Viv Richards Vs Warne

[Migara]

They weren't on his level. No one has ever got close to that with his gear of destructiveness. And that is a point of difference. But even without that - his output is excellent.

Shewag against spin and gilly in general were always in that gear. That is why they have a SR of 82. It is no mean **** to have a SR of 82 in ODIs.

 

[BazBall21]

Shewag against spin and gilly in general were always in that gear. That is why they have a SR of 82. It is no mean **** to have a SR of 82 in ODIs.

I said destructiveness with his level of efficiency.

 

[subshakerz]

I think I may be one of the few ones who give Viv credit as a good captain.

He took over from Lloyd and kept the legacy going strong for WI despite a weakened side and strong contenders, not losing a single series.

He was accused of being too harsh, but he had a lot of pride and bailed out WI at key moments when it looked like their hold on the top was in threat.

I think in judging Viv the cricketer, it's importance to keep this in mind. He was a talisman figure for that team and on the field, a central symbol of their dominance, not just a great bat.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think I may be one of the few ones who give Viv credit as a good captain.

He took over from Lloyd and kept the legacy going strong for WI despite a weakened side and strong contenders, not losing a single series.

He was accused of being too harsh, but he had a lot of pride and bailed out WI at key moments when it looked like their hold on the top was in threat.

I think in judging Viv the cricketer, it's importance to keep this in mind. He was a talisman figure for that team and on the field, a central symbol of their dominance, not just a great bat.

Tbh, I never rated Richards the captain much. Nothing I read had much praise for his captaincy and rather it seemed to me his success was more of a result of an exceptionally strong team, built by predecessor Lloyd.

 

[subshakerz]

Tbh, I never rated Richards the captain much. Nothing I read had much praise for his captaincy and rather it seemed to me his success was more of a result of an exceptionally strong team, built by predecessor Lloyd.

I read some complimentary pieces on Viv as captain.

Think of Ponting. He had a big struggle as captain keeping the team competitive after Waugh and then losing his top players. It's based on that that I give Viv credit to remain an unbeaten no.1 side.

 

[BazBall21]

I think I may be one of the few ones who give Viv credit as a good captain.

He took over from Lloyd and kept the legacy going strong for WI despite a weakened side and strong contenders, not losing a single series.

He was accused of being too harsh, but he had a lot of pride and bailed out WI at key moments when it looked like their hold on the top was in threat.

I think in judging Viv the cricketer, it's importance to keep this in mind. He was a talisman figure for that team and on the field, a central symbol of their dominance, not just a great bat.

Yeah that's is part of why cricket writers had him so high up.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I read some complimentary pieces on Viv as captain.

Think of Ponting. He had a big struggle as captain keeping the team competitive after Waugh and then losing his top players. It's based on that that I give Viv credit to remain an unbeaten no.1 side.

I also don't rate Ponting the captain that highly, though higher than Viv. I think Ponting, Viv, Kohli, etc. got great success, but they inherited a champion team (not so much for Kohli, but you got the gist). I would much rather try to fit in Worrell in my AT WI team to captain it.

 

[Bolo.]

I read some complimentary pieces on Viv as captain.

Think of Ponting. He had a big struggle as captain keeping the team competitive after Waugh and then losing his top players. It's based on that that I give Viv credit to remain an unbeaten no.1 side.

No opinion on the better captain, but Ponting had zero issues keeping AUS at number one until the bowling resources ran pretty dry. Its not a problem Viv ever faced.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

If Viv retired at a more standard age and WSC didn't take up a chunk of his prime he would average 54-55 instead of 50.

Doesn't have a home/away split, doesn't have any minnow bashing, didn't have particularly flat pitches at home, and his level of destructiveness at such efficiency remains peerless. His output issues are exaggerated.

I voted Warne, but it is mighty close. I had them one place apart on my greatest cricketers list. Warne's record against India and great players of spin in general is a caveat.

Warne also sucked in WI.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I also don't rate Ponting the captain that highly, though higher than Viv. I think Ponting, Viv, Kohli, etc. got great success, but they inherited a champion team (not so much for Kohli, but you got the gist). I would much rather try to fit in Worrell in my AT WI team to captain it.

