SehwagVsGilchrist

[Pratters]

I think that is because of Sehwag's amazing run of very big Test hundreds including triples.

By the way, I think Sehwag has sorted out his bugs. No more throwing away his wicket by trying to hit everythimg to the off and getting caught behind square so often. The fact is that after being dropped he has reached an amazing level at consistency and is scoring faster than before which seems unbelievable.

In 178 games till he was dropped Sehwag had the following stats

• Matches :183
• Runs : 5312
• Average : 31.0
• St Rate : 96.5

Since then he has i

• Matches : 21
• Runs : 1240
• Average : 62.0
• St Rate : 131.5
• 100's : 3
• 50's : 11

It is an amazing run. In 21 innings he has three hundreds, another 11 fifties and three other scores in the 40's !! Mind boggling. Here is the complete run

89, 59, 2, 78, 119, 49, 42, 60, 85, 1, 68, 69, 91, 42, 116, 5, 6, 77, 54, 3, 125 not out.

I would love someone to try and find a similarly consistent run by any other batsman in odi's and at a strike rate of 131 !!

The Sehwag innings stat was given in Times of India. It is too early to judge him based on 20/21 innings.

 

[Pratters]

91 is as far from 100 as 34 is from 40. So I don't see what your point is? Sehwag's played almost as many matches as Bevan. Unless Bevan can't be rated too on grounds of sample size.

9/91 x 100 = 9.89%.
6/34 x 100 = 17.65%.

Nopes not the same at all. Try again.

Also, Sehwag may have played more matches than Bevan but Bevan's career is over. So we can judge him and give a final analysis on it. Sehwag still has years left in his career and there is no way of telling where it will end up.

 

[haroon510]

this is a hard one.. vote for gilly though..

i just think Gilly was more reliable.. with Sehwag .. sometimes he plays unnecessary shots and give his wicket away..

 

[G.I.Joe]

9/91 x 100 = 9.89%.
6/34 x 100 = 17.65%.

Nopes not the same at all. Try again.

Thats far too simplistic. Try the cricinfo records section.

Number of batsmen averaging 40+ = 31.

Number of batsmen striking at 90+ = 12.

Number of batsmen striking at 100+ = 6.

Number of batsmen averaging 30+ and striking at 90+ = 12.

Sehwag is anything but average.

 

[Pratters]

Thats far too simplistic. Try the cricinfo records section.

Number of batsmen averaging 40+ = 31.

Number of batsmen striking at 90+ = 12.

Number of batsmen striking at 100+ = 6.

Number of batsmen averaging 30+ and striking at 90+ = 12.

Sehwag is anything but average.

I quoted your stats and showed you how it is not the same and you call that simplistic.

And where did I say Sehwag is average exactly?

 

[silentstriker]

Wait till the end of their careers. Gilchrist in his peak would steam-roll Sehwag who is at his peak at the moment - if we accept it's his peak. Will wait a while before judging.

I don't give a crap about ODIs, but in Tests, I would say Sehwag is the better pure batsman. Gilchrist obviously is much more likely to be in an all time side as he is so good at batting and a very good keeper too.

 

[Pratters]

i don't give a crap about odis, but in tests, i would say sehwag is the better pure batsman.

AWTA - and I say this despite Gilchrist being one of my favourite all time players.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I quoted your stats and showed you how it is not the same and you call that simplistic.

And where did I say Sehwag is average exactly?

Of course, it is simplistic. You assumed strike rates and averages could both be extrapolated linearly for comparison's sake, but they cannot. The difference between strike rates of 91 and 100 is comparable, if not better than the difference between averages of 34 and 40.

 

[Pratters]

Of course, it is simplistic. You assumed strike rates and averages could both be extrapolated linearly for comparison's sake, but they cannot. The difference between strike rates of 91 and 100 is comparable, if not better than the difference between averages of 34 and 40.

To calculate the % difference you go by changed-original divided by original x 100. That's the way it is always done.

 

[Jono]

Purely on batting, Sehwag and Gilly in tests is pretty close. I'd go Sehwag, but they played different roles. Will be interesting to see how much better Sehwag can get.

