Jack Hobbs vs Sachin Tendulkar

[BazBall21]

Again I would quite this from the match report, re that 60 on the Sabina pitch.

View attachment 42512

I wish there was proper footage of Gooch's hundreds in Jamaica and Barbados

 

[BazBall21]

I think I have addressed this already. Roberts played one of the Tests as well in which he scored a ton. He failed completely in 83, no point in dissecting, and scored everywhere in 71. Given chance or not, there are reports of Holding bowling beamers there as well. 66 works fine in such conditions.

The 66 was a good knock. The hundreds were on the cashy-in side though.

Holding didn't really do anything in either innings. Roberts struggled in the instance he was there. It must have been a pretty unhelpful pitch for pacers when India chased 400-4 and WI only selected one seamer. Obviously Miandad's tons in 1988 didn't come on seaming bouncing minefields either.

 

[kyear2]

I think I have addressed this already. Roberts played one of the Tests as well in which he scored a ton. He failed completely in 83, no point in dissecting, and scored everywhere in 71. Given chance or not, there are reports of Holding bowling beamers there as well. 66 works fine in such conditions.

71 was probably the worst attack in test history.
I don't know why that's even brought up tbh.

Re the Sabina innings where he received two chances and Roberts didn't play, withHolding likely picked him off when he returned for a later spell.
I'll just say that when you have a match support stating one didn't look good and had two chances, it's not a point a point in ones favor.

 

[capt_Luffy]

The 66 was a good knock. The hundreds were on the cashy-in side though.

Holding didn't really do anything in either innings. Roberts struggled in the instance he was there. It must have been a pretty unhelpful pitch for pacers when India chased 400-4 and WI only selected one seamer. Obviously Miandad's tons in 1988 didn't come on seaming bouncing minefields either.

I overall find plucking holes in Gavaskar's '76 tour futile. It wasn't exactly a low scorer, but wasn't extremely flat either. Overall a Great series with 3 successes in 4 matches. '83 was genuinely piss poor bar a ton in a dead draw. '71 series I still think his best work there. Weak bowling attack but in probably the most important series by an Indian batsman everything considered.

 

[BazBall21]

1971 was a good example of the ability to set games up but it shouldn't be mentioned in the same conversation as scoring runs and hundreds against good attacks

 

[BazBall21]

I overall find plucking holes in Gavaskar's '76 tour futile. It wasn't exactly a low scorer, but wasn't extremely flat either. Overall a Great series with 3 successes in 4 matches. '83 was genuinely piss poor bar a ton in a dead draw. '71 series I still think his best work there. Weak bowling attack but in probably the most important series by an Indian batsman everything considered.

I would definitely rate Amarnath in 1983 higher than Gavaskar 76.

India were always going to win a series away from home eventually. Bored of talking about 1971 now.

 

[capt_Luffy]

71 was probably the worst attack in test history.
I don't know why that's even brought up tbh.

Re the Sabina innings where he received two chances and Roberts didn't play, withHolding likely picked him off when he returned for a later spell.
I'll just say that when you have a match support stating one didn't look good and had two chances, it's not a point a point in ones favor.

Simply because cricket is played in the field not in stat sheets. You said he shan't get any credit for 71, I said it was the most important series by any Indian batter arguably ever.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I would definitely rate Amarnath in 1983 higher

I would rate Amarnath 83 as the best series by any Indian ever. But wasn't that important in the Grand scheme of things given India didn't won a single match. 71 was the 2nd win of India away, and after Sardesai's double in the 1st match, completely on the backs of Gavaskar. ****ing calypsos were written. It's the impact that makes it important, not the opposition quality; as the former is more often more important in real scenarios.

 

[kyear2]

The 66 was a good knock. The hundreds were on the cashy-in side though.

Holding didn't really do anything in either innings. Roberts struggled in the instance he was there. It must have been a pretty unhelpful pitch for pacers when India chased 400-4 and WI only selected one seamer. Obviously Miandad's tons in 1988 didn't come on seaming bouncing minefields either.