Yes so he’s saying Viv is a good test captain, not ATG. Above Ponting for sure tho

 

[subshakerz]

I also don't rate Ponting the captain that highly, though higher than Viv. I think Ponting, Viv, Kohli, etc. got great success, but they inherited a champion team (not so much for Kohli, but you got the gist). I would much rather try to fit in Worrell in my AT WI team to captain it.

I don't rate Ponting high as captain because his team crashed once he lost his top players.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I don't rate Ponting high as captain because his team crashed once he lost his top players.

Yeah, but Viv never lost his top players....

 

[subshakerz]

No opinion on the better captain, but Ponting had zero issues keeping AUS at number one until the bowling resources ran pretty dry. Its not a problem Viv ever faced.

Yes and no. Lloyd, Garner and Holding retired at the around same time as Viv got the team.

He had Marshall and Walsh for a couple of years, and then Ambrose and Bishop once Marshall began to decline, but it wasn't the original quartet level really, but better than other teams.

Ponting didn't have McGrath and Warne replacements but I don't think I can excuse him for losing two series at home, including 3 innings losses in 2010. That's pathetic.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, but Viv never lost his top players....

He did. He just had better replacements than Ponting.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Warney forever

 

[BazBall21]

Warne also sucked in WI.

His record v top players of spin is iffy. Viv against quality pacers you would back more.

 

[Bolo.]

Yes and no. Lloyd, Garner and Holding retired at the around same time as Viv got the team.

He had Marshall and Walsh for a couple of years, and then Ambrose and Bishop once Marshall began to decline, but it wasn't the original quartet level really, but better than other teams.

Ponting didn't have McGrath and Warne replacements but I don't think I can excuse him for losing two series at home, including 3 innings losses in 2010. That's pathetic.

With the exception of a brief period between Ambrose and Garner, WI always had 3 of the top 15 or so AT quicks. Plus a bunch of other quality. Not that it matters much in terms of assessing Viv's captaincy due to the amount of time involved, but I think the best collection of 4 bowlers ever assembled was peak Bishop + 3 greats.

AUS didn't have much after McWarne (and Clark) went.

Batting declined for both. WI was still the best after the decline. Still very strong, and not much competition. AUS late Ponting had a ton of competition. They probably had the best home lineup, but not away.

 

[subshakerz]

With the exception of a brief period between Ambrose and Garner, WI always had 3 of the top 15 or so AT quicks. Plus a bunch of other quality. Not that it matters much in terms of assessing Viv's captaincy due to the amount of time involved, but I think the best collection of 4 bowlers ever assembled was peak Bishop + 3 greats.

AUS didn't have much after McWarne (and Clark) went.

Batting declined for both. WI was still the best after the decline. Still very strong, and not much competition. AUS late Ponting had a ton of competition. They probably had the best home lineup, but not away.

I don't disagree with any of that. WI tho were at times under series threat of losing their unbeaten streak but under Viv they managed to always keep ahead.

I wouldn't fault Ponting for the overall decline in results but his failure to lift them in key moments did lead them to losing to teams that were at their relative level a lot.

Ponting losing to SA in 2008 at home was definitely on him. Frankly they should have won both of the first two tests.

In India, Ponting chose to bowl his spinners rather than seek a chance to draw the series in Nagpur in 2008. In 2010, India managed a last wicket partnership and Ponting let another test out of his hands.

Losing the Ashes in 2009 was also to a rather ordinary English team. They failed to seal the 1st test and lost all momentum.

And while losing the Ashes at home in 2010 was to an outright superior team, losing three home tests by an innings each is unforgivable.

Under Ponting, Aus went from a undisputed no.1 side to a mid-tier team, behind SA, India and England, in a matter of three years.

 

[BazBall21]

Ponting wasn't a great captain

 

[kyear2]

One’s a top 5 bowler and one’s a top 15 batsman. Plus I thought bowlers were more impactful.

Yeah, I have Warne tied for 5th with Murali, I have Viv 4th or 5th, so about exactly the same.

Both Wisden top 5 cricketers.

But IVA was at his very best vs the best pacers of his day, how he handled Lillee in WSC and the subsequent tour was nothing short of legendary.

Warne was at his absolute worst vs the best of his day. He was humbled vs India and Lara had the upper hand over him.

Richards was the best batsman and the heart of his team. Warne was second fiddle to McGrath and there was no doubt who was better and more critical to the team's success.