Asia Xi vs ROW Xi

[kyear2]

Don't really have time to read all and answer; so about the bolded part, you are very wrong. Barry Richards have not proven himself enough, so it's not justifiable to rank him ahead of Dravid, let alone Gavaskar. Enough said. Most people who saw both Trumper and Don bat rated Victor higher.

Let me be very clear. You can argue that Dravid had the better test career, no one who knows anything about Barry would rate him the better bat.

You do understand he made the cricinfo all time 2nd team (ahead of Sehwag / Trumper / Smith / Greenidge / Norris), everyone's SA test team .

I first became aware of him when as an early teen and I was reading a book (I believe was called the no. 1s) and the succession for batsmen basically went Sobers, Richards and Richards.
Lillee bowlers to all of them, he rated Barry ahead of Sunny far less Dravid.

 

[kyear2]

Do you have any idea how many players start off well, especially in the first 4 tests, and then decline with time?

He had a full career, test, DC, ROW, WSC. He more than proved himself in all contions and against all the top bowlers of his time.

This isn't just me, the man made Cricinfo's 2nd all time team. The same team as Sunny, Imran, Lara, Murali and Hammond.

I'm sure you know the names he beat out for that spot.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Let me be very clear. You can argue that Dravid had the better test career, no one who knows anything about Barry would rate him the better bat.

You do understand he made the cricinfo all time 2nd team (ahead of Sehwag / Trumper / Smith / Greenidge / Norris), everyone's SA test team .

I first became aware of him when as an early teen and I was reading a book (I believe was called the no. 1s) and the succession for batsmen basically went Sobers, Richards and Richards.
Lillee bowlers to all of them, he rated Barry ahead of Sunny far less Dravid.

That's simply is not true lol.
Lindsay Hassett rated Victor Trumper ahead of Don Bradman, so that must mean Trumper>Don. And Sobers did called Sunny the best batsman he has seen.
You do remember Wasim making the Cricinfo team ahead of Hadlee and McGrath, or Qadir stumbling upon the 3rd year??

 

[capt_Luffy]

He had a full career, test, DC, ROW, WSC. He more than proved himself in all contions and against all the top bowlers of his time.

This isn't just me, the man made Cricinfo's 2nd all time team. The same team as Sunny, Imran, Lara, Murali and Hammond.

I'm sure you know the names he beat out for that spot.

The names he had beaten out were:

Victor Trumper (absolute travesty)

Gordon Greenidge
Graeme Smith
Virendra Sehwag
Arthur Morris
Hanif Mohammad
Conrad Hunte
Glenn Turner
Saeed Anwar
Sanath Jayasuriya
Stewie Dempster
Marvanam Atapattu


Except Trumper, and the first 3 names, I think that was alright.

 

[smash84]

He had a full career, test, DC, ROW, WSC.

He more than proved himself in all contions and against all the top bowlers of his time.

He didn't prove himself against all opposition in all conditions in TEST cricket.

 

[Coronis]

I don't need to run a poll, everyone who saw them both bat had him ahead. Mark Nicholas has them both in his all time team.

It wasn't just his 4 tests and FC career, it was also the ROW matches and WSC production, and his quality.

If they are both on the field, you think Barry wouldn't perform as well because he didn't play a 100 tests? Get real, the man was quality.

There are about 10 forum members who watches Barry bat and they all rate him among the top 5 batsmen they've seen, including the guy you claim is your favorite poster. He rates him literally with Viv and Sachin as the best batsmen he's ever watched, think it's Northerer who says the same, among others. Lillee named the best 3 batsmen he bowled to, they were Garry Sobers, Viv Richards and Barry Richards.

Sunny had a better and longer test career, but put them both on the field in a match at their best and that doesn't count for much if anything. Barry was a unicorn, who else brings what he does to the table?

Not about Anwar being better than Sehwag, I don't remotely trust him against this level of attack on anything outside of the SC.

If we're going like WTC, you can play at Lord's, no English players on the team anyways, and that's one way traffic.

If it's a 6 test series can play 3 in each territory. The SC team isn't winning in England, SA or Australia. More likely to get a draw or steal a game in the SC and win the series, all I'm saying.

If you want to go Sehwag, knock yourself out, just wouldn't be my choice. Younis would also bring more to the team than Javed and Bumrah (as like Barry) despite the smaller sample size, is a better bowler than Waqar.

And not even discussing the Sobers pick, it's kinda ridiculous that there's even caveats in the first place, of he said 70's I'm including players who played in the 70's. When you select your at Aus vs WI team you don't start from when the WI became good.

But again, and we're picking the same team for all 6 mat he's, so balance might be suggested.

