smash84
The Tiger King
Indeed it would have been fascinating viewing. What about Hadlee? Does anyone know how Viv fared against Hadlee? Might be the closest to a McGrath we can get in terms of bowling line and length all day long.
-
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.
Is Viv Richards an Overrated Test Batsman?
- Thread starter sachin200
- Start date
robelinda
International Vice-Captain
Seen plenty of Viv facing Hadlee. Viv was very cautious. Understandably. Dont recall him ever looking that great, and from memory had a 41 or 42 average vs NZ. I'm pretty sure he never even made a 50 in NZ, but was very aggressive in the WI on the 85 tour, almost all his innings were close to a run a ball. In one dayers he tried to take on Hadlee, but had as much luck as Dean Jones, well until Jones took him apart in that one dayer in 1990 in NZ.
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Ok I dont agree or disagree with the original argument but just have to say something about this point. Vaas did manage to get Lara and Tendulkar both much more than Muralitharan...and the couple of times that Lara did get out cheaply in that series..it was against Vaas.
Anyway carry on
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Going back to Viv Richards,
I do not believe he was overrated. If people believe he was overrated, the onus is on them to provide the arguments because he has already been established by players and analysts as an all time great. There is no point in being speculative about how he would have played Warne or Murali. In that case we will have to speculate how Lara and Tendulkar would have played Marshall or Lillee.
The issue is, what is it that Lara and Tendulkar have that allowed them to dominate Murali and Warne? A very good eye, tremendous footwork, intelligent head on their shoulders, awesome shot selection and temperament. Did Viv Richards possess these qualities? I think the answer would be a resounding yes.
Stats do reflect to an extent the greatness or awesomeness of a player. You wont see a great player with an crap average, but often you will find a great player's average could have been even greater than what the actual is. Richards averaged just 50...but a large part of that had to do with the way he played his game, he never cared about averages..he never cared about stats, he went for his shots. Even when Lillee was bowling with his tail up with an attacking field, Viv would try to dominate him. In all probability he would get out and that would effect his average. On the other hand, he could have tried to hang in there, tire Lillee out, wait for Lillee to be taken off and then go for your shots but thats not his style.
Now its up to you how you look at it, if that makes him less of a great batsman in your books, fine..not in mine because thats part of the Viv Richards package...of being that aggressive fighter who would never back down.
I do not believe he was overrated. If people believe he was overrated, the onus is on them to provide the arguments because he has already been established by players and analysts as an all time great. There is no point in being speculative about how he would have played Warne or Murali. In that case we will have to speculate how Lara and Tendulkar would have played Marshall or Lillee.
The issue is, what is it that Lara and Tendulkar have that allowed them to dominate Murali and Warne? A very good eye, tremendous footwork, intelligent head on their shoulders, awesome shot selection and temperament. Did Viv Richards possess these qualities? I think the answer would be a resounding yes.
Stats do reflect to an extent the greatness or awesomeness of a player. You wont see a great player with an crap average, but often you will find a great player's average could have been even greater than what the actual is. Richards averaged just 50...but a large part of that had to do with the way he played his game, he never cared about averages..he never cared about stats, he went for his shots. Even when Lillee was bowling with his tail up with an attacking field, Viv would try to dominate him. In all probability he would get out and that would effect his average. On the other hand, he could have tried to hang in there, tire Lillee out, wait for Lillee to be taken off and then go for your shots but thats not his style.
Now its up to you how you look at it, if that makes him less of a great batsman in your books, fine..not in mine because thats part of the Viv Richards package...of being that aggressive fighter who would never back down.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Conversely Hadlee didn't have a great series in WI either. Richards was a beast in ODIs and I don't remember any one bowler getting the better of him.
robelinda
International Vice-Captain
Viv only played Hadlee in one series in NZ, in 86/87 he missed the 1980 tour. I think he mightve only played one series in the WI too vs NZ in 85, someone can look it up.
edit, here it is
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...=5;template=results;type=batting;view=innings
edit, here it is
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...=5;template=results;type=batting;view=innings
shivfan
Banned
Viv looked great in hammering Hadlee and co to all parts of the ground on a lightning fast Bridgetown pitch here. He made 105 off 140-odd balls, I think....
