Jack Hobbs vs Sachin Tendulkar

[capt_Luffy]

Tendulkar and Hobbs’ are the best candidates. It is very tough to argue for Viv over either, tho he is the best after them.

As I said, after these 3 I can present arguments for 6 batsmen, almost equally (though will learn somewhat heavily towards Sobers).

 

[DrWolverine]

As I said, after these 3 I can present arguments for 6 batsmen, almost equally (though will learn somewhat heavily towards Sobers).

May I know the six?

Let me make a guess - Sobers, Richards, Lara, Hammond, Hutton and Gavaskar?

 

[capt_Luffy]

May I know the six?

Let me make a guess - Sobers, Richards, Lara, Hammond, Hutton and Gavaskar?

Smith for Hammond

 

[DrWolverine]

Smith for Hammond

What if Smith has a fall like Ponting? Already his average has fallen from 60.1 to 56.9 in just 15 Tests.

 

[capt_Luffy]

What if Smith has a fall like Ponting? Already his average has fallen from 60.1 to 56.9 in just 15 Tests.

Smith had the best peak bar Bradman ever imo. And he also have ATG tours in very tough conditions and a very balanced record over everywhere. He have to fall REALLY hard to be rated below Hammond.

 

[DrWolverine]

Smith had the best peak bar Bradman ever imo. And he also have ATG tours in very tough conditions and a very balanced record over everywhere. He have to fall REALLY hard to be rated below Hammond.

Was WI team in 1930s that good? Hammond has an average in mid 30s against them. Don Bradman himself had an average of just 75 odd against them.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Was WI team in 1930s that good? Hammond has an average in mid 30s against them. Don Bradman himself had an average of just 75 odd against them.

I mean, it's really hardpress to criticize Bradman for averaging "just" 75...... But WI did had arguably the best pace attack mid War, atleast in that time frame. Martindale, Constantine, Francis was a really solid pace attack for the era. Hammond also played only 1 series against them and that had some pretty low scores, including arguably the best sub 30 score ever; by none other than Hammond.

 

[Johan]

How fast do people reckon Martindale was? I see him often as a counterpoint to the idea Hobbs and Sutcliffe won't have any skillset against PROPER pacers

 

[capt_Luffy]

How fast do people reckon Martindale was? I see him often as a counterpoint to the idea Hobbs and Sutcliffe won't have any skillset against PROPER pacers

All I will say is, of people believe Thomson bowled 160+ regularly (he has proof to atleast have done so once), I can't think of any reason why any bowler before him couldn't; as there was hardly any leap in diet and training of bowlers by then, in comparison to now especially. So if someone believes Thomson bowled faster than anyone ever, especially those who enjoyed high benefits from sport science, people before him could had bowled as fast as well.
So I believe Martindale bowled 140+, and atleast have read one study that claimed Larwood's best to be 154.5

 

[BazBall21]

Bradman
Tendulkar
Hobbs
Sobers
Richards
Hutton
Smith
Lara
Hammond

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

How fast do people reckon Martindale was? I see him often as a counterpoint to the idea Hobbs and Sutcliffe won't have any skillset against PROPER pacers

Here’s Ted McDonald. Constantine was much quicker than Martindale. Both McDonald and Gregory were quicker too. All of them probably bowled between 135-140 kmph or maybe tad quicker. Larwood in the mid-high 140s.

 

[Migara]

Sachin, because he played on varied conditions.

 

[Coronis]

Sachin, because he played on varied conditions.

Uncovered stickies and matting pitches not varied enough?

What if Smith has a fall like Ponting? Already his average has fallen from 60.1 to 56.9 in just 15 Tests.

I mean Viv’s average fell from 60 to 55 in 15 tests then a further 5 points before his career finished and people still consider him in that group.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

I have always thought Gregory to be quicker than McDonald though. Think I have seen Constantine in early part of his career bowl absolute fire in one of the footage which I think was of a county game. Both Gregory and Constantine at their best seem to me to be quicker.

Here’s Gregory, 6.3 ish extremely long limbs, very strong guy.

 

[subshakerz]

I


I am not sure about Jack Hobbs.

In Tests, I honestly don’t see any argument for Viv over Sachin. Maybe Viv had a better peak. Sachin’s insane consistency and longevity wins it for me.

Viv had a better peak with ATG series.

Unlike Sachin, actually dominated ATG pacers at their peak multiple times.

Sachin still better but Viv has a good case.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Viv had a better peak with ATG series.

Unlike Sachin, actually dominated ATG pacers at their peak multiple times.

Sachin still better but Viv has a good case.

Sachin vs Steyn and co in 2010. If that was not dominant, I don't know what is. Viv had a better peak, but that pretty much that sums up his argument, if you aren't too big a SR guy.

 

[Johan]

All I will say is, of people believe Thomson bowled 160+ regularly (he has proof to atleast have done so once), I can't think of any reason why any bowler before him couldn't; as there was hardly any leap in diet and training of bowlers by then, in comparison to now especially. So if someone believes Thomson bowled faster than anyone ever, especially those who enjoyed high benefits from sport science, people before him could had bowled as fast as well.
So I believe Martindale bowled 140+, and atleast have read one study that claimed Larwood's best to be 154.5

I've always been of the belief that Thompson while probably reaching early 160s, averaged someone in the 150s, and what made him freakish was the fact that he had this insanely stressful action that allowed him to constantly generate lethal pace, basically destroying his body in a tradeoff for increased speed

 

[Johan]

Viv had a better peak with ATG series.

Unlike Sachin, actually dominated ATG pacers at their peak multiple times.

Sachin still better but Viv has a good case.

I can see Viv>Sachin against pacers but an argument for Viv>Sachin in general is definitely a tough hill to climb, like a 32-68 stacked argument

 

[subshakerz]

I can see Viv>Sachin against pacers but an argument for Viv>Sachin in general is definitely a tough hill to climb, like a 32-68 stacked argument

Well I consider Sachin better, but Viv was well ahead of bats of his era as far as standing goes to an extent even Sachin was not. Viv was such an anomaly in cricket history, batting well ahead of his time at a 70 plus SR. Great batting peak ever and no real flaw in his overall record.

And we have to think how hard it is to absolutely dominate worldclass pacers at their peak, in their own homes, yet Viv did so repeatedly.

 

[Coronis]

Sachin vs Steyn and co in 2010. If that was not dominant, I don't know what is. Viv had a better peak, but that pretty much that sums up his argument, if you aren't too big a SR guy.

Yeah but he didn’t score 500 runs or go past 898 rating.