Richards, Smith, Lara, Hammond

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Gavaskar had taken centuries of peak Thomson in Perth and Adelaide; and he also has a very highly rated 66 in Kingston vs Holding. Overall, against high pace his only proper failings was 83 WI tour (85 Aus wasn't much tougher to bat than his previous or successive tour, Lillee only took him once legally and well I don't think a 70 in a 3 match series is good but not what I would extremely poor or a tangible sample size also, overall I think 79 was the bigger challenge); but imo he has done enough against the WI pacers to doubt his skill there. Not to mention, most matches weren't even in such bouncy tracks. Viv's SR is balanced in my book by Gavaskar's opening, his first two England series were pretty bad but 78 was ATG so I think he is also proven there and Viv's record in England is balanced by Gavaskar's in Pakistan.

I personally think Viv’s SR is a massive boost, also given he batted in the top three mostly in his peak, so for me it’s not completely balanced against Gavaskar’s opening, and Gavaskar had only one good series vs a decent attack in Aus(cause he only had to contend with Thomson, not Lillee), and also only great series in Eng, where he failed quite badly except that, so I think Viv is significantly better and more proved against pace to be better overall despite the fact that Gavaksar was a better player of spin. I’d choose Gavaskar in SC like conditions, but Viv was far far superior in Eng and Aus.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I personally think Viv’s SR is a massive boost, also given he batted in the top three mostly in his peak, so for me it’s not completely balanced against Gavaskar’s opening, and Gavaskar had only one good series vs a decent attack in Aus(cause he only had to contend with Thomson, not Lillee), and also only great series in Eng, where he failed except that, so I think Viv is significantly better and more proved against pace to be better overall despite the fact that Gavaksar was a better player of spin

Gavaskar also had a great series against an Australian attack of McDermott, Hogg, Reid and co; not exactly great but far from poor. He also had a great series against some ATG WI pace attacks in 76 and 83 home. He again only played Lillee once and I don't put too much emphasis on that as he played only 3 games, scored important runs in a winning match (was given a very poor out, resulting in a famous walkout) and wasn't like he struggled extensively vs him. Just feel the former series had much tougher pitches. His first two English series were before he really turned World Class and his last two were also decent albeit not great. But I think he has proven himself enough in English conditions with that tour, his record in comparative NZ conditions and bowling and his County record. Also, I don't feel nearly as much emphasis on SR, so given the total lack of top tier openers post WWII except Gavaskar (taking Hutton debuted pre War and Barry didn't got a career); I almost value it more.
With everything said though, I will take Viv against high pacers in bouncy tracks over any batsman in History, arguably except Don. But that being said, Gavaskar was the best batsman of reverse swing ever and was better against pacers in slower wickets.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Gavaskar also had a great series against an Australian attack of McDermott, Hogg, Reid and co; not exactly great but far from poor. He also had a great series against some ATG WI pace attacks in 76 and 83 home. He again only played Lillee once and I don't put too much emphasis on that as he played only 3 games, scored important runs in a winning match (was given a very poor out, resulting in a famous walkout) and wasn't like he struggled extensively vs him. Just feel the former series had much tougher pitches. His first two English series were before he really turned World Class and his last two were also decent albeit not great. But I think he has proven himself enough in English conditions with that tour, his record in comparative NZ conditions and bowling and his County record. Also, I don't feel nearly as much emphasis on SR, so given the total lack of top tier openers post WWII except Gavaskar (taking Hutton debuted pre War and Barry didn't got a career); I almost value it more.
With everything said though, I will take Viv against high pacers in bouncy tracks over any batsman in History, arguably except Don. But that being said, Gavaskar was the best batsman of reverse swing ever and was better against pacers in slower wickets.

Pretty mid and far far from anything challenging given Hogg was not half the bowler he was pre 79 tour vs WI. Also feel Gavaksar was not bad in England by any stretch, or in Aus, but behind Viv by a significant distance. Viv had one really great tour of Pak to prove himself in the SC, Gavaskar doesn’t have the equivalent of that in Australian conditions. I give SR a certain degree of importance, especially cause he could really demoralise an attack and turn the tide of a match within, WI chased 180 in 30 overs vs Ind thanks to him. Gavaskar in the top ten bats ever easily tho.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Have never heard anyone place Gavaskar up there, in fact B. Richards was seen as the best batsman post Sobers and pre V. Richards

Greatest Cricketer rates Gavaskar the best he has seen.

Crowe arguably the Most intelligent cricketer rates Gavaskar, Headley, Sachin and Sobers as the best batsmen after Bradman.

Smartest CW member rates Gavaskar as the 2nd greatest batsman.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Greatest Cricketer rates Gavaskar the best he has seen.

Crowe arguably the Most intelligent cricketer rates Gavaskar, Headley, Sachin and Sobers as the best batsmen after Bradman.

Smartest CW member rates Gavaskar as the 2nd greatest batsman.

I don’t think Bradman called Gavaskar the best. Plus that way 3rd greatest cricketer calls Virat better than Sachin. Although I agree with your last statement

 

[capt_Luffy]

Pretty mid and far far from anything challenging given Hogg was not half the bowler he was pre 79 tour vs WI. Also feel Gavaksar was not bad in England by any stretch, or in Aus, but behind Viv by a significant distance. Viv had one really great tour of Pak to prove himself in the SC, Gavaskar doesn’t have the equivalent of that in Australian conditions. I give SR a certain degree of importance, especially cause he could really demoralise an attack and turn the tide of a match within, WI chased 180 in 30 overs vs Ind thanks to him. Gavaskar in the top ten bats ever easily tho.

