DrWolverine
International Debutant
What does that mean?
-
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.
George Headley vs Ken Barrington
- Thread starter DrWolverine
- Start date
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
He believes Viv doesn't make enough runs per inning/centuries as often etc in comparison to guys he's usually compared to (Tendulkar, Hobbs, Sobers etc).
DrWolverine
International Debutant
An argument I have against him is that his overall record is too dependant on one specific year(1976).
P. S : Yeah. Missed out few years at peak to WSC
P. S : Yeah. Missed out few years at peak to WSC
Sliferxxxx
U19 Captain
Tbf, I do believe that most of the top batsmen have a rpi of around the late 40s.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Viv's RPI is higher than Sachin's minus Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, century rate gap is 7.2 innings/ton vs 7.58 innings/per ton in Sachin's favour
Sliferxxxx
U19 Captain
So then there's no huge difference in terms of actual output then.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
I don't personally believe there is
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
His output is extremely focused on his peak. Outside of that it is very subpar for a batsman of his standard, even with one of the best peaks of all time he still sits at the bottom rung of most ATG batsmen amongst stats like runs and centuries per innings (exceptions being guys like Border and Waugh who I rank below him for well known reasons).
A strike rate doesn’t influence my opinion on any batsman. I give him his due in my opinion for his great peak and extremely solid away record (especially great away performance during his peak) despite his lacking in other aspects and so rate him just outside the top 10.
A strike rate doesn’t influence my opinion on any batsman. I give him his due in my opinion for his great peak and extremely solid away record (especially great away performance during his peak) despite his lacking in other aspects and so rate him just outside the top 10.
DrWolverine
International Debutant
For me this is perhaps his biggest flaw
capt_Luffy
International Coach
And Steve Smith. Also, best short peak. SRT had a 10 year peak for eg.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Consistency over a career > peak (see:Botham)
Besides its not like his peak is in a different stratosphere to others
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah SRT is a good reference, considering post peak Viv and post peak SRT are identical in output but SRT has like 7 years on him.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Botham is an extreme example, though I don't know if Botham would be rated higher if he was just a 28 averaging bowler and 33 averaging bat his whole career instead of one peak.
sure I guess, I don't think his declining phase is an outlier among ATGs either though
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Not identical and like, Sachin had a legit 2nd peak.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
removing Bangladesh and Zimbabwe
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.
this is what I got last time I checked
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Meh. Had this discussion already I believe, not much point in paraphrasing.
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
alright
kyear2
International Coach
Hammond is a bit too high. Ahead of Lara is a stretch considering one had a much larger portfolio of work against ATG pacers and especially spinners.
Sutcliffe over Hutton is just pure fantasy. There's a hierarchy of English batsmen that starts with Hobbs, and goes through Hutton then Hammond.
Hutton played against better bowlers.and in a substantially more difficult conditions than Hammond and Sutcliffe and had comparable production.
Lara and Hutton are too low, Richards is wayyy too low. I know it's a meme and his "thing", but it's just lunacy.
Richards played in the same era as Chappell and Sunny and there isn't a pundit who rated either on par with him, far less higher.
He tries to prove some point that s/r doesn't matter and it seems for him that final average is the be all and end all. Richards was the best ever player of fast bowling and unlike every other ATG batsman, didn't have a dead pitch era or played against minnows.
There isn't a serous cricket pundit / observer or fan that rates Herbert Sutcliffe over Sir I.V.A. Richards. He was the best batsman in the world for over a decade, again during the playing tenure of Gavaskar and Chappell.
And it's not about mediocre players, Viv was top tier elite, a batsman that's made Cricinfo's and Wisden's All time World XI's and very arguable top 5 batsman of all time.