Jack Hobbs vs Sachin Tendulkar

[kyear2]

Yes Tendulkar had a second peak but also a dip towards the end.

Overall has a notable bump over Lara but Sunny was never rated near Viv.

Literally never.

 

[kyear2]

Depends whom you ask. Not in the West, but there were certainly a number of experts who rated him higher. Most notably Sobers and Hutton.

Sobers's answers changed depending on where he was speaking.

Can't speak to the Hutton quote.

 

[kyear2]

As a overall player, Viv is top 5 of the 20th century, Gavaskar won't crack top 10. Now you ask me who the better Test Batsman was, it was Viv but not really by any significant margin imo. And as I said, Viv had the press because he was box office. It didn't happened with Lara/SRT as both were box office. But there were experts who rated Gavaskar back then also (I mean, two among the literal best batsmen after Don).

He was also unanimously seen as the best batsman in the world from around ',76, Sunny was never seen as a contender to that throne.

Sachin and Lara swapped that title back and forth during their career.

Don't see how this is seen as a viable argument.

 

[kyear2]

I think the 70-71 Windies tour of Gavaskar might influence Gary's opinion.

Since Garry was bowling.

But yeah, look into the context of the quote.

 

[kyear2]

The mythology around his WI record led to that narrative. He is an ATG but not in contention for best since Bradman.

He really isn't, and never has been.

 

[kyear2]

You can reference my previous posts on this matter in the Gavaskar vs Richards I posted. Holding set that series on fire and by the last Test they pretty much implemented body line. Also Roberts played 2 of those matches. And really dude??? 76 wasn't Great; because he scored in only 3 of the 4 matches???? There were also reports of Holding straight up beamers there.
Overall, I don't think it would be unfair to say Viv was a much Greater player of pace, but simultaneously, I can't see him scoring that 96.

I said the '76 series wasn't great in context to the argument we were having, if Sunny was great against fast bowling.

And you didn't mention the '83 series which you said was great and clearly wasn't.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I would hedge a bet that the general consensus is the exact opposite of yours.

There is no way that Sunny was seen to be closer to Viv than Lara was to Sachin.

Yes, I am well aware of that.

He was also unanimously seen as the best batsman in the world from around ',76, Sunny was never seen as a contender to that throne.

Sachin and Lara swapped that title back and forth during their career.

Don't see how this is seen as a viable argument.

Tha has more to do with Lara and Tendulkar's peak by and large not corresponding; which did almost perfectly for Sunny and Viv. And Viv definitely had the better peak. Still, saying he wasn't seen a contender around 78 is false.

 

[kyear2]

Gavaskar's bigger issue than Pace was movement imo, he was vulnerable to swing, visible even in raw records.

Gavaskar against England and New Zealand —

3134 runs at 39.17 average from 83 innings, only 6 tons.

He was vulnerable to both.

His WI record is the most misleading in sport.

 

[kyear2]

Might be. I also think we shan't totally ignore the '71 series like we do. Yes, it was against a poor attack, but it was a legit Great series. Scoring 774 runs in 5 matches @154; in what turned out to be India's FIRST overseas series win in any NZ country, is impressive. As was his double ton in the 5th Test, which clutches a draw when the rest of the line-up crumbled. It was one of the 4 Gold innings of Gavaskar in DoG's rankings (the other 3 were 221, 96 and 236). '83 away was outright poor with a single ton, '83 home was Great with him being successful in 3 of the 6 matches and so was the '76 series with him being successful in 3 of the 4 matches.

The '71 tour was against possibly the worst attack in test history.

No, one doesn't get credit for that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I said the '76 series wasn't great in context to the argument we were having, if Sunny was great against fast bowling.

And you didn't mention the '83 series which you said was great and clearly wasn't.

If scoring runs against 3 of the 4 matches vs Holding and Roberts isn't great display of batsmanship against pace, I don't know what is.

Again, if a 90, 100 and 200 against the quartet in a 6 match series isn't Great, I don't know what is.

 

[kyear2]

Hmm yeah he never had a good/great series against Hadlee or Lillee. A bit padded against WI. Great against Pakistan.

I know it seems crazy to some when I say he isn't in my best after Bradman tier, but he honestly wasn't that great against pace, especially in fast or seaming conditions

And as an opener, isn't that your no. 1 job?

 

[capt_Luffy]

The '71 tour was against possibly the worst attack in test history.

No, one doesn't get credit for that.

Except players you like..... Stop blabbering non sense. If you really think a batsman scoring 774 runs @154 in his debut tour in his countries first major away series win, as their only consistent batsman doesn't deserves credit, then I am not replying anymore.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Hadlee wasn't anything in 76.

We don't reward fifties once a series with ATG points.

Hadlee ran through the Indian batting in the 2nd game. He definitely bowled special. Also scored modestly to him at home.

What about a 70 in a 3 match series in an unlikely 4th innings successful run chase away in Australia, leading to India's first series draw there?? Especially when given a laughably poor out.

 

[kyear2]

If scoring runs against 3 of the 4 matches vs Holding and Roberts isn't great display of batsmanship against pace, I don't know what is.

Again, if a 90, 100 and 200 against the quartet in a 6 match series isn't Great, I don't know what is.

Holding's 1st full year, but yeah quick but still raw. But most importantly, the point I made is that he never scored runs vs the attack outside of Bourda or the QPO.

 

[capt_Luffy]

The Holding 1st full year, but yeah quick but still raw. But most importantly, the point I made is that he never scored runs vs they attack outside of Bourda or the QPO.

Except did just that in QPO....... And not like Holding averaged low 20 in that series or anything!

 

[kyear2]

Except players you like..... Stop blabbering non sense. If you really think a batsman scoring 774 runs @154 in his debut tour in his countries first major away series win, as their only consistent batsman doesn't deserves credit, then I am not replying anymore.

 

[capt_Luffy]

View attachment 42498

And that officially ends this discussion from my part.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah going over all this, I think I have to downgrade Gavaskar. I consider Hutton definitely better than him now.

I am being sincere when I say, I don't think there was a viable argument.

The main reason people give to support this argument was his WI record, which was always misrepresented.

 

[Coronis]

View attachment 42498

That’s extremely insulting to Sheperd and Noreiga.

Nice to see you admit Sobers sucks though.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Hadlee got him in the first inning (took 4/35 and then 7/23 when Gavaskar did not bat), Yeah I'd say 1986 series was pretty decent considering the conditions and he did his job of setting the stage for Vengsarkar, Overall I don't think he was particularly bad against movement but he was certainly vulnerable against it, like Kohli or Ponting, only poor when compared to Elites but generally pretty decent/good.

Fair, but highly doubt the issue can be considered comparable to that of Ponting and Kohli. Certainly wasn't perceived as such when he played I believe. Also, in his last FC game, RoWXI vs MCC, he scored 188 against Marshall and Hadlee opening the bowling.