Gavaskar / Sehwag / Dravid / Tendulkar / Sangakkara / Younis / Imran / Jadeja / Wasim / Muralitharan / Bumrah

Richards / Greenidge / Richards / Lara / Smith / Sobers / Gilchrist / Hadlee / Marshall / Warne / McGrath

The ROW's batting is stronger, bowling is stronger and more adaptable, catching and fielding a little better as well (bigger gap without Younis). They can steal or draw one in the SC, don't see the ROW matches being that competitive.

Remove the arbitrary restrictions and Hutton replaces Greenidge and Bradman either Smith or Lara.

You mean a mythical fantasy? Sure.

I would argue all of Trumper, Hayden, Sehwag and Smith are all aggressive opening bats with proven records at test level.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You mean a mythical fantasy? Sure.

I would argue all of Trumper, Hayden, Sehwag and Smith are all aggressive opening bats with proven records at test level.

The love is for Trumper!!!


Yeah, yeah, not really great stats; but hey, atleast he have those!!!

 

[kyear2]

That's simply is not true lol.
Lindsay Hassett rated Victor Trumper ahead of Don Bradman, so that must mean Trumper>Don. And Sobers did called Sunny the best batsman he has seen.
You do remember Wasim making the Cricinfo team ahead of Hadlee and McGrath, or Qadir stumbling upon the 3rd year??

And Wasim also made the Wisden team, and of late, mine as well. Even in our polls he was easily rated the best old ball bowler of all time, good enough for me.

With regards to Sobers, yeah... He's also noted for saying that Chandra (I believe) was better than Warne. Also it's noteworthy to put into context when and where these comments were made. Also made some comments about Viru the same time.

I don't recall seeing a 3rd AT XI, but who else would have made it, it was him or Underwood. Recall that Warne was in the first and O'Reilly and Murali made the 2nd. Grum, nor Laker would have been eligible. So was him, Deadley or Gibbs. None of them are in the class of the top 3.

In any even the fact that Richards can make such a team above Sehwag, Greenidge, Anwar, Smith, Hayden, Trumper, practically everyone except Hutton, Hobbs, Gavaskar (and potentially, but not explicitly Sutcliffe), means that the professional cricket community rates him considerably higher than you do. Bradman too had his favorites that he played with and against, but also had Barry up there with Sachin and Garry.

That's this old post that I found (there are no new arguments on CW), that further illustrates what I'm trying to being across. Bagapath was arguing against SJS and others, and this was one of the responses. SJS had even compiled his best innings including SA XI tours, ROW matches and WSC, he more than proved himself over two decades.

As the person who brought up the Richards-Gavaskar comparison, an explanation may be in order. One of the things that we can do when looking at the history of cricket is identify the successive players who were regarded as holding the title of best batsman/best fast bowler/best slow bowler in the world. In the case of batsmen, Hobbs was clearly seen as the world's best in the years immediately before and after World War I. Hammond succeeded him briefly at the end of the 1920's but was superseded by Bradman, who held the title until his retirement in 1948. After that it gets a bit complicated - Hutton, I suppose, could have been seen as the world's best in the late 1940's and early 50's, followed by Walcott, who had two great series in the middle of the decade, then May. Sobers was an easy consensus choice in the 1960's, but his reign ended in 1971. For the next five years at least (until Viv Richards emerged in 1976) most cricketers would have identified Barry Richards as the best batsman in the game. The commentaries written at the time are more or less unanimous on this point.

None of Richards' contemporaries other than Sobers and Viv Richards was ever generally regarded as the world's best batsman. That list includes Pollock, Greg Chappell and, yes, Gavaskar, who is four years his junior. The point is that when they were both active and in their prime most observers considered Richards to be a greater batsman than Gavaskar. For me the difference is not huge, because I would say that Hutton, Richards and Gavaskar are a class above any opening batsman since Hobbs (well, Sutcliffe). My assessment of Richards is based not only on his performance in first class matches, but also on what he did in Packer tours. As those who played in those matches will tell you, the intensity and level of cricket played were higher than in the vast majority of Tests.

 

[Coronis]

With regards to Sobers, yeah... He's also noted for saying that Chandra (I believe) was better than Warne. Also it's noteworthy to put into context when and where these comments were made. Also made some comments about Viru the same time.

So again yes, peer ratings only count when they support your arguments.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And Wasim also made the Wisden team, and of late, mine as well. Even in our polls he was easily rated the best old ball bowler of all time, good enough for me.

With regards to Sobers, yeah... He's also noted for saying that Chandra (I believe) was better than Warne. Also it's noteworthy to put into context when and where these comments were made. Also made some comments about Viru the same time.

I don't recall seeing a 3rd AT XI, but who else would have made it, it was him or Underwood. Recall that Warne was in the first and O'Reilly and Murali made the 2nd. Grum, nor Laker would have been eligible. So was him, Deadley or Gibbs. None of them are in the class of the top 3.