3rd Test: West Indies v New Zealand at Bridgetown, Apr 26-May 1, 1985 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com
He only toured New Zealand once, from what I can recall, and he was starting to go into decline then. Interestingly, the tour he did miss was the one in 1980, and that was the one that the WI lost. Many WI experts said that Richards loss was probably one of the main reasons the WI lost that tour.
All great batsmen have flaws. For example, I easily predicted that Tendulkar would already be out in this current Test match when I woke up this morning. He was not the type of batsman to play the type of innings needed on a pitch like Mohali against this Aussie attack to win this Test. This match is tailor-made for Dravid and Laxman, when they were younger and better, of course.
smash84
The Tiger King
I totally agree with you. As great a batsman as Tendulkar is I have found his performances to be short of match winning in a lot of crunch situations.
shivfan
Banned
I totally agree....
shivfan
Banned
let me add, Murali also said in an interview that he felt that Lara played him better than Tendulkar did....
He went on to say that Lara was the best batsman he played against.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Ye. Richards also had a average 86/87 tour to NZ as well. But i'm not sure if Hadlee & co exposed him technically or anything of the sort during that series or if it was a case of King Viv just having an odd bad series.Viv looked great in hammering Hadlee and co to all parts of the ground on a lightning fast Bridgetown pitch here. He made 105 off 140-odd balls, I think....
3rd Test: West Indies v New Zealand at Bridgetown, Apr 26-May 1, 1985 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com
He only toured New Zealand once, from what I can recall, and he was starting to go into decline then. Interestingly, the tour he did miss was the one in 1980, and that was the one that the WI lost. Many WI experts said that Richards loss was probably one of the main reasons the WI lost that tour..
The intention of the poster is clear - "No one (especially Viv Richards) is as great as my idol - Sachin Tendulkar. And let me prove that using statistics".
The problem with statistics is NOT that they don't tell the truth, the problem is that they can be filtered any which way you want, to prove (or disprove) a point.
Let me give you an example. The poster who started this thread -- an obvious Sachin fanboy -- has made excellent "observation" about Richard's modest statistics against Pakistan and Australia.
Now, going by the same token (or logic), here are some of Sachin's stats against the greatest fast bowlers of his era like Glenn McGrath, Allan Donald and Wasim Akram, in both Tests as well as ODIs.
In Tests, Sachin averages a modest 36.77 against Australia when McGrath plays.
It is very noticeable that most of his Test runs/stellar performances against Australia have invariably come only when McGrath was absent, basically against second rate (good, but not great) fast bowlers like Brett Lee, Mitchell Johnson, Kasper, Damien Fleming, Paul Riefel etc. Whenever McGrath is absent from the Australian attack, Sachin's average almost doubles (averages nearly 70 against Australia when McGrath is absent!!!).
Even McGrath's bunny - Lara - does better than Sachin, against McGrath.
Against other great fast bowlers whom he faced at the peak of their powers in Test Match cricket, Sachin averages a pathetic 32 against South Africa whenever Allan Donald has played.
I really don't know whether to include Wasim Akram here since India-Pak never played a series for nearly 10 years (between 1989 to 99 for political reasons) during which Akram was at his absolute peak. But Akram bowled very very well in 1999 when they played each other. In any case, Tendulkar averages an equally pathetic 32 against Pakistan whenever Wasim Akram has played.
Once again, he revelled against the respective teams (South Africa and Pakistan) when these bowlers were absent.
Against the 3 greatest fast bowlers of his era, whom he faced in more than one Test series, McGrath, Donald and Akram, Sachin has scored 1719 Test runs at a modest average of 34.3 (compared to his career average of 56).
Even Lara, who is considered suspect against pace bowling, averages significantly better against the exact same bowlers (3116 Test runs at 40.46). Lara has scored more runs, at a better average, and a better strike rate than Tendulkar against both McGrath and Donald in Tests.
Here is the clincher:
Of all the Test series Sachin has played against these great fast bowlers (McGrath,Donald,Akram), more than 7 series including home and away, only once did he average more than 50 in a series!, that too just barely, when he averaged 50.66 against McGrath in 2000-01 series at home in India. Even more stunning is the fact that only once was he India's best batsman in all the Test series against these bowlers (so much for him being the batting mainstay of India against great attacks). This is the very definition of being over-rated.
