Jack Hobbs vs Garry Sobers

[Johan]

Isn't that a box that he didn't tick?

ngl, that's a preference. Viv was more than good enough in his decline phase too, 1982-91 Viv probably has similar output to Sachin from Dec 2002 to the end.

 

[Bolo.]

I don't think I rate shakib in my top 100 anymore, which proves that I'm not biased.

Sure, but it does prove that you are wrong. Be more biased if that's what it takes to get Shakib into the top 100. There are very few ARs ahead of him, and he has a genuine case against the elite specialists.

 

[Johan]

Sure, but it does prove that you are wrong. Be more biased if that's what it takes to get Shakib into the top 100. There are very few ARs ahead of him, and he has a genuine case against the elite specialists.

Shakib is a New Zealand basher tbf, so a Minnow basher

 

[sayon basak]

Shakib is a New Zealand basher tbf, so a Minnow basher

Very few could do that.

And don't think NZ was as minnow as his own team.

 

[Bolo.]

Shakib is a New Zealand basher tbf, so a Minnow basher

Meh.

His record is actually very balanced by spinner standards. Not too many countries he hasn't bashed with either bat or ball (and most especially cumulatively).

 

[Johan]

Very few could do that.

And don't think NZ was as minnow as his own team.

Meh.

His record is actually very balanced by spinner standards. Not too many countries he hasn't bashed with either bat or ball (and most especially cumulatively).

I'm trying to bait the kiwi boys bozos

 

[sayon basak]

I'm trying to bait the kiwi boys bozos

Oh, I'm in.

 

[subshakerz]

ngl, that's a preference. Viv was more than good enough in his decline phase too, 1982-91 Viv probably has similar output to Sachin from Dec 2002 to the end.

I think the insinuation is that Vivs career by virtue of being so peak focused was slightly 'flukey'. Which is wrong.

There is a contingent on CW that prefers longevity consistency only and looks down on peaks. I think peaks should be appreciated for stretching the performance levels of what can be achieved.

 

[Johan]

I think the insinuation is that Vivs career by virtue of being so peak focused was slightly 'flukey'. Which is wrong.

There is a contingent on CW that prefers longevity consistency only and looks down on peaks. I think peaks should be appreciated for stretching the performance levels of what can be achieved.

removing Bangladesh

Viv (1982-1988): 3600 @ 46.6, 43.8 runs per inning
Sachin (late 2002-early 2011): 5180 @ 49.8, 44.26 runs per inning

now including years where they fell completely off the cliff

Viv (1982-1991): 4570 @ 43.9, 40.79 runs per inning.
Sachin (late 2002-2013): 6408 @ 45.12, 41.07 runs per inning.

But yup, Viv has all the output issues.

 

[Kirkut]

Lol. I rate Viv fairly, you guys overrated him, acting like he faced top attacks in his career only. With his big aura and big chewing gum and big strike rate and all, his actual output gets overestimated. I don't even punch him down, the only one I do is Ponting.

I mean the lengths some of the posters go in proving their point makes those Sachin fanboys look sane.

 

[Johan]

why am I catching strays wtf

 

[ankitj]

Bro, how is this different from you combing through Imrans tally of wickets against WI to see how many tailenders he got and thus cheapen it?

Or selecting Gavaskar's innings by ground.

 

[Johan]

Sure, but it does prove that you are wrong. Be more biased if that's what it takes to get Shakib into the top 100. There are very few ARs ahead of him, and he has a genuine case against the elite specialists.

who would that be?

 

[sayon basak]

who would that be?

Depends on which elite specialists he is talking about.

 

[Thala_0710]

I don't think I rate shakib in my top 100 anymore, which proves that I'm not biased.

You still didn't send me that list

 

[subshakerz]

removing Bangladesh

Viv (1982-1988): 3600 @ 46.6, 43.8 runs per inning
Sachin (late 2002-early 2011): 5180 @ 49.8, 44.26 runs per inning

now including years where they fell completely off the cliff

Viv (1982-1991): 4570 @ 43.9, 40.79 runs per inning.
Sachin (late 2002-2013): 6408 @ 45.12, 41.07 runs per inning.

But yup, Viv has all the output issues.

I agree Viv doesn't have major output issues post peak, though I prefer Tendulkar from 2003 onwards to Viv.

 

[Johan]

I agree Viv doesn't have major output issues post peak, though I prefer Tendulkar from 2003 onwards to Viv.

the difference between them is of Bangladesh imo

and then it comes down to Longetivity vs Peak.

 

[sayon basak]

the difference between them is of Bangladesh.

And the fact that Sachin played for 8 more years.

 

[capt_Luffy]

the difference between them is of Bangladesh.

And 3.2 runs of average and a couple of years and a number of matches

 

[Johan]

And the fact that Sachin played for 8 more years.

read again mf