Dale Steyn vs Viv Richards

[Xix2565]

It's incredibly easy, Viv isn't really at the same level within the batting peers as Steyn is within his bowling peers. And Bradman aside, the top tier bowlers are generally better than the top tier batters (outside of all rounders).

 

[Johan]

so the case for Steyn being "easily" better is him debuting in an era with no ATG pacers while Viv debuted in an era with ATG batters...Very interesting argument for one of the top ten Pacers being easily superior to one of the Top Ten bats.

 

[Xix2565]

so the case for Steyn being "easily" better is him debuting in an era with no ATG pacers while Viv debuted in an era with ATG batters...Very interesting argument for one of the top ten Pacers being easily superior to one of the Top Ten bats.

I don't see why the reputations of their playing peers when they debuted and played is relevant. Their records vs those around them say enough.

 

[Coronis]

Get your IQ above Room temperature before giving me any **** tbh, you should write a public apology in shame for saying something that stupid.

When you get yours past 0, we can talk.

@kyear2 @subshakerz this is how you beef

 

[Johan]

I don't see why the reputations of their playing peers when they debuted and played is relevant. Their records vs those around them say enough.

That doesn't work when one is surrounded by Allan Borders/Gavaskars/Chappels while one is surrounded by Johnsons/Zaheers/Southees

 

[Xix2565]

That doesn't work when one is surrounded by Allan Borders/Gavaskars/Chappels while one is surrounded by Johnsons/Zaheers/Southees

And Viv wasn't as far ahead of them as Steyn was ahead of his peers. Viv also didn't have to play the best attacks of his time all that often, since they were on his team.

 

[Johan]

And Viv wasn't as far ahead of them as Steyn was ahead of his peers. Viv also didn't have to play the best attacks of his time all that often, since they were on his team.

Viv was considered to be the best of his era by everyone when he was surrounded by ATGs and 50+ avg bats while Steyn was by far the best of an era where there was no great bowler, as I said, your metric is far too dependant on who you're playing alongside, if Courtney Walsh was playing in 2008-2015 he would also be considered the best fast bowler by far but in his own era he wasn't even top 5, too dependent on eras.

yeah because 2008-14 SA definitely wasn't a packed batting side too that Steyn didn't have to bowl to lol.

 

[Xix2565]

Viv was considered to be the best of his era by everyone when he was surrounded by ATGs and 50+ avg bats while Steyn was by far the best of an era where there was no great bowler, as I said, your metric is far too dependant on who you're playing alongside, if Courtney Walsh was playing in 2008-2015 he would also be considered the best fast bowler by far but in his own era he wasn't even top 5, too dependent on eras.

yeah because 2008-14 SA definitely wasn't a packed batting side too that Steyn didn't have to bowl to lol.

Why does reputation matter more than the records and relative comparisons? Reputation doesn't score runs or take wickets.

 

[Johan]

Why does reputation matter more than the records and relative comparisons? Reputation doesn't score runs or take wickets.

Nobody said it does? relative comparisions are too era dependent and any ATG bowler, or even high tier ATVGs like Statham would be far ahead of Steyn's contemporaries during Steyn's career's timeframe because Steyn didn't have a single ATG bowler to compete with, and hence, they're flawed.

Record wise, Steyn vs Viv is debateable.

 

[Xix2565]

Nobody said it does? relative comparisions are too era dependent and any ATG bowler, or even high tier ATVGs like Statham would be far ahead of Steyn's contemporaries during Steyn's career's timeframe because Steyn didn't have a single ATG bowler to compete with, and hence, they're flawed.

Record wise, Steyn vs Viv is debateable.

You can still adjust for eras and conditions though, and it's a far better metric than looking at the reputations of players which are quite often subjective and subject to feelings rather than assessment of performances. I don't see why Viv competing with the likes of Border and Gavaskar is enough to say he's better when there's a strong case that either of those two were better players than him when you look at the numbers and oppositions played. You can't really say that for Steyn even with him benefiting from having favourable home conditions in South Africa relative to the rest of the world.

