-
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.
Viv Richards vs Brian Lara
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
DrWolverine
International 12th Man
Darren Gough was a good bowler.
Fanboy375
School Boy/Girl Captain
He liked spin there
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yup. I have been trying to point this out.
And when you go deeper it's even less impressive.
For example, SA he failed in the 98 series when Donald was there and dismissed him five times and succeeded in the next series when Donald was retired.
In Pakistan, he failed in 97 against the 2Ws and succeeded in the next in 2006 when Shoaib was absent.
India failed in one series.
In NZ he succeeds earlier in the 90s but fails when Bond comes into the attack towards the end of his career.
In Aus, as has been mentioned, outside of his first series he actually averages sub-40 in the next three series overall against the McGrath--led Aus side when it became number one post 95.
In Eng has a mega series against medium attacks in 95 but fails in the two next series when Gough and then the 2000s Ashes quartet with Flintoff and Harmison have his number.
On the whole, a pretty padded away record that doesn't compare well to Viv or the other top tier bats.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
He didn't play Walsh (in tests), Steyn or Shoaib. The other 3 are fair.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
He played Bond.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
Sachin didn't score any 100 vs Bond. Look at I replied to please.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Fair enough I was just trying to think of the worldclass pacers he might have faced.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
The above are the records of Sachin and Lara during the 90s with Sachin having a distinctly better record overall and away so one would conclude Sachin was overall better which he was but let's have some context. Lara played a total of 29 tests during that time vs great attacks: McWarne, WWs, Donald/Pollock. He played back to back to back away series vs those three greay attacks in 96, 97 and 98. He should've done better but he didnt; this was in the middle of his form slump eye issues whatever.
Sachin played 13 tests vs great attacks: McWarne (3 tests), Donald/Pollock (3 tests), WWs (2 tests), Walsh/Ambrose(5 tests) *** He played tests vs South Africa in 1992 and 1996. Pollock didn't feature in any of those series and Donald alone played in 5 of the 6 tests. Plus I've been told Sachin was a teenager so they dont count. Anyway, against the better teams Sachin was about even with Lara look at their records vs Australia, RSA and Pakistan. Notice i said teams and not any particular bowler. So even with the 100s, Sachin wasn't particularly better vs the better 90s attacks. What he did though was to pound the weaker teams much more so that Lara, which he played more: SL, NZ, Zim, weaker Aus attacks.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
Soo you're counting India but not SL where he does in fact average over 50. But yes Lara’s away average is his biggest achilles heel. 48 is imo very very good but great like Sachin, Smith or even Viv.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
Lara at home:
51 vs RSA (all but 3 tests vs Donald)
50 vs NZ (including series vs Bond)
61 vs Pakistan (One series vs the Ws)
78 vs England
70 vs SL
66 vs Aus ( including 2 series vs McWarne)
35 vs India (real head scratcher this)
And before you come with the bs, Subz, the WI wickets aren't and weren't flat. Bourda and ARG were but Sabina (remember the abandoned test) and Kensington were as fast as any and the QPO had uneven bounce.
So again, Sachin gets the edge over Lara for me because he was better away, nothing more nothing less. Sachin's output vs the greats that they both faced overall was there or there abouts with Lara. And by greats I mean: Wasim,Waqar, Pollock, Donald, Bond, Murali, Warne, McGrath. He has 100s vs Donald and Ws but his overall output wasn't significantly more than Lara. And that's so even if Lara got out to the great bowlers more or looked more uncomfortable or whatever. Because what's the point of making the same overall runs as Lara but getting out to Cronje or Saqlain or whomever else.
kyear2
International Coach
Yeah, he likes to skip this part.Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
The above are the records of Sachin and Lara during the 90s with Sachin having a distinctly better record overall and away so one would conclude Sachin was overall better which he was but let's have some context. Lara played a total of 29 tests during that time vs great attacks: McWarne, WWs, Donald/Pollock. He played back to back to back away series vs those three greay attacks in 96, 97 and 98. He should've done better but he didnt; this was in the middle of his form slump eye issues whatever.