It was a spinners pitch, Trinidad has always been.

 

[kyear2]

1971 was a good example of the ability to set games up but it shouldn't be mentioned in the same conversation as scoring runs and hundreds against good attacks

Not to add that the argument is framed towards that he was close to, and in the same conversation as Richards.

Which I must add, has never been an actual thing.

 

[BazBall21]

It was a spinners pitch, Trinidad has always been.

Yeah but Trinidad sometimes at least offers uneven bounce which is helpful for all kinds of bowlers. Look at the 90s for example. I suspect Ambrose and Walsh both have excellent records there.

402-4 in the 4th innings suggests it was just slow and true, and even if it wasn't, that means the spinners were either horrendous or Gavaskar helped do a job on them and he was certainly a top drawer player of spin.

 

[BazBall21]

I would rate Amarnath 83 as the best series by any Indian ever. But wasn't that important in the Grand scheme of things given India didn't won a single match. 71 was the 2nd win of India away, and after Sardesai's double in the 1st match, completely on the backs of Gavaskar. ****ing calypsos were written. It's the impact that makes it important, not the opposition quality; as the former is more often more important in real scenarios.

Accolades like that never really do it for me tbh. Right place at the right time. They won lots of away series after that and I'm pretty sure they still would have done without 1971. And it isn't relevant to a conversation about batting ability&credentials v proper bowling.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Accolades like that never really do it for me tbh. Right place at the right time. They won lots of away series after that and I'm pretty sure they still would have done without 1971. And it isn't relevant to a conversation about batting ability&credentials v proper bowling.

I think the conversation shan't just be about credentials tbh. It should be on achievement, not what one could had achieved in another timeline. Gavaskar's best work to pace in a fast track are still probably his tons vs Thomson and Clarke in Waca and Gabba.

 

[kyear2]

Simply because cricket is played in the field not in stat sheets. You said he shan't get any credit for 71, I said it was the most important series by any Indian batter arguably ever.

There's a reason minnows are mentioned when discussing cricketer's records. Against who is as important as anything else in the game.

And it's weird that you mention stat sheets, because it's the only area where that tour matters towards his legacy.

 

[BazBall21]

I think the conversation shan't just be about credentials tbh. It should be on achievement, not what one could had achieved in another timeline. Gavaskar's best work to pace in a fast track are still probably his tons vs Thomson and Clarke in Waca and Gabba.

His 1971 series doesn't do much for me. Better bat than Miandad, not as good as Richards.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Better than Miandad, not as good as Richards.

Against pace on faster tracks, frankly not a convo. As is the ability on a slow turner.

 

[BazBall21]

Against pace on faster tracks, frankly not a convo. As is the ability on a slow turner.

As overall test batsmen, Richards>Gavaskar.

 

[capt_Luffy]

There's a reason minnows are mentioned when discussing cricketer's records. Against who is as important as anything else in the game.

And it's weird that you mention stat sheets, because it's the only area where that tour matters towards his legacy.

Yes, thank God you brought up legacy. As in the 1st away series win outside of NZ...... India were minnower than WI. Don't think Gavaskar scored vs Holder, Noregia, Sobers and Gibbs; but that Gavaskar alone matched the output of Sobers, who played a weaker bowling, earning a draw.

 

[capt_Luffy]

As overall test batsmen, Richards>Gavaskar.

Fair. I also rate Richards ahead, mostly due to his ability to accelerate and having better series against top draws like 79 Australia (mostly 79 Australia, most of his other best series are atleast matched by 1 from Gavaskar, home or away). I just don't think the gap is much significant.

 

[kyear2]

As overall test batsmen, Richards>Gavaskar.

Think Luffy is the only one who comes close to disputing that.

Sorry, forgot about Pews and Coronis, but they place many above Vivian.