 

[Johan]

You can still adjust for eras and conditions though, and it's a far better metric than looking at the reputations of players which are quite often subjective and subject to feelings rather than assessment of performances. I don't see why Viv competing with the likes of Border and Gavaskar is enough to say he's better when there's a strong case that either of those two were better players than him when you look at the numbers and oppositions played. You can't really say that for Steyn even with him benefiting from having favourable home conditions in South Africa relative to the rest of the world.

I never claimed that him competing with Border/Gavaskar/Chappel is what makes him better....? you claimed that Steyn's relative performance makes a case for him above Viv, frankly it doesn't, because what your flawed argument ignored was that Viv's relative performance is impacted by playing with multiple ATGs while Steyn had no ATG bowler around, that's it, Steyn's superiority to his contemporaries being higher than Viv's is entirely a resultant of Viv having far more competent contemporaries while Steyn's era was filled with 27-30 averaging bowlers whom any ATG bowler would decently outperform.

neither Border nor Gavaskar are better batters than Viv or particularly have a strong argument to be, Border lacks the output and Sunny lacks the away greatness.

Regardless, I believe Viv better because I find his record more well rounded and find him more tested, I just think your argument of relative performance is complete bunk when you consider the contemporaries both of them had. It's like Tyson vs Ali.

 

[Xix2565]

I never claimed that him competing with Border/Gavaskar/Chappel is what makes him better....? you claimed that Steyn's relative performance makes a case for him above Viv, frankly it doesn't, because what your flawed argument ignored was that Viv's relative performance is impacted by playing with multiple ATGs while Steyn had no ATG bowler around, that's it, Steyn's superiority to his contemporaries being higher than Viv's is entirely a resultant of Viv having far more competent contemporaries while Steyn's era was filled with 27-30 averaging bowlers whom any ATG bowler would decently outperform.

neither Border nor Gavaskar are better batters than Viv or particularly have a strong argument to be, Border lacks the output and Sunny lacks the away greatness.

Regardless, I believe Viv better because I find his record more well rounded and find him more tested, I just think your argument of relative performance is complete bunk when you consider the contemporaries both of them had. It's like Tyson vs Ali.

I mean this ignores that Steyn's era was noticeably better for batting than Viv's though. It wasn't like all the bowlers in Viv's era bowled on as many flat tracks as they did in Steyn's era. The only point you seem to be making is that Viv is better because we called more of his peers ATGs and he did reasonably well. That's a horrific argument.

Border and Gavaskar especially have extremely strong arguments once the nostalgia goggles are off to be frank.

 

[Johan]

I mean this ignores that Steyn's era was noticeably better for batting than Viv's though. It wasn't like all the bowlers in Viv's era bowled on as many flat tracks as they did in Steyn's era. The only point you seem to be making is that Viv is better because we called more of his peers ATGs and he did reasonably well. That's a horrific argument.

Border and Gavaskar especially have extremely strong arguments once the nostalgia goggles are off to be frank.

Again, you missed the point, I'm saying Viv having so many ATG contemporaries while Steyn having none is the reason Steyn has superior relative performance, contemporaries doesn't effect comparisions in any logical way anyway, if Steyn was bowling with ATG pacers and was a level above then sure that's a huge and probably decisive point for him, but he wasn't, he was leagues above average-very good pacers...duh, that's not an argument for him.

Viv's era's was much tougher for batting, cancels out Steyn's tougher era for bowling.

Nostalgia goggles is just a cheap Jab, Gavaskar and Border are amazing batters but above Viv is not reflected in anything.

 

[Xix2565]

Again, you missed the point, I'm saying Viv having so many ATG contemporaries while Steyn having none is the reason Steyn has superior relative performance, contemporaries doesn't effect comparisions in any logical way anyway, if Steyn was bowling with ATG pacers and was a level above then sure that's a huge and probably decisive point for him, but he wasn't, he was leagues above average-very good pacers...duh, that's not an argument for him.

Viv's era's was much tougher for batting, cancels out Steyn's tougher era for bowling.

Nostalgia goggles is just a cheap Jab, Gavaskar and Border are amazing batters but above Viv is not reflected in anything.

Viv regardless wasn't as outstanding as Steyn though. And he did so without having the same sort of challenges as his peers. That's not a point for him regardless of reputations. Steyn was so good that he merits comparisons with the very elite despite his competition.

The rest is just your opinion though, based on how you feel. Nostalgia goggles is a fine description of it, not a cheap jab.

