Viv Richards & Allan Donald vs Brian Lara & Curtly Ambrose

[capt_Luffy]

In chronological order. Test and first-class combined.



Grace, Trumper, Hobbs, Bradman, Sobers, Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, Viv Richards, Lara, Tendulkar.

 

[subshakerz]

Pure ability wise he's in tier 2 and definely behind only Sachin and Viv, not sure if he's above or below Garry.

You should never rate someone that high on ability. It's not like we are talking a Bradman level talent here.

 

[kyear2]

None of these rate him absolute best bat I think. And plenty rate Pollock ahead, including freaking Cricket South Africa and the ESPN and Wisden lists.

Well since I've heard most of them say it themselves, don't know how you would say that.

Re cricket SA rating him the best and you going along with that, I assume then that toy also rate Kapil over Sachin?

For what I imagine is at least the 5th time. Pollock stayed, played and invested into cricket in SA during most of the isolation period. Barry was seen to be and I guess was somewhat of a mercenary.

The Wisden list was well intended but poorly executed and not in anyway a useful resource outside of the top 5, one can even say outside of the top 2. Unless of course you're calling Frank Worrell the 6th greatest cricketer of all time. And if memory serves correct Pollock had a grand total of 4 votes, out of a hundred.

Reasons I rate Barry where I do, and why he's a lock for my AT XI

Gavaskar is close, but during the 1970s he was never considered as good as Barry Richards, except perhaps in India and parts of the Caribbean (Guyana and Trinidad).

That's Compton on Hutton btw. Barry could take on and destroy any attack on any pitch. He could bat it out and play the long game, or go on the attack and score a hundred before lunch, sticking the opponents game plan.

Thompson, Lillee and Procter all rated Barry higher than any other opening batsman, and Lillee rated him alongside Richards and Sobers overall. Thompson, alongside Chappell, who he rates as the best he had bowled to.

On quicker pitches, actually on swinging ones as well, Barry was also better against fast bowling than Sunny was. At the end of the day, what's more important in an opening batsman tool belt.

I've already showed how Barry did vs the best bowlers of his day, especially in comparison to his contemporaries, and the scores he compiled against those greats. I've already spoken of how he averaged 70 vs touring test teams.

Me personally, I don't rate Pollock that highly among the top tier guys, and that's for various reasons. One of which was that I've never seen anyone call Pollock the greatest, the absolute best they've seen, and despite Barry playing only 4 tests, it's still a discussion.

 

[Johan]

Compton is a silly man

 

[subshakerz]

Well since I've heard most of them say it themselves, don't know how you would say that.

Re cricket SA rating him the best and you going along with that, I assume then that toy also rate Kapil over Sachin?

For what I imagine is at least the 5th time. Pollock stayed, played and invested into cricket in SA during most of the isolation period. Barry was seen to be and I guess was somewhat of a mercenary.

The Wisden list was well intended but poorly executed and not in anyway a useful resource outside of the top 5, one can even say outside of the top 2. Unless of course you're calling Frank Worrell the 6th greatest cricketer of all time. And if memory serves correct Pollock had a grand total of 4 votes, out of a hundred.

Reasons I rate Barry where I do, and why he's a lock for my AT XI



View attachment 45470
That's Compton on Hutton btw. Barry could take on and destroy any attack on any pitch. He could bat it out and play the long game, or go on the attack and score a hundred before lunch, sticking the opponents game plan.

Thompson, Lillee and Procter all rated Barry higher than any other opening batsman, and Lillee rated him alongside Richards and Sobers overall. Thompson, alongside Chappell, who he rates as the best he had bowled to.

On quicker pitches, actually on swinging ones as well, Barry was also better against fast bowling than Sunny was. At the end of the day, what's more important in an opening batsman tool belt.

I've already showed how Barry did vs the best bowlers of his day, especially in comparison to his contemporaries, and the scores he compiled against those greats. I've already spoken of how he averaged 70 vs touring test teams.

Me personally, I don't rate Pollock that highly among the top tier guys, and that's for various reasons. One of which was that I've never seen anyone call Procter the greatest, and despite Barry playing only 4 tests, it's still a discussion.

I'm not going over this again.

Except please note:

You undermine your entire argument of rating Barry so high based on peer/pundit rep when you dismiss that same peer/pundit rep when it clearly rates Pollock as high if not higher, or remain silent on Van Der Bijl as an ATG.

It's clear as day which is why your Barry opinion comes across as so silly.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I'm not going over this again.

Except please note:

You undermine your entire argument of rating Barry so high based on peer/pundit rep when you dismiss that same peer/pundit rep when it clearly rates Pollock as high if not higher, or remain silent on Van Der Bijl as an ATG.

It's clear as day which is why your Barry opinion comes across as so silly.

By rep, Trumper>>>>Barry

 

[Johan]

Now I'm mad at Compton

 

[capt_Luffy]

Now I'm mad at Compton

Tbh I don't even it's that good of a critic when you yourself score like 6 runs more per 100 deliveries.

 

[Johan]

Tbh I don't even it's that good of a critic when you yourself score like 6 runs more per 100 deliveries.

he's a middle order bat and Hutton an opener too so Idk whose worse in SR department

 

[sayon basak]

he's a middle order bat and Hutton an opener too so Idk whose worse in SR department

I don't get why SR is such a big deal. It obviously matters, but does it really matter that much when the player is scoring a lot of runs?

 

[Johan]

I don't get why SR is such a big deal. It obviously matters, but does it really matter that much when the player is scoring a lot of runs?

It doesn't matter, especially for opener it might be better to play slow, I'm sure Australia would've preffered openers who stay until 25/30th over over Khawaja last BGT

 

[PlayerComparisons]

I don't get why SR is such a big deal. It obviously matters, but does it really matter that much when the player is scoring a lot of runs?

I think people generally use it to split players that are scoring a similar amount of runs. A better strike rate shouldn’t make up for scoring less runs.

 

[h_hurricane]

Barry Richards is slowly becoming the most mythologized player in history.

 

[Coronis]

Tbh I don't even it's that good of a critic when you yourself score like 6 runs more per 100 deliveries.

he's a middle order bat and Hutton an opener too so Idk whose worse in SR department

I will be completely fair here despite not rating Compton, in this regard he probably has a leg to stand on. He had a few quite fast tons iirc.

 

[Johan]

I will be completely fair here despite not rating Compton, in this regard he probably has a leg to stand on. He had a few quite fast tons iirc.

Pun intended?

 

[capt_Luffy]

I will be completely fair here despite not rating Compton, in this regard he probably has a leg to stand on. He had a few quite fast tons iirc.

He does. But his (and May's and Cowdrey's) overall SR was hardly any higher than someone like Barrington

 

[Coronis]

He does. But his (and May's and Cowdrey's) overall SR was hardly any higher than someone like Barrington

Yes I am obviously well aware of that. But as was said here the specific quote was about Hutton not being aggressive vs lackluster attacks. I’d wager Hutton doesn’t have the quick ton resume that Compton does, especially against certain teams, which is basically what he is saying.

Of course, inversely, this would mean he was still able to score at the same rate in tough batting times whereas someone like Compton would practically be forced to a standstill when things weren’t in his favour.

 

[Johan]

Who has faster tons between Viv and Compton?

 

[Coronis]

Who has faster tons between Viv and Compton?

McCullum.

 

[kyear2]

I'm not going over this again.

Except please note:

You undermine your entire argument of rating Barry so high based on peer/pundit rep when you dismiss that same peer/pundit rep when it clearly rates Pollock as high if not higher, or remain silent on Van Der Bijl as an ATG.

It's clear as day which is why your Barry opinion comes across as so silly.

Only it's not just peer and pundit ratings, it's who they performed against, that Barry went out looking for challenges (and money of course), it's watching them as well.

And you're acting like I'm saying he wasn't an ATG, I have him as easily a top 20 batsman of all time, something you don't even afford to Kallis for your own biased reasons.

And no, I don't think that Pollock has a higher rating than Barry by their peers and pundits, especially not the guys who bowled to them.

I think Barry was special, like top 10, he literally could do things that no one else could, and who he was doing them against was special too... I don't think that's where you rate Pollock is it? Not too 10, so what's the issue?