HouHsiaoHsien
International Debutant
If we are considering ODIs I will take Viv ahead. But I assumed tests and voted Hadlee
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Hadlee Vs Viv Richards
- Thread starter Jumno
- Start date
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
I mean, as someone who admittedly isn't as big of a Viv fan as you, he was ridiculous, almost a Gracian figure in ODIs.
kyear2
International Coach
If you include odi's Viv's definitely ahead.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Totally agree. This is the product of Viv downgrading.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Viv is around top 5 as a bat which is equivalent to top 3 with the ball, for me better.
I think the difference here is I am willing to give Viv credit for captaincy, he never lost a series as captain and kept the WI afloat as the world's best team. Once you add slip catching, etc it enough extra credit to account for secondary disciplines.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Folks are overrating Hadlee the bowler. He pretty much was, like Ambrose, pillaging mostly in home and Aus/Eng.
SL is irrelevant. Only a single good series in the SC outside that and WI, the ultimate test, was below his standards.
Not saying that he wasn't an allround bowler but some obvious flaws here.
You can't mark a player down for where their country has country has played if they are also succeeding elsewhere. His record in those 3 was basically identical to the ROW. His overall average/SR/WPM are all better than in NZ and England. He's got stellar figures in 5 countries, extremely good in one, and proper poor in one (which comes with a caveat of being only essentially 4 innings in a series before he'd figured out his bowling).
It's a more complete away record than anyone except maybe Marshall.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
What's wrong with his test record except for a solo series in NZ?
It's weaker than his relative batting peers as far as numbers and records go, and he doesn't have that much of a reason for not being dominant.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes we can. We do it for Lillee and Ambrose to an extent. And Hadlee wasn't succeeding everywhere, that's the point, he didn't play enough for us to know.
You are not going into the actual context.
WI is not extremely good, it is below par and Hadlee himself was actually disappointed after that series. Again it's just one series but it was the ultimate challenge for Hadlee so should be given more importance.
Ind/Pak is three series, one which was good, the others early career.
SL is a minnow.
It's a pretty imbalanced record with him reaping it in pace friendly countries and not being sufficiently tested outside.
Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, Imran were all way more tested across different countries in multiple series.
Viv played in WI, Aus, Eng, Ind and Pak with multiple series in all of these countries. Far better tested too.
Last edited:
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
He is good to great everywhere. The only thing Viv lacked was minnowbashing. And we aren't even including his WSC numbers.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Based on what hole in Viv's record? I pointed several I can see in Hadlee's.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Just to highlight, Hadlee's record is basically like Lillee whom gets endlessly critiqued, except with one good India series under his belt.
I don't think the conditions of the era he played in justifies barely averaging over 50. He didn't have to face great attacks all the time, and had minnow level opposition at times even if you don't consider them as such due to being full members. Like come on, averaging under 50 in multiple places and vs multiple teams is not reaching that high bar to be on par with a top 3 pace bowler of all time.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Maybe for once you should understand that most people don't just try to find "holes" in players records that don't satisfy your dumb country wise checklist and consider at the overall level of dominance of your record as something of more importance.
Viv didn't have to face the strongest available attacks of his era (because they were on his team) and only averaged a shade over 50 and very skewed record in terms of his peak years vs non peak years. He wasn't exactly the most consistent run machine throughout his career compared to a lot of other ATGs.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes they do. It wasn't the 2000s and again he didn't minnow bash against SL and get an couple of extra points
If you look at his career, most of his scoring coincided with the top end attacks of his opposition.
I don't see that scrutiny with Hadlee averaging 27 in WI against the top opposition of his time, or roughly 25 in England.
I don't see this scrutiny with Tendulkar averaging in the 40s in several countries to be pointed out as a weakness.
40 plus to me is the minimum you need to establish yourself there.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Except when Lillee comes up then suddenly it's a talking point. And it's not just about holes, it's a more fundamental point: his success was heavily concentrated in three pace friendly countries and he wasnt sufficiently proven outside that.
The irony is it's your side that is mindlessly reading averages from Hadlee's spreadsheet to give him a good star.
Viv has more dominant series against top attacks than virtually any other bat.
And his leaner years are balanced by a disproportionately awesome peak. It all balances out with a record that is good to great everywhere just like Tendulkar.
Last edited: