centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
You really have lost it. You're interpreting the posts -the way you want to interpret them and not how we are presenting them.Reading the first part I almost thought we found a middle ground.... No, saying a batsman like Gavaskar is "less skillful" than Sehwag; because Sehwag is more dominant; is just wrong. And it's also wrong to think dominant batsmen don't need support any more than passive ones. Reference; George Headley. If you think the things like patience and perseverance are secondary and not as important as dominance; I don't think we really have much to continue this discussion on.
No one is saying patience is secondary. Even a dominant innings requires a lot of patience and excellence decision making- which balls to defend, which to leave and which to score off. You are not trying to play a quick fire short innings. You are trying to play a long productive innings like any other batter.
And who is comparing Sehwag with Gavaskar? Sehwag is not close to Gavaskar as an opener. He was quite technically deficient. Meanwhile, Gavaskar played in a completely different era without helmets and against hostile bowling as an opener. Get hit on the head/neck and you could get seriously hurt and potentially even die. So you had to play late and more cautiously. Look at the run rates back then. Game has changed.