In any even the fact that Richards can make such a team above Sehwag, Greenidge, Anwar, Smith, Hayden, Trumper, practically everyone except Hutton, Hobbs, Gavaskar (and potentially, but not explicitly Sutcliffe), means that the professional cricket community rates him considerably higher than you do. Bradman too had his favorites that he played with and against, but also had Barry up there with Sachin and Garry.

That's this old post that I found (there are no new arguments on CW), that further illustrates what I'm trying to being across. Bagapath was arguing against SJS and others, and this was one of the responses. SJS had even compiled his best innings including SA XI tours, ROW matches and WSC, he more than proved himself over two decades.

Good good, but nothing here is persuing more any more to rate Barry any higher than I do (which according to me is as high as you could go with a 4 Test career). At the end of the day, Test matches are that, Test matches. Hick scored plenty against even World's best in FC, but failed against even worse bowlers in Tests. Hirst would have Legitimate claims to be a Top 5 All-rounder of All Time if he could had produced even 75% of his County record in Tests. He could not. Failed hard. FC was bigger than Test back then. Barry never played in Asia, can't think anyone rating an Asian batsman half as highly as Barry on not playing in England and Australia.

PS: Both Qadir and Prasanna made that team.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Now I am genuinely thinking, does Barry have a clear case ahead of Vijay Merchant??

 

[kyear2]

The names he had beaten out were:

Victor Trumper (absolute travesty)

Gordon Greenidge
Graeme Smith
Virendra Sehwag
Arthur Morris
Hanif Mohammad
Conrad Hunte
Glenn Turner
Saeed Anwar
Sanath Jayasuriya
Stewie Dempster
Marvanam Atapattu


Except Trumper, and the first 3 names, I think that was alright.

Think he was better than all 4, not to mention the discussion on where Trumper performed the best, has already been had.

I love Greenidge, he was my childhood hero and first favorite player, and I rate him higher than some. Barry imo was better, he was also easily better than Graeme and Sehwag just wasn't good enough in most conditions to merit a serious discussion.

 

[kyear2]

The love is for Trumper!!!


Yeah, yeah, not really great stats; but hey, atleast he have those!!!

And the Cricinfo judges easily selected Barry over him. What does that say?

Unlike with the all-rounders or bowlers where arguments about eligibility abound, this was a straight up vote. Mark Nicholas, a former player, journalist and commentator openly claims they are the two best openers he's seen and for him ever.

You and I will definitely disagree on this one, but sometimes it's to watch the players.

 

[kyear2]

So again yes, peer ratings only count when they support your arguments.

There's consensus peer rating, then there's such one offs, I believe even you would be able to tell those apart.

 

[kyear2]

Good good, but nothing here is persuing more any more to rate Barry any higher than I do (which according to me is as high as you could go with a 4 Test career). At the end of the day, Test matches are that, Test matches. Hick scored plenty against even World's best in FC, but failed against even worse bowlers in Tests. Hirst would have Legitimate claims to be a Top 5 All-rounder of All Time if he could had produced even 75% of his County record in Tests. He could not. Failed hard. FC was bigger than Test back then. Barry never played in Asia, can't think anyone rating an Asian batsman half as highly as Barry on not playing in England and Australia.

PS: Both Qadir and Prasanna made that team.

He never played in Asia, which was, in his time, not the toughest of places to score runs.

There's a reason why most fast bowlers are rated on their performance in Asia (in addition to other metrics of course) and batsmen for their performances in England, the WI and Australia (later SA). Yes there was the quartet, but he also faced similar bowers on uncovered pitches in England.

And that's the thing, nothing anyone has to say is capable of convincing you of anything, and at 22 (I believe) you're perfectly sure of everything.

I've had my opinion changed on many things here over the years, because as we learn we adapt.

 

[Coronis]

He never played in Asia, which was, in his time, not the toughest of places to score runs.

There's a reason why most fast bowlers are rated on their performance in Asia (in addition to other metrics of course) and batsmen for their performances in England, the WI and Australia (later SA). Yes there was the quartet, but he also faced similar bowers on uncovered pitches in England.

And that's the thing, nothing anyone has to say is capable of convincing you of anything, and at 22 (I believe) you're perfectly sure of everything.

I've had my opinion changed on many things here over the years, because as we learn we adapt.

So bloody disingenuous. This is almost exclusively applied to non-Asian pace bowlers and Asian batsmen. i.e performing in unfamiliar conditions. When pace bowlers from the subcontinent are being talked about people (especially you) are always talking about their records outside of Asia.

 

[bagapath]

I don't need to run a poll, everyone who saw them both bat had him ahead. Mark Nicholas has them both in his all time team.