The only truly great fast bowler Sachin has had some success against is Curtly Ambrose. But Sachin never faced Ambrose (or the West Indian attack) at their peak. He played only one Test series against Ambrose, that too in 1997, on the dead pitches of the Carribbean (4 of the 5 Tests ended in draws). Ambrose was 35 years old and couple of years away from retirement back then.
I can't recall a single full Test series of Sachin where his performance was similar to Richard's performance against Imran Khan & co. in Pakistan in 1980-81 (Windies batting total never crossed 300 in the entire series and Richards scored 350+ runs at an average of 70+, more than twice the average (and runs) of the next best batsman, no other top-order West Indian batsman averaged above 30 in that series! The team's batting hung almost entirely on Richard's shoulders). And yet Sachin is hyped to have had no batting support whatsoever for a major part of his career, while Richards succeeded only because of the support of Haynes and Greenidge. What an irony.
Amazingly, the trend of Tendulkar's poor stats against great fast bowlers continues in ODIs. In spite of all the batsmen-favoured rules and pitches, Sachin's stats against these bowlers in ODIs are equally pathetic! A measly average of 31 (2222 runs @ 31.64) in ODIs after playing 70+ ODIs against McGrath/Donald/Akram. Only 2 of Sachin's ODI hundreds came against these bowlers (both against McGrath in the sub-continent). In 26 ODI innings against Donald, Sachin managed to cross fifty just 3 times!
Not just his average, even his strike-rate suffers against these bowlers (especially against Donald).
Once again Lara beats him hands down (2969 runs at an average of 44.81 against McGrath/Donald/Akram).
Since most people (especially Sachin fanboys) here seem to swear by stats, above stats clearly prove that Sachin was a cropper against great fast bowlers, and heavily cashed in against modest or less-than-great attacks.
Contrastingly, Richards averages a healthy 47.61 in Tests against Dennis Lillee and Imran Khan (so much for Lillee-Imran effect on him). If you include Hadlee too, Richards averages a very decent 46.8. Interestingly Richards has scored more runs, at a better average against these bowlers (Imran,Lillee,Hadlee) than Gavaskar. Here is the link to the stats:
Batsmen stats against Lillee, Imran and Hadlee
Richards, at least, had a couple of towering "away" series against both Imran (at his peak in 1980-81) and Lillee (in 1978-79). Even his performances against peak Lillee+Thommo in 75-76 after he was asked to open the batting in Test match cricket (elevated from batting position 5 or 6) facing the fast bowlers when they were at their freshest and fastest, and the ball was it's most new, were very good. He has had at least one high scoring series (300+ runs) with a 50+ average against each of Imran, Lillee and Hadlee.
As the links show, the above stats are true. I am not exaggerating them by any means. They conclusively prove Sachin as a modest-attack bully in all forms of the game
.
Moral of the story: With the probable exception of Bradman, you can always filter stats to show that your favourite (or your favourite's nearest rival) cricketer is the best (or is over-rated) in the game.
The problem with statistics is NOT that they don't tell the truth, the problem is that they can be filtered any which way you want, to prove (or disprove) a point.
Let me give you an example. The poster who started this thread -- an obvious Sachin fanboy -- has made excellent "observation" about Richard's modest statistics against Pakistan and Australia.
Now, going by the same token (or logic), here are some of Sachin's stats against the greatest fast bowlers of his era like Glenn McGrath, Allan Donald and Wasim Akram, in both Tests as well as ODIs.
In Tests, Sachin averages a modest 36.77 against Australia when McGrath plays.
It is very noticeable that most of his Test runs/stellar performances against Australia have invariably come only when McGrath was absent, basically against second rate (good, but not great) fast bowlers like Brett Lee, Mitchell Johnson, Kasper, Damien Fleming, Paul Riefel etc. Whenever McGrath is absent from the Australian attack, Sachin's average almost doubles (averages nearly 70 against Australia when McGrath is absent!!!).
Even McGrath's bunny - Lara - does better than Sachin, against McGrath.
Against other great fast bowlers whom he faced at the peak of their powers in Test Match cricket, Sachin averages a pathetic 32 against South Africa whenever Allan Donald has played.
