capt_Luffy
International Coach
It's not necessarily uncommon, don't think it's wrong as well.wtf where
It's not necessarily uncommon, don't think it's wrong as well.wtf where
it's wrong, but didn't think that was the common take, always though the consensus was Hobbs and Hutton instead of Hobbs and GavaskarIt's not necessarily uncommon, don't think it's wrong as well.
I do not think it is such a wrong take. Gavaskar proved himself against some of the greatest bowlers of all time.it's wrong
It's Hobbs, then either Hutton or Gavaskar (the only correct answer).it's wrong, but didn't think that was the common take, always though the consensus was Hobbs and Hutton instead of Hobbs and Gavaskar
Or Boycott.It's Hobbs, then either Hutton or Gavaskar (the only correct answer).
Eh, Twitter and Reddit are places that probably don't know pre 70s CricketIn many places
Twitter. Reddit. Many online forums.
1. He is India’s first all time great cricketer.
2. He has proved himself against great pacers.
3. He has peer acclaim as a great opener.
Hobbs, Hutton, Gavaskar and then Sutcliffe.It's Hobbs, then either Hutton or Gavaskar (the only correct answer).
conditions advantage for Hutton cancel out the bowlers advantage for Gavaskar, you're just left with one having a blatantly better record.I do not think it is such a wrong take. Gavaskar proved himself against some of the greatest bowlers of all time.
Sutcliffe isn't universally 4th tbf. Barry, Trumper, Boycott, Sehwag, Hayden, Smith, Greenidge, Gooch, Cook all are fairly highly rated elsewhere.Hobbs, Hutton, Gavaskar and then Sutcliffe.
It's not twitter and reddit I am talking about. Check ESPN legends of cricket ranking. Check Richie Benaud's all time XI.In many places
Twitter. Reddit. Many online forums.
1. He is India’s first all time great cricketer.
2. He has proved himself against great pacers.
3. He has peer acclaim as a great opener.
Yes Hutton played in tougher conditions. Sunny played far better bowlers. For me Gavaskar’s achievements are better than what Hutton did.conditions advantage for Hutton cancel out the bowlers advantage for Gavaskar
Barry vs Sutcliffe is probably a good comparision (yes I'm baiting Coronis), Tho I don't think it makes sense to rate Sutcliffe too much behind others, he averaged 60+, master against spin, master of spin and proven against pace too, I don't have him much behind the other Hs of English Cricket, he just has a bit of a duller career.Sutcliffe isn't universally 4th tbf. Barry, Trumper, Boycott, Sehwag, Hayden, Smith, Greenidge, Gooch, Cook all are fairly highly rated elsewhere.
what away series from Gavaskar is better than Hutton's 1950 Ashes?Yes Hutton played in tougher conditions. Sunny played far better bowlers. For me Gavaskar’s achievements are better than what Hutton did.
brb gotta write a couple of paragraphs on his greatness that I’ve posted 100 times beforeBarry vs Sutcliffe is probably a good comparision (yes I'm baiting Coronis), Tho I don't think it makes sense to rate Sutcliffe too much behind others, he averaged 60+, master against spin, master of spin and proven against pace too, I don't have him much behind the other Hs of English Cricket, he just has a bit of a duller career.
1979 Englandwhat away series from Gavaskar is better than Hutton's 1950 Ashes?
alright, we both know the England 1979 series isn't better than 1950 Ashes.1979 England
Don't think it's necessarily worse either.alright, we both know the England 1979 series isn't better than 1950 Ashes.
close, but not that closeDon't think it's necessarily worse either.