It wasn't just his 4 tests and FC career, it was also the ROW matches and WSC production, and his quality.

If they are both on the field, you think Barry wouldn't perform as well because he didn't play a 100 tests? Get real, the man was quality.

There are about 10 forum members who watches Barry bat and they all rate him among the top 5 batsmen they've seen, including the guy you claim is your favorite poster. He rates him literally with Viv and Sachin as the best batsmen he's ever watched, think it's Northerer who says the same, among others. Lillee named the best 3 batsmen he bowled to, they were Garry Sobers, Viv Richards and Barry Richards.

Sunny had a better and longer test career, but put them both on the field in a match at their best and that doesn't count for much if anything. Barry was a unicorn, who else brings what he does to the table?

Not about Anwar being better than Sehwag, I don't remotely trust him against this level of attack on anything outside of the SC.

If we're going like WTC, you can play at Lord's, no English players on the team anyways, and that's one way traffic.

If it's a 6 test series can play 3 in each territory. The SC team isn't winning in England, SA or Australia. More likely to get a draw or steal a game in the SC and win the series, all I'm saying.

If you want to go Sehwag, knock yourself out, just wouldn't be my choice. Younis would also bring more to the team than Javed and Bumrah (as like Barry) despite the smaller sample size, is a better bowler than Waqar.

And not even discussing the Sobers pick, it's kinda ridiculous that there's even caveats in the first place, of he said 70's I'm including players who played in the 70's. When you select your at Aus vs WI team you don't start from when the WI became good.

But again, and we're picking the same team for all 6 mat he's, so balance might be suggested.

Gavaskar / Sehwag / Dravid / Tendulkar / Sangakkara / Younis / Imran / Jadeja / Wasim / Muralitharan / Bumrah

Richards / Greenidge / Richards / Lara / Smith / Sobers / Gilchrist / Hadlee / Marshall / Warne / McGrath

The ROW's batting is stronger, bowling is stronger and more adaptable, catching and fielding a little better as well (bigger gap without Younis). They can steal or draw one in the SC, don't see the ROW matches being that competitive.

Remove the arbitrary restrictions and Hutton replaces Greenidge and Bradman either Smith or Lara.

Barry Richards did not play enough tests to warrant this discussion

 

[bagapath]

Post 1970s World XI

G. Smith *
G. Greenidge
V. Richards
B. Lara
JH Kallis
S. Smith
A.C. Gilchrist +
RJ Hadlee
MD Marshall
SK Warne
GD McGrath

12th man: IT Botham

Post 1970s Asia XI

SM Gavaskar
ST Jayasuriya
R Dravid
SR Tendulkar
K Sangakkara
Imran Khan
MS Dhoni *+
Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Muralitharan
J Bumrah

12th man: Kapil Dev

 

[capt_Luffy]

And the Cricinfo judges easily selected Barry over him. What does that say?

Unlike with the all-rounders or bowlers where arguments about eligibility abound, this was a straight up vote. Mark Nicholas, a former player, journalist and commentator openly claims they are the two best openers he's seen and for him ever.

You and I will definitely disagree on this one, but sometimes it's to watch the players.

That they should had voted differently and don't know much about cricket?? I mean, they also selected Lillee over McGrath.....

 

[capt_Luffy]

He never played in Asia, which was, in his time, not the toughest of places to score runs.

There's a reason why most fast bowlers are rated on their performance in Asia (in addition to other metrics of course) and batsmen for their performances in England, the WI and Australia (later SA). Yes there was the quartet, but he also faced similar bowers on uncovered pitches in England.

And that's the thing, nothing anyone has to say is capable of convincing you of anything, and at 22 (I believe) you're perfectly sure of everything.

I've had my opinion changed on many things here over the years, because as we learn we adapt.

That's just not totally true. The quarter was a unique challenge, especially at home. Playing Underwood occasionally and batting those 4 together are very very different. Coronis- already replied on the judging point. Imran in Pakistan and the spin quartet in India are types of challenge he never faced.

Your second line just reeks of a boomer, "oh you 22 year old child, have no knowledge yet think understand everything!" Energy. Like that ma guy whom I put on ignore. Please don't do that. Anyways, on that, firstly I am 21. And turned just 8 days ago so 22 is a bit baffling. Secondly, there are multiple instances I have changed my stance, given the argument is good enough. OverratedSanity convinced me that Chappell is Overrated, HouHsiaoHsien did so with Imran's away record which I was underrating, Coronis did so with Lillee, Patience and Accuracy+Gut made me rate O'Reilly higher, heck even Subshakerz conviction me on how I was underrating Ashwin before. I have changed my mind many times, but need a solid enough argument for that.