Saeed Anwar vs. Virender Sehwag

[subshakerz]

With all due respect...this is quite a ridiculous notion. That Sehwag would fall a full 10 points in his overall average is untenable IMO. You can't even prove if he would regress at all; just as you can't rule out that he'd improve.

Not ridiculous at all.

You take a batsman who scores the majority of his runs on easy pitches, who is highly suspect in seaming and swinging conditions (if you've seen him play in such conditions there can no doubt about this fact), and you place him in a decade when the occurence of flat pitches is dramatically reduced and the countries he has pillaged the most (Pakistan, South Africa, Australia, and West Indies) have their bowling attacks replaced with a string of all-time great fast bowlers.

Yes, I think he will take that big of a hit. Guys like Mohammad Yousuf, Jayawardene, and Laxman have had their averages bump up 10+ points since playing in this decade after plenty of cricket in the 90s. I don't see why its so unbelievable.

 

[Sanz]

Actually, I think if Sehwag had to consistently play Walsh & Ambrose, Waqar & Wasim, Donald & Pollock and McGrath & Gillepsie abroad in the 90s, he would struggle to average 40 IMO. He never faced an attack abroad compared to those, and any attack approaching them he's usually struggle against. So it's a fair bet.

Saeed Anwar Vs. Ambrose/Walsh - 19.20

Saeed Anwar Vs. Donald/Pollock - 23.25

I hope this is enough to stop you from making up hypothetical nonsense about Sehwag. I love Saeed and enjoyed watching him bat and from where I look at it is merely a matter of personal choice between the two but what yourself and aussie are indulged in is just belitting Sehwag.

 

[aussie]

Saeed Anwar Vs. Ambrose/Walsh - 19.20

Saeed Anwar Vs. Donald/Pollock - 23.25]

I hope this is enough to stop you from making up hypothetical nonsense about Sehwag. I love Saeed and enjoyed watching him bat and from where I look at it is merely a matter of personal choice between the two but what yourself and aussie are indulged in is just belitting Sehwag.

Haa oh this is just beautfiul. People enter this thread who are defending Sehwag, without bothering to really read the argument in detail over the last 13 pages, make a random post to a comment. Then have to nerve to say that I & suhshakerz are just "belitting" Sehwag. Yall funny...

The reason for this lobsided aggregate vs WI & SA overall has already been explained [URL="http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2081216-post175.html"]here. Now you can engage us in constructive debate, instead of cherry picking stats.

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah Saeed was one of the more overrated test and ODI batsmen of the 90s. Personally, when it came down to the best openers in the 90s I wouldn't look past Kirsten.

 

[Sanz]

This has been acknowledged by saying on flat decks he destroy any attack as shown by his two Chennai hundreds in 2004 & 2008. But the when those same attacks gets testing conditions, he has failed.

And how well has Saeed Done against those Quality attacks (Clue :- Look at my previous post in the thread).

 

[aussie]

What was the par average for batsmen striking at 90+ in the 1990s btw?

Hmm, that would be a hard stat to filter out on cricinfo, since i dont think they do SRs. But even so i dont think SR is relevant or important here.

 

[aussie]

Yeah Saeed was one of the more overrated test and ODI batsmen of the 90s. Personally, when it came down to the best openers in the 90s I wouldn't look past Kirsten.

Graham Gooch for a few years?. But yes i'd put Kirsten over Anwar as well slighty, but i disagree totally Anwar was overrated in either format.

 

[Sanz]

Haa oh this is just beautfiul. People enter this thread who are defending Sehwag, without bothering to really read the argument in detail over the last 13 pages, make a random post to a comment. Then have to nerve to say that I & suhshakerz are just "belitting" Sehwag. Yall funny...

It is belitting Sehwag's performance by making stuff up and when people point that Saeed Fails too in the criteria set by you, you accuse them off 'serious cherry picking of stats' when the fact of the matter is you yourself are most guilty of doing the same.

The reason for this lobsided aggregate vs WI & SA overall has already been explained here. Now you can engage us in constructive debate, instead of cherry picking stats.

Cherry Picking and engaging in constructive debate ? Yeah Right and then point to a post full of excuses, mere excuses to win an argument when you have been owned using your own argument.

 

[jeevan]

Actually there is evidence of Sehwag's adaptability. He'd been criticized for his relatively poor scores in 3rd and 4th innings, i.e. exactly the difficult batting circumstances that are generally infrequent this decade. It is something he's tried to fix after he pulled himself together and .....

Sehwag Mk 1 (i.e. before he was dropped in 2007,1008) had 4 fifties and no hundreds in 45 innings batting 3rd or 4th.

Sehwag Mk 2 (i.e. after he returned) has 4 fifties and one hundred in 16 innings batting 3rd or 4th.

This is as controlled an experiment as cricket will allow, and Sehwag's acquitted himself well in it.

 

[jeevan]

As to picking Sehwag over Anwar - as good as the latter might have been, there were others who did about as well. Even if you specified left handed openers who did well in the 90's - you come up with Justin Langer, Gary Kirsten and Mark Taylor. Langer has about the same strike rate too, it seems. There'd be enough selection for one to draw on, if you passed on Anwar.