Sachin played 13 tests vs great attacks: McWarne (3 tests), Donald/Pollock (3 tests), WWs (2 tests), Walsh/Ambrose(5 tests) *** He played tests vs South Africa in 1992 and 1996. Pollock didn't feature in any of those series and Donald alone played in 5 of the 6 tests. Plus I've been told Sachin was a teenager so they dont count. Anyway, against the better teams Sachin was about even with Lara look at their records vs Australia, RSA and Pakistan. Notice i said teams and not any particular bowler. So even with the 100s, Sachin wasn't particularly better vs the better 90s attacks. What he did though was to pound the weaker teams much more so that Lara, which he played more: SL, NZ, Zim, weaker Aus attacks.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Great so we are agreed Tendulkar is a just a much better away player.Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
The above are the records of Sachin and Lara during the 90s with Sachin having a distinctly better record overall and away so one would conclude Sachin was overall better which he was but let's have some context. Lara played a total of 29 tests during that time vs great attacks: McWarne, WWs, Donald/Pollock. He played back to back to back away series vs those three greay attacks in 96, 97 and 98. He should've done better but he didnt; this was in the middle of his form slump eye issues whatever.
I like that you have walked back your argument about who was better against the bowlers, since we know Lara can't match Tendulkar there.
I never faulted Lara for his home record, did I? Though even with his home record, you yourself would still give an edge to Tendulkar thanks to the tons. Also that weaker Aus attack still included Warne who he destroyed epically. Please talk about the weaker attacks that Lara piled on in the 2000s if you are going to bring this up.
Last edited:
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
My two main issues with Lara: pace weakness and away record. I have always been consistent on it.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Sorry but in the 2000s, WI pitches were flat and much of his scoring in the above record were against the weaker attacks of these teams. But anyways I have never faulted Lara for being very good at home. You are getting desperate.
Yeah Tendulkar was better because of away record and struggling relatively less against those pacers in terms of dismissals in his prime. Him getting out to other bowlers is just not the same and you know that.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
I know him so well, he'll say Sachin never struggled never looked uncomfortable and some other bs. Which is why I specifically wrote that: what's the point of not making runs and still getting out to bowlers like Cronje or Saqlain or whoever else. And we all have already said Lara was less than great away ie he was very good. Averaging 48 away isn't poor by any measure.
Then he wants to say crap about Lara stat padding vs lesser attacks. Bull, Lara played great bowling (Ws, McWarne, Donald/Pollock) more often than Sachin did while also playing the minnows less.
Someone else posted the great fast bowlers Sachin made 100s against that lara didn't and there were only 3: Donald, and the Ws. Lara didn't play Shoaib, and couldn't play Walsh. But what about the fact that Lara has the most 500 runs series, 3rd most 200s, only player with 100, 200, 300 and 400 scores. Lara is one of a select few to score 100 and 200 in the same test, scored 3 100s in a series 3 times etc. I personally rate all batsmen like this:
Bradman
Sachin
Hobbs
Sobers
Smith
Viv
Hutton
Lara
Hammond
Gavaskar
Lara isn't going any lower than that. Too bad if whomever can't accept that.
Sliferxxxx
U19 12th Man
It's not the same but what was the same is that him and Lara made similar amount of runs. So what's Sachin's flex: " Hey I'm better than Lara because he got out to elite bowlers but I got out to scrubs and we both scored the same." Really??
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
You miss the point. It's not Sachin's flex it is Lara's weakness that the elite bowlers, especially high quality pace, had more of an edge over him.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
As you said, Lara has an away record that is not great like others top tiers. You agree that Sachin is better overall and now agree that Sachin did relatively better against the top pacers.
Lol dude we agree on the main points I don't know why you are being so argumentative.