Saeed Anwar vs. Virender Sehwag

[honestbharani]

Martyn & Langer's hundreds in SRI 04 & Fleming 274* in SRI 03/04 are comparable innings againts quality spinners in tough conditions.

They are not comparable in terms of domination though.. There is a reason why some of those innings resulted in draws while at Galle Viru won us the match..

 

[honestbharani]

This one from Anwar in Calcutta is around the same level, I reckon. Particularly cas' it was in the second innings after India got a lead.

1st Match: India v Pakistan at Kolkata, Feb 16-20, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

I agree it was one of the best in India and I rate it as his best.. But India only had Srinath in that attack who could be called "threatening" at this level... The pitch was tough but the attack he faced was rather ordinary... And it did flatten out in sessions 2 and 3 as it always does at the Eden...

 

[Shri]

Sehwag more destructive than Richards | Opinion | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

His first hundred came in his debut Test, on a lively pitch in Bloemfontein after India had lost four wickets for not many. He has gone on to score big hundreds in diverse conditions in Nottingham, Melbourne, Chennai, Mumbai, Lahore and Galle. He has collared Shane Warne, shredded Shoaib Akhthar, got the better of Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee, finished off Saqlain Mushtaq's career, and walloped Mutthiah Muralitharan like no one, including Lara, has before. He has set up wins and saved more Tests than he is given credit for.

That his second triple-hundred, a better-than-run-a-ball 319 against South Africa in Chennai came in a run-fest often obscures the fact that India started the innings trying to save the Test, facing 540. By the time Sehwag finished, he was speaking of winning it. His previous century, an uncharacteristically stodgy 151 in Adelaide had been a decidedly match-saving effort, on the final day of the Test. It was the only time, Sehwag reflects with pride, that he went an entire session without hitting a four.

It was his ability to strike fear in the hearts of the bowlers that set Richards apart. It can be argued that bowling stocks were healthier in that age, but a man can't be held guilty of not being able to choose his circumstances. It's futile wondering how Richards would fared in the 90s and the noughties. Against the best that his times have offered him, Sehwag has been more destructive than even Richards. Let's cut out the buts now.

 

[Pratters]

IND has quality pace attacks in FC cricket?. Ha, well why haven't those bowlers played tests yet..

Very good Duleep Trophy attacks.

 

[Pratters]

Haha. Serious double standard.

Haha. Great response.

Yes in 2004 AUS won in SRI & IND. Conquering Murali/Harbhajan/Kumble & because Chandana took a freak 10 wicket haul AUS in glory years cant couldn't play spin.

When did I say Australia couldn't play spin. Except for a few years, Australia was just above average against spin though.

 

[subshakerz]

I agree it was one of the best in India and I rate it as his best.. But India only had Srinath in that attack who could be called "threatening" at this level... The pitch was tough but the attack he faced was rather ordinary... And it did flatten out in sessions 2 and 3 as it always does at the Eden...

I disagree subshakerz with the above. It was not a spinners game and only Srinath looked threatening in that match from India's point of view. Pakistani batsmen threw away their wickets with abandon and that made Anwar's efforts look superlative. I admit it was a good innings but it was never in the league of Galle 2001.

I'm not saying that Anwar's innings was better but it was certainly in the same league. It was a bowler-friendly wicket from memory and facing Kumble and an in-form Srinath at home is a huge challenge (remember, Kumble had taken 10 wickets in an innings in the previous match). On top of that it was a second-innings knock after India had a lead with the extra pressure of playing in a Pak-India match. And Anwar scored around the same ratio of runs as Sehwag while carrying his bat.

 

[Ikki]

I agree with this actually. It's no coincidence that Hayden's losses in form have come at the same time he faced high quality express bowling. He struggled in the beginning with Donald/ Pollock and Ambrose, then in mid-career with Shoaib and the Ashes quartet, then towards the end with Sharma, Zaheer and Steyn.