Right now though, Gilly was the better ODI batsman. Sehwag was very good at the start of his career, than ordinary for like 4 years, and now in the last 12-18 months has been superb. If he can keep this up for another 2-3 years, it'll show in an improved average (he'll likely get it up to 36-37) and still a strike rate of around 100.

Provided he does those things (and when Indian need him too, which is what he's known for), that'll be enough to be better than Gilchrist, but he's not there yet.

 

[Pratters]

Right now though, Gilly was the better ODI batsman. Sehwag was very good at the start of his career, than ordinary for like 4 years, and now in the last 12-18 months has been superb. If he can keep this up for another 2-3 years, it'll show in an improved average (he'll likely get it up to 36-37) and still a strike rate of around 100.

Provided he does those things (and when Indian need him too, which is what he's known for), that'll be enough to be better than Gilchrist, but he's not there yet.

AWTA totally.

 

[G.I.Joe]

To calculate the % difference you go by changed-original divided by original x 100. That's the way it is always done.

Thats the way it is done if the rates of multiplication or increase of both items being compared are the same. It doesn't work when thats not the case. These are graphs that plot as curves rather than straight lines, and cannot be interpreted by using linear equations.

 

[Perm]

Gilchrist, in both Tests and ODIs.

Let's not forget that for a fairly big portion, over half (I think), of his career Gilchrist was averaging almost 60 in Test cricket with that phenomenal strike rate. ODIs, it's not even that close at the moment. If Sehwag continues playing like he has been and ends up with a better average, than maybe.

 

[Anil]

sehwag easily better as a one day batsman and an opener, gilchrist has to be the most overrated one day opener ever...in tests, sehwag as a successful top order batsman constantly facing the new ball at this point would rank higher than gilchrist, a lower middle order batsman who for most of his career had the luxury of coming in after one of the best top & middle order lineups of all time...

 

[Jono]

sehwag easily better as a one day batsman and an opener, gilchrist has to be the most overrated one day opener ever...

Would you have said this 12 months ago? I know you have always stated the opinion that Gilly is overrated as a ODI opener, but so was Sehwag until recently.

The fact Sehwag made the ODI Rest of the World XI for the Super Series in 2005 showed he was overrated.

 

[Anil]

Would you have said this 12 months ago? I know you have always stated the opinion that Gilly is overrated as a ODI opener, but so was Sehwag until recently. The fact Sehwag made the ODI Rest of the World XI for the Super Series in 2005 showed he was overrated.

my point is it doesn't take much to be better than gilchrist as a one day opener, the way people laud the guy as an all-time great opener sounds just stupidly ridiculous to me...and yes, sehwag has had some serious troughs in his career but in his latest avatar, he has been pretty impressive and if he keeps this up, he could end up being one of the best one day openers ever, forget gilchrist....

 

[Jono]

Sure.

But forgetting the over-hype that you talk about with Gilly...

At this stage of Sehwag's career... if you objectively put Gilly's ODI record/performances against Sehwag's... Gilly wins. Right?

 

[Sanz]

Martin Crowe : Sehwag is better than Gilchrist.......

Very poorly written article.Goes all over the place and makes some really stupid comparisons.

I think the article aims to compare Sehwag and Gilchrist onlt as ODI openers.

 

[Jono]

It was only just over 12 months ago that Sehwag couldn't make it into India's best ODI XI to play the CB Series finals seriers vs. Australia.

 

[Anil]

Sure.

But forgetting the over-hype that you talk about with Gilly...

At this stage of Sehwag's career... if you objectively put Gilly's ODI record/performances against Sehwag's... Gilly wins. Right?

oh i don't know, their career stats are pretty close right now....and as i said before sehwag has been more consistent in his latest form surge than gilly has at any point in his career, gilly is lauded as a great opener almost entirely because he has played a couple of stirring knocks in world cup finals and has a great career strike-rate...this conveniently forgetting the fact that for example in 2007, he didn't do anything of note in the matches leading to the finals...