-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Jasprit Bumrah vs Malcolm Marshall
- Thread starter Darkshadows
- Start date
kyear2
International Coach
Lillee being ahead of Australia exists only in Australia and even then by the Chappell / Benaud circle, who obviously played with Lillee and again they didn't play together.
Lillee was the best bowler in the world in the 70's and until Marshall took the title of best in the world and eventually best ever from him.
And it bears repeating they didn't play together. Sunny and Viv were a direct in real time comp
Yes, one if the reasons I have Viv listed higher is batting down the order. But he was equally brilliant at 4. And we know why he did it. Did any of the others have the burden of bowling 40 overs a match, that had to impact one's batting. So if you're going to mention batting at 6, which he didn't always and again, was great everywhere he batted, have to mention the bowling load that none of the others had.
As I have often said, Garry with at most, half the bowling load and batting at 4 and standing at slip.would have been the best thing for WI cricket and his legacy. We just don't have the bowlers for more than half his career, and he too over bowled himself.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Who the **** did that!!??? I said it was a factor and you would be dumb as a cow (no dig on @SillyCowCorner1 you are Great, like @daisycow) to believe it Was a non factor.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
It's a rare thing for Bumrah. It was a common thing for Shoaib. Like I said, every other series he is breaking down mid-test. Do not only do you lose your strike bowler but you are a bowler short.
Johan
International Regular
WHY DO YOU ALWAYS THINK I'M ATTACKING YOU SPECIFICALLY!!!
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
It's so silly. 'Ooh he scored fast with big shots and chewed gum and everyone thought he was the best' lol
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Lillee is literally rated by 90% of the cricket faculty to be higher, especially in England as well. It wasn't the work of Benaud mafia.
That makes Sobers the Greatest Test all rounder by a very clear margin and the 2nd Greatest Test cricketer; but it's a factor while rating his batting.
Johan
International Regular
Lloyd also scored fast, didn't make him the best even if I think he was a great bat
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Blatantly false.
The Wisden list and ESPN lists relying on international panels had Lillee high in the top ten, Marshall nowhere near.
And I was going through the Lord's ATG XIs of so many ex cricketers on YT and frankly Lillee's name came up more than Marshall by not just Aussies. Lillee was in Dickie Birds XI. I can go on and on.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Because:
1) I raised that point on Showmanship of Viv
2) Kyear brought it as if I meant it was the only reason behind his rating, like he was Gary Cosier.
Johan
International Regular
nah I'm just seeing it being mentioned a lot more than I think it should be.
It's not like other ATG bats weren't aided by factors outside of their batsmenship output as well, Ashes 1953 for Hutton, coolness factor for Hammond, Lara carrying WI and so forth.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Lara is also an example of showmanship factor, to an extent Sachin and Sobers as well. Don't think Ashes for Hutton qualifies really here in this discussion. Think of Smith and that there exists people who still somehow rate Kohli higher!!! (Probably no longer, but we're plenty till like 2020-21). I never said that's why Viv is rated over Gavaskar or Chappell or Barry ****ing Richards or Lloyd or Amarnath or Gus Logie or Sudhir Naik; just that it was a factor behind his press and peer presence
Johan
International Regular
I think it's a factor behind every great batter tbh, Sobers was flamboyant and almost flawless just like Viv, Sachin himself was rated so highly for being free flowing but more importantly being a one man army for many years (or atleast, that's a common perception), Hobbs for being a freak wrecking pacers at 45+ and so forth, I genuinely think that being rated for some of the intangibles is fundamentally a part of being a great Batsmen.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Hobbs demolishing pacers at 48 is a different bit though, it comes to effectiveness. Viv does gets a boost for his **** bowlers murder all style. I don't rate that exceptional higher than a no non sense die at crease before getting wicket style though. Some do. Attacking batting is better to watch.
Johan
International Regular
Yeah, but imagine if say Sachin was a grafter like Chanders or Dravid but had the exact same stats, and played for a much stronger team in early parts of his career, debuted at 20, all of this would imo make people rate Sachin lower. is there a reason to say Viv's attacking style gets him rated more than Sachin's free flowing strokemaking does for Sachin or Hammond's versatility does for him? I think a lot of people imply Viv was rated as #1 of his era more because of his style than output which I think is completely wrong, the quality of his output is definitely top 7.
kyear2
International Coach
How did he adjust and refit himself?
Did he change his technique? No
Did he slow down? No particularly.
Could it possibly be that faced a flatter era and he kept doing what he was?
But Viv couldn't? Viv kept up his standards well after his peak. And there wasn't a mass exodus of greats as there was in the 2000's.
DrWolverine
International 12th Man
This was an innings of absolute discipline and controlling one self. I highly doubt if Viv could play such an innings.
Attachments
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
You really are ignorant about Tendulkar.
What was that entire innings of 241* in Australia about but him adjusting his shot selection outside off mid-series?
His entire destruction of Warne in 97/98 was based on Tendulkar adjusting his entire game towards attacking a spinner from the rough?
And post 2007 his technique was much tighter, far more compact with a better back lift than 2003 to 2006. He was able to swivel from leg to off in a way he didn't before. He introduced new shots like the ramp shot into his selection.
You want to pretend that Viv made all this planning and these adjustments as his career progressed? He had supreme physical gifts of reflexes, power and timing, but his game style and technique essentially stayed the same and he clearly declined linearly as his runs also became less.
Last edited:
DrWolverine
International 12th Man
Every great batsman has that one thing that appealed to them to the fans(whether it was actually true or not is a different thing.)
Sunny : A technically perfect opener who stood upto the legendary fast bowlers.
Richards : The most destructive batsman ever
Sachin : The child prodigy who shouldered the hopes of a billion earning praise from even the Don
Lara : On his day he was a genius and best ever
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There was a pretty noticeable change in his backlift and shuffle at the crease after 01/02 or so, gradually kept making little changes to it and by 07/08 he doesn't really look much like the 90s version .