Not really. He faced attacks in said period weren't high quality. Simply put, he was in a really **** patch and had gone some 15 tests without a ton - which for him is an eternity. Many of those same teams he failed against were the same ones he plundered before.

 

[jeevan]

If you were a bowler and given a choice of Anwar or Sehwag to bowl at:

Bowling to Anwar is another day at the office. Not really different from bowling to Kirsten, Taylor, Langer, or Hayden. Smith, Strauss and Gambhir in slightly more recent years. Compared to the slowest of the bunch, Anwar would take you for 15 more runs if you bowled 20 overs to him. So in the worst case it is a hard day at the office.

Bowling to Sehwag is playing Russian roulette. If you are not a top class inswing bowler and the pitch and conditions are not favroable to you, two or three chambers are loaded. If both of those things go your way, may be just one chamber loaded it is. But same game.

So, you ask yourself "Do you feel lucky, punk".

Sehwag's no Bradman in batting skills. But if he gets going for whatever reasons (and even by the definition of his detractors it takes more than one thing to really stop him) he'll blow your away just as thoroughly.

He's not done it just one or two times but ten or twelve times. Saqlain, Akhtar, Lee, Clark, Vaas, Steyn, Ntini, Murali have all failed to contain him, by which one means a 150+ score made at a rate approaching (or sometimes exceeding) a run a ball. Even the firm of McGrath & Warne have held him down to a strike rate of 70. So, it is no dishonor to be so utterly helpless.

Nonetheless, another day at the office sounds good.

 

[jeevan]

If you're a captain of a team that had 10 batting losers and get to pick just one more, perhaps you'd think of something a bit more solid-in-all-conditions like Anwar.

But if your team sheet has one of Kirsten, Taylor, Hayden,Gambhir,Strauss,Smith to start at one end (let alone the Gavaskars, Sutcliffes, Hobbs and the Boycotts) with Dravid-Tendulkar-Laxman or Ponting-Martyn-Waugh(or Clarke,Hussey) or Younis-Yousuf-Inzi or Sarwan-Lara-Chanderpaul or Amla-Kallis-DeVeillers or Sangakaara-Jaywardene-Samaraweera, heck even Vengsarkar-S Manjrekar-Azharuddin to follow after that, would you pick another opener roughly in the class of the other one you have already or Sehwag?

Methinks Anwar would need to be better than any of those other openers, but that's a different discussion.

 

[Faisal1985]

If you're a captain of a team that had 10 batting losers and get to pick just one more, perhaps you'd think of something a bit more solid-in-all-conditions like Anwar.

But if your team sheet has one of Kirsten, Taylor, Hayden,Gambhir,Strauss,Smith to start at one end (let alone the Gavaskars, Sutcliffes, Hobbs and the Boycotts) with Dravid-Tendulkar-Laxman or Ponting-Martyn-Waugh(or Clarke,Hussey) or Younis-Yousuf-Inzi or Sarwan-Lara-Chanderpaul or Amla-Kallis-DeVeillers or Sangakaara-Jaywardene-Samaraweera, heck even Vengsarkar-S Manjrekar-Azharuddin to follow after that, would you pick another opener roughly in the class of the other one you have already or Sehwag?

Methinks Anwar would need to be better than any of those other openers, but that's a different discussion.

I think you summed it up pretty good.....

 

[aussie]

Indeed well said Jeevan.

 

[subshakerz]

If you're a captain of a team that had 10 batting losers and get to pick just one more, perhaps you'd think of something a bit more solid-in-all-conditions like Anwar.

But if your team sheet has one of Kirsten, Taylor, Hayden,Gambhir,Strauss,Smith to start at one end (let alone the Gavaskars, Sutcliffes, Hobbs and the Boycotts) with Dravid-Tendulkar-Laxman or Ponting-Martyn-Waugh(or Clarke,Hussey) or Younis-Yousuf-Inzi or Sarwan-Lara-Chanderpaul or Amla-Kallis-DeVeillers or Sangakaara-Jaywardene-Samaraweera, heck even Vengsarkar-S Manjrekar-Azharuddin to follow after that, would you pick another opener roughly in the class of the other one you have already or Sehwag?