Gavaskar also did scored a match winning 4th innings 121 in 128 balls vs WI..... Anyways, while it's true that Gavaskar haven't proven himself enough in Australia, he did have done so against better WI pacers, whom Viv never faced. Gavaskar had two great series out of three against them. And 1979 tour, even lacking Lillee was a pretty big challenge given the nature of the pitches and Thomson's ability on them. I would have that tour on par with Viv's 1975 Australia just because the latter had more failings; but definitely not close to Viv's 1980. I think Viv in Pakistan and England is equivalent to Gavaskar in those places, just reversed; one ATG tour to not put their abilities on question litter with plenty mediocrity of mediocrity in one place and arguably being the Greatest Batsman of all time in the other.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Gavaskar also did scored a match winning 4th innings 121 in 128 balls vs WI..... Anyways, while it's true that Gavaskar haven't proven himself enough in Australia, he did have done so against better WI pacers, whom Viv never faced. Gavaskar had two great series out of three against them. And 1979 tour, even lacking Lillee was a pretty big challenge given the nature of the pitches and Thomson's ability on them. I would have that tour ahead of Viv's 1975 Australia just because the former had more failings; but definitely not close to Viv's 1980. I think Viv in Pakistan and England is equivalent to Gavaskar in those places, just reversed; one ATG tour to not put their abilities on question litter with plenty mediocrity.

I agree with many things here. However Gavaskar only proved himself against the better WI pacers in SC. Further one more thing Gavaskar had bigger failures in Eng, than Viv in Pak, given his first series there was a 2 match series, and during the last one, he didn’t do really badly. He would average 50+ in Pak, but even in the series he performed really well, he wouldn’t average 100+ like Gavaskar cause he had very few not outs

 

[OverratedSanity]

Strike rate is never a "massive" boost if the productivity is the same.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Strike rate is never a "massive" boost if the productivity is the same.

But it does give you the ability to have a match winning impact very quickly. Also in Viv’s case, the demoralising impact it had on bowlers and his psychological dominance are very important intangibles which makes him further unique amongst ATG’s

 

[capt_Luffy]

I agree with many things here. However Gavaskar only proved himself against the better WI pacers in SC. Further one more thing Gavaskar had bigger failures in Eng, than Viv in Pak, given his first series there was a 2 match series, and during the last one, he didn’t do really badly. He would average 50+ in Pak, but even in the series he performed really well, he wouldn’t average 100+ like Gavaskar cause he had very few not outs

Agreed mostly. Viv would be slightly better in Pakistan than Gavaskar in England, but I won't put Gavaskar's ATG series ahead of Viv's if solely for that 221. Also, saying he didn't proved himself in WI against top pacers is wrong, given his 1976 series vs a blazing Holding and Roberts.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Agreed mostly. Viv would be slightly better in Pakistan than Gavaskar in England, but I won't put Gavaskar's ATG series ahead of Viv's if solely for that 221. Also, saying he didn't proved himself in WI against top pacers is wrong, given his 1976 series vs a blazing Holding and Roberts.

Holding was very raw then, from what I read. It was like Viv’s domination of Akram in the 1988 Pak tour of WI

 

[capt_Luffy]

But it does give you the ability to have a match winning impact very quickly. Also in Viv’s case, the demoralising impact it had on bowlers and his psychological dominance are very important intangibles which makes him further unique amongst ATG’s

Fwiw, I was reading an interview of a bowler (don't exactly remember whom), but according to him, an attacking batsman was demoralising but also gave them plenty of hope as they create chances.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Holding was very raw then, from what I read. It was like Viv’s domination of Akram in the 1988 Pak tour of WI

He was very successful in that series and even if raw, was even faster.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

He was very successful in that series and even if raw, was even faster.

Sure but Roberts didn’t even play the whole series. It was a very good series from Sunny sure, but the WI attack wasn’t close to the best they would have

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sure but Roberts didn’t even play the whole series. It was a very good series from Sunny sure, but the WI attack wasn’t close to the best they would have

I think it was pretty close to what they became. Not as good as the famed quartet, but then again they only played 6 times together and 4 of those were in the 83 India series. Roberts and Holding on and on themselves are a very good bowling attack, and I think it was a very good series against some very good high pacers away.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I think it was pretty close to what they became. Roberts and Holding on and on themselves are a very good bowling attack, and I think it was a very good series against some very good high pacers away.

Yes but Roberts only played two matches

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yes but Roberts only played two matches

Yeah, but Gavaskar scored a 150 in the 3 innings he played against them. Again, that wasn't an ATG series like Amarnath in 1983, but a great series against a strong attack away.

 

[subshakerz]

Strike rate is never a "massive" boost if the productivity is the same.

I think in Viv's context when everyone was batting sedately and suddenly this guy comes with a 70 SR scaring bowlers, it is a big boost.

Now, pretty much every lineup has a batter with high SR so it is more of an edge.

 

[kyear2]

Greatest Cricketer rates Gavaskar the best he has seen.

Crowe arguably the Most intelligent cricketer rates Gavaskar, Headley, Sachin and Sobers as the best batsmen after Bradman.

Smartest CW member rates Gavaskar as the 2nd greatest batsman.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I don’t think Bradman called Gavaskar the best. Plus that way 3rd greatest cricketer calls Virat better than Sachin. Although I agree with your last statement

No way..
Kohli debuted 93 years after WG's Death.