Sehwag - however many caveats you apply to his records - has no peer among top order batsmen of his age for what he does. Not Gayle, Hayden, Smith or Jayasurya or even his own idol Sachin Tendulkar. Some of them are overall better batsmen, but ....

...if Waugh is selecting a team (i.e. Sehwag's failures would be covered by a spectacular middle order), it isnt a hard bet for him to go for Sehwag. (Actually would Anwar be offering any thing much different than his regular opening pair of Langer/Taylor?)

 

[Top_Cat]

*cough* Langer first opened the batting in Tests in 2001 *cough*

 

[jeevan]

*cough* Langer first opened the batting in Tests in 2001 *cough*

But he did well as a batsman in the 90's? Or even thats not enough?

 

[aussie]

It is belitting Sehwag's performance by making stuff up and when people point that Saeed Fails too in the criteria set by you, you accuse them off 'serious cherry picking of stats' when the fact of the matter is you yourself are most guilty of doing the same.

Please point out to me what im my analysis of Sehwag's test career i have made up in the last 13 pages?

I have not set any criteria for anybody. I have called Sehwag's career as it see it & thats stats have clearly backed me up.

No point in Sehwag's career to date has he scored runs againts a quality pace attack in testing conditons like what Anwar faced vs AUS (98/99 & 99/00) & SA 97/98. That alone puts him ahead of Sehwag. This is facts, no cherry picking here.

Cherry Picking and engaging in constructive debate ? Yeah Right and then point to a post full of excuses, mere excuses to win an argument when you have been owned using your own argument.

Please highlight the excuses in that link sir. Since all of that are the facts of how Anwar's career progressed.

 

[Top_Cat]

But he did well as a batsman in the 90's? Or even thats not enough?

Well, not *that* well but anyway, I presumed it was limited to openers since you only mentioned openers and, well, both the guys being talked about in this thread are openers.

 

[subshakerz]

...if Waugh is selecting a team (i.e. Sehwag's failures would be covered by a spectacular middle order), it isnt a hard bet for him to go for Sehwag. (Actually would Anwar be offering any thing much different than his regular opening pair of Langer/Taylor?)

Sure that's one way to look at it. The other way to look at is if you are a pace bowler on a sporting wicket, you would you rather bowl to? Given that Sehwag gets weak knees anytime he's on such a wicket, I would probably want to bowl to him.

 

[Top_Cat]

No point in Sehwag's career to date has he scored runs againts a quality pace attack in testing conditons like what Anwar faced vs AUS (98/99 & 99/00) & SA 97/98. That alone puts him ahead of Sehwag. This is facts, no cherry picking here.

Utter bollocks that those series against OZ were in testing conditions for a batter. Seriously. Flat decks all. Perth was the quickest of all of them and two Aussie batsmen (one of whom was coming off three consecutive ducks) all but passed 150.

The attacks were top-notch, sure. But then, Sehwag has also done well against some top-notch attacks so it's not a point of difference if the conditions suited the batsmen. Which they did.

Please highlight the excuses in that link sir. Since all of that are the facts of how Anwar's career progressed.

This is so because based on my memory of Anwar in 90s & resaerch of his career. He had a bit of bad patch when SA toured PAK in 97. This was vindicated by another pakistan poster Xuhaib earlier in this thread.

Aww, just going through a bit of a bad patch? Excuse.

Also his record vs WI is hindered by the fact that on his debut he wasn't ready for test cricket in 1990.

Excuse.

Anwar missed the WI tour when he was at his peak in 2000 for whatever reasons (probably the death of his daughter), if Imran Nazir could score hundreds againts Walsh & Ambrose then, so would have Anwar.

Nothing but speculation.

The only fact I read was the tragic death of his daughter. Got a serious misunderstanding of the difference between fact and opinion if you think the above are facts.

 

[jeevan]

Well, not *that* well but anyway, I presumed it was limited to openers since you only mentioned openers and, well, both the guys being talked about in this thread are openers.

OK, well there's two choices then for Anwar (off the top of my fairly limited head) for left hand openers who opened in the 90s and did well as openers in the 90s.

 

[subshakerz]

The general thrust of this thread is that somehow Sehwag's plundering on dead wickets so ruthlessly series after series outweighs any apparent deficiency in his record on tougher wickets. I guess I prefer a more all-weather, all-wicket batsman (Anwar) over a flat pitch master blaster.

 

[subshakerz]

Utter bollocks that those series against OZ were in testing conditions for a batter. Seriously. Flat decks all. Perth was the quickest of all of them and two Aussie batsmen (one of whom was coming off three consecutive ducks) all but passed 150.

The attacks were top-notch, sure. But then, Sehwag has also done well against some top-notch attacks so it's not a point of difference if the conditions suited the batsmen. Which they did.

Please, I saw both series. The series is South Africa from memory was the most bowler-friendly series you can think of. South Africa's pace attack was at his peak, the match in Durban when Anwar scored his century the ball was swinging corners.

In Australia, it was hardly as flat as the wickets are nowadays. McGrath and Fleming were at their peaks as bowlers. And no, Sehwag never faced such an attack in Australian soil both times he toured there.

 

[Prince EWS]

Got a serious misunderstanding of the difference between fact and opinion

Aussie?? Never!!!