Methinks Anwar would need to be better than any of those other openers, but that's a different discussion.

That's a good point and I would agree that if I were an Indian captain I might opt for Sehwag given that his failings can be dealt with by the rest of the lineup.

 

[aussie]

Very good Duleep Trophy attacks.

Indian FC attacks (especially pace attacks) are way below "consistent" international standards. So if he smoked Sharma/Singh (Vikramor RP)/Sharma/Sreesanth/Gony/Patel in a domestic match, its not really a great guide tbf.

When did I say Australia couldn't play spin. Except for a few years, Australia was just above average against spin though.

Well yes. But going back to reason how we got the this part in the debate, i presume you agree now that ONE great performances doesn't make a player great. Rather some form of consistency is needed?.

They are not comparable in terms of domination though.. There is a reason why some of those innings resulted in draws while at Galle Viru won us the match.

To avoid repeating myself. See here.

 

[Shri]

To avoid repeating myself. See here.

That does not answer his question. Those knocks were gritty for sure but didn't get their sides out of trouble with sheer brute force. They had to work hard and had to play those innings with their backs to the walls with the bowlers intimidating them. Sehwag's knock is not comparable to the other knocks mentioned in the way HB is suggesting.

 

[aussie]

That does not answer his question. Those knocks were gritty for sure but didn't get their sides out of trouble with sheer brute force. They had to work hard and had to play those innings with their backs to the walls with the bowlers intimidating them. Sehwag's knock is not comparable to the other knocks mentioned in the way HB is suggesting.

Half & Half TBF. Intially espeically the Martyn & Langer hundreds their backs where againts the wall & they where battling to score, but eventually they began to dominate Murali & co. But yes they weren't as brutal as Sehwag in Galle 08 in ther dominance of Murali.

A better compariosn in the way HB is suggesting then would be Gilchrist's 144 in that same Kandy test 04. He couter attacked Murali & co just as brutally as Sehwag for sure.

 

[honestbharani]

Half & Half TBF. Intially espeically the Martyn & Langer hundreds their backs where againts the wall & they where battling to score, but eventually they began to dominate Murali & co. But yes they weren't as brutal as Sehwag in Galle 08 in ther dominance of Murali.

A better compariosn in the way HB is suggesting then would be Gilchrist's 144 in that same Kandy test 04. He couter attacked Murali & co just as brutally as Sehwag for sure.

yes, it was similar but Sehwag got more runs with less support.. So his knock was better.

 

[aussie]

yes, it was similar but Sehwag got more runs with less support.. So his knock was better.

The more runs isn't a issue. Sehwag & India where dominating the test all the way even though he was the only batsman (other than Gambhir) where handling Murali & Mendis well.

AUS & Gilly where playing catch up & where under far more pressure than IND.

 

[Cruxdude]

The more runs isn't a issue. Sehwag & India where dominating the test all the way even though he was the only batsman (other than Gambhir) where handling Murali & Mendis well.

AUS & Gilly where playing catch up & where under far more pressure than IND.

They had just been raped in the first test and in the Asia cup by Mendis. There was a whole lot of pressure on India before this match. Murali and Mendis when he was sill a mystery is a nightmare come true.

 

[Pratters]

Indian FC attacks (especially pace attacks) are way below "consistent" international standards. So if he smoked Sharma/Singh (Vikramor RP)/Sharma/Sreesanth/Gony/Patel in a domestic match, its not really a great guide tbf.

I don't see what we are arguing about. He played superbly and removed all doubts I had regarding his batting.

 

[Pratters]

Well yes. But going back to reason how we got the this part in the debate, i presume you agree now that ONE great performances doesn't make a player great. Rather some form of consistency is needed?.

It would be ludicrous to say one great performance makes a player great. I never said that.