I really don't know whether to include Wasim Akram here since India-Pak never played a series for nearly 10 years (between 1989 to 99 for political reasons) during which Akram was at his absolute peak. But Akram bowled very very well in 1999 when they played each other. In any case, Tendulkar averages an equally pathetic 32 against Pakistan whenever Wasim Akram has played.
Once again, he revelled against the respective teams (South Africa and Pakistan) when these bowlers were absent.
Against the 3 greatest fast bowlers of his era, whom he faced in more than one Test series, McGrath, Donald and Akram, Sachin has scored 1719 Test runs at a modest average of 34.3 (compared to his career average of 56).
Even Lara, who is considered suspect against pace bowling, averages significantly better against the exact same bowlers (3116 Test runs at 40.46). Lara has scored more runs, at a better average, and a better strike rate than Tendulkar against both McGrath and Donald in Tests.
Here is the clincher:
Of all the Test series Sachin has played against these great fast bowlers (McGrath,Donald,Akram), more than 7 series including home and away, only once did he average more than 50 in a series!, that too just barely, when he averaged 50.66 against McGrath in 2000-01 series at home in India. Even more stunning is the fact that only once was he India's best batsman in all the Test series against these bowlers (so much for him being the batting mainstay of India against great attacks). This is the very definition of being over-rated.
The only truly great fast bowler Sachin has had some success against is Curtly Ambrose. But Sachin never faced Ambrose (or the West Indian attack) at their peak. He played only one Test series against Ambrose, that too in 1997, on the dead pitches of the Carribbean (4 of the 5 Tests ended in draws). Ambrose was 35 years old and couple of years away from retirement back then.
I can't recall a single full Test series of Sachin where his performance was similar to Richard's performance against Imran Khan & co. in Pakistan in 1980-81 (Windies batting total never crossed 300 in the entire series and Richards scored 350+ runs at an average of 70+, more than twice the average (and runs) of the next best batsman, no other top-order West Indian batsman averaged above 30 in that series! The team's batting hung almost entirely on Richard's shoulders). And yet Sachin is hyped to have had no batting support whatsoever for a major part of his career, while Richards succeeded only because of the support of Haynes and Greenidge. What an irony.
Amazingly, the trend of Tendulkar's poor stats against great fast bowlers continues in ODIs. In spite of all the batsmen-favoured rules and pitches, Sachin's stats against these bowlers in ODIs are equally pathetic! A measly average of 31 (2222 runs @ 31.64) in ODIs after playing 70+ ODIs against McGrath/Donald/Akram. Only 2 of Sachin's ODI hundreds came against these bowlers (both against McGrath in the sub-continent). In 26 ODI innings against Donald, Sachin managed to cross fifty just 3 times!
Not just his average, even his strike-rate suffers against these bowlers (especially against Donald).
Once again Lara beats him hands down (2969 runs at an average of 44.81 against McGrath/Donald/Akram).
Since most people (especially Sachin fanboys) here seem to swear by stats, above stats clearly prove that Sachin was a cropper against great fast bowlers, and heavily cashed in against modest or less-than-great attacks.
Contrastingly, Richards averages a healthy 47.61 in Tests against Dennis Lillee and Imran Khan (so much for Lillee-Imran effect on him). If you include Hadlee too, Richards averages a very decent 46.8. Interestingly Richards has scored more runs, at a better average against these bowlers (Imran,Lillee,Hadlee) than Gavaskar. Here is the link to the stats:
Batsmen stats against Lillee, Imran and Hadlee
Richards, at least, had a couple of towering "away" series against both Imran (at his peak in 1980-81) and Lillee (in 1978-79). Even his performances against peak Lillee+Thommo in 75-76 after he was asked to open the batting in Test match cricket (elevated from batting position 5 or 6) facing the fast bowlers when they were at their freshest and fastest, and the ball was it's most new, were very good. He has had at least one high scoring series (300+ runs) with a 50+ average against each of Imran, Lillee and Hadlee.
As the links show, the above stats are true. I am not exaggerating them by any means. They conclusively prove Sachin as a modest-attack bully in all forms of the game
.Moral of the story: With the probable exception of Bradman, you can always filter stats to show that your favourite (or your favourite's nearest rival) cricketer is the best (or is over-rated) in the game.
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
and a most impressive one too - there are one or two on here who will annoy you intensely - stick around and don't let them put you offNope. That really was my first post.