 

[Prince EWS]

So do you guys ever want to discuss Steyn vs Viv again? Please don't act like you've forgotten how to read.

Yeah I'm sick of posting warnings and deleting posts now, gave them both an infraction.

Stop talking about Warne vs Murali in here. If someone who hasn't read my warning replies to an old post then show some restraint and let it go ffs (or quote it in the other thread).

 

[Johan]

Viv regardless wasn't as outstanding as Steyn though. And he did so without having the same sort of challenges as his peers. That's not a point for him regardless of reputations. Steyn was so good that he merits comparisons with the very elite despite his competition.

The rest is just your opinion though, based on how you feel. Nostalgia goggles is a fine description of it, not a cheap jab.

Viv till his 37th birthday was a 53 averaging bat, that's pretty much compareable to a 23 averaging bowler (Steyn retired at 36). I'm not really much into hypotheticals but Viv bashed Akram/Imran in low scoring tours, I don't know how he would've done against Windies pacers in internationals same way I don't know how Steyn would do against Kallis/De Villiers/Amla/Smith in international cricket but I'm confident some of the weaker Windies attacks like 1971 and 76 he would've bashed to oblivion, I don't really know how windies would impact his stats.

both Steyn and Viv are elite, it's the idea Steyn is 'easily' better when nothing substantiates it is what I'm debating against.

Regardless, Statistically they're compareable, I just explained why relative performance logic doesn't work.

You're welcome to make a case for Gavaskar>Richards if you feel the need to.

 

[Xix2565]

A 53 averaging bat is not really comparable to a 23 averaging bowler, come on.

 

[Johan]

a difference of opinion perhaps, when it comes to Bowler in Batter friendly era vs Batsmen in bowler friendly era, I see 24.5 avg Pacers as equivalent to 50 avg batters.

 

[DrWolverine]

Viv's era's was much tougher for batting, cancels out Steyn's tougher era for bowling.

Dale Steyn’s era was much tougher to bowling and it is not even debatable.

Dale Steyn(2006-2015)

12 fast bowlers took 150+ wickets between 2006-2015.

Between 2006-2015, Steyn took 398 wickets at an average of 21.9 and SR of 41.

No other pacer had an average below 25 or a strike rate below 50.

Viv Richards


Between 1976-1985, 13 batsmen scored more than 4000 runs.

Viv averaged 57.6
Miandad averaged 56.9
Chappell averaged 54.9
Greenidge averaged 52.1
Border averaged 51.6

 

[Johan]

Dale Steyn’s era was much tougher to bowling and it is not even debatable.

Dale Steyn(2006-2015)

12 fast bowlers took 150+ wickets between 2006-2015.

Between 2006-2015, Steyn took 398 wickets at an average of 21.9 and SR of 41.

No other pacer had an average below 25 or a strike rate below 50.

Viv Richards


Between 1976-1985, 13 batsmen scored more than 4000 runs.

Viv averaged 57.6
Miandad averaged 56.9
Chappell averaged 54.9
Greenidge averaged 52.1
Border averaged 51.6

Hint — all these Batsmen are better than Steyn's contemporary bowlers.

Here are the pacers that played 2006-2015 with Steyn

James Anderson — Couldn't bowl until 2010
Stuart Broad — same, only became good in 2011
Mitchell Johnson — Not a great
Morne Morkel — Very good
Peter Siddle — Meh
Ryan Harris — Injury prone
Ishant Sharma — lol
Zaheer Khan — lol
Makhaya Nitini — Good

Yeaaaaaaah, I'll take Gavaskar, Miandad and Chappel and Border above those guys in batting.

as I've explained multiple times, these are ATG bats, the bowlers that count as Steyn's "contemporaries" are not ATGs, they're just very good bowlers to average bowlers with Anderson being the sole exception. Gavaskar/Chappel/Border are rated among top 15 batters of all time, those bowlers don't even make top 40 pacers (bar Anderson) so No, your logic doesn't work.

Like Ishant, Zaheer, Johnson maybe and Harris might not even make their respective international teams these days! and you're talking about Gavaskar/Border/Chappel/Javed for Viv.

it's not the era, it's just that bowlers from this era are decisively inferior.