Sunil Gavaskar vs Wally Hammond

[kyear2]

He didn't have a full international cricket career. FC doesn't count. WSC and a single home series aren't enough.


Peer rating doesn't trump an actual record. I have always been clear on this.
Otherwise why not vote Lillee over Marshall?

Barry's peer rating based on getting tested in county games is completely suspect. This is obvious.

There is no substitute to an actual international career. Barry shouldn't be considered in the top 20 bats at least.


Graeme Pollock was voted SA cricketer of the century, was shortlisted in Benaud's team unlike Barry, rated higher than Barry in both Wisden and ESPN rankings as well as others, gets rated by many of the 60s era jointly with Sobers as best or next best bat. Are you going to acknowledge that based on peer rating and more of an international career sample, Pollock has a better case than Barry?

Graeme Pollock was South Africa's cricketer of the Century yes, Kapil Dev was India's cricketer of the century. Is Kapil better than Sachin and Sunny?

Yes Pollock was an ATG batsman and cricketer. He's in all of my lists as well.

For me, and this doesn't have to count for you. Barry was better tested. Pollock, who says Barry was one of the two best batsmen he's seen, and this was decades later, were Barry and Garry, started home, while Barry went out and challenged himself in all of the toughest arenas.

He faced better bowlers in WSC, fc (England and Australia) and especially vs touring test teams than Pollock did during his test career. And he dominated them, like destroyed them. Lillee, Thompson, Procter, Snow.

But this is my objective opinion, doesn't have to be yours.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Graeme Pollock was South Africa's cricketer of the Century yes, Kapil Dev was India's cricketer of the century. Is Kapil better than Sachin and Sunny?

Yes Pollock was an ATG batsman and cricketer. He's in all of my lists as well.

For me, and this doesn't have to count for you. Barry was better tested. Pollock, who says Barry was one of the two best batsmen he's seen, and this was decades later, were Barry and Garry, started home, while Barry went out and challenged himself in all of the toughest arenas.

He faced better bowlers in WSC, fc (England and Australia) and especially vs touring test teams than Pollock did during his test career. And he dominated them, like destroyed them. Lillee, Thompson, Procter, Snow.

But this is my objective opinion, doesn't have to be yours.

It was made regarding the 19th Century and they gave Tests and ODIs around equal weightage. So yes, Kapil is better than Sachin just 90s and Gavaskar with ODIs.

 

[Johan]

Gavaskar closing the gap here

 

[kyear2]

I think we may end up having the same top ten except for your Barry infatuation

Don't take this personally, but for a second consider this.

You have your Imran thing, I Barry. Yours is because he was Pakistan's first ATG cricketer and your personal hero.
I have Barry because I see he's deserving and ignored despite being an ATG and one of the 3 great post war openers.

I like and respect styles of play. I also believe that if we drafted every great opening batsman into a camp or had inter squad battles on all surfaces for selection, Barry wins out. Quality, not labels.

The same way you believe that Imran is a perfect fit into an ATG team because of his reverse swing, and batting at 8, I think Barry is as well. Every bit the equal when it comes to quality. His aggression at the top to match Hutton's stoic approach, that can apply pressure to the opposing team and set the tone for the innings, is analogous to Imran's reverse swing, something literally no one else (well Wasim and Steyn for Imran, but that's an argument for another day) can bring to the table. His slip catching adds a 3rd elite catcher to the cordon, and he would slip in at 1st, again comparable to Imran's batting at 8. Best options for that spot taking into account the talent available.

And the same way that Pakistan deserves to have a player on the squad to represent a world XI, taking account their history and importance to the game, so does South Africa.

So yes, if we're choosing a first team based on pure quality, value and (unique) skill set (to win) he's my first choice to open. No modern opener can do what he could, nor bring the over all package that he possessed.

I could care less about the labels, he faced great and ATG bowlers and dominated them. In red ball cricket he's one of one. Good enough for me.

 

[kyear2]

It was made regarding the 19th Century and they gave Tests and ODIs around equal weightage. So yes, Kapil is better than Sachin just 90s and Gavaskar with ODIs.

By that point Sachin was an ATG and made first team for the World XI.

It was about who meant more to the country not who was better. Kapil was the first fast bowler of note and won a world cup. He wasn't better, even then.

 

[kyear2]

Gavaskar closing the gap here

Not really, but even if... I have them really close, so no big surprise.

 

[capt_Luffy]

By that point Sachin was an ATG and made first team for the World XI.

It was about who meant more to the country not who was better. Kapil was the first fast bowler of note and won a world cup. He wasn't better, even then.

Considering both formats equally, I won't place Sachin at top right away. So no big surprise really

 

[subshakerz]

Don't take this personally, but for a second consider this.

You have your Imran thing, I Barry. Yours is because he was Pakistan's first ATG cricketer and your personal hero.
I have Barry because I see he's deserving and ignored despite being an ATG and one of the 3 great post war openers.

I like and respect styles of play. I also believe that if we drafted every great opening batsman into a camp or had inter squad battles on all surfaces for selection, Barry wins out. Quality, not labels.

The same way you believe that Imran is a perfect fit into an ATG team because of his reverse swing, and batting at 8, I think Barry is as well. Every bit the equal when it comes to quality. His aggression at the top to match Hutton's stoic approach, that can apply pressure to the opposing team and set the tone for the innings, is analogous to Imran's reverse swing, something literally no one else (well Wasim and Steyn for Imran, but that's an argument for another day) can bring to the table. His slip catching adds a 3rd elite catcher to the cordon, and he would slip in at 1st, again comparable to Imran's batting at 8. Best options for that spot taking into account the talent available.

And the same way that Pakistan deserves to have a player on the squad to represent a world XI, taking account their history and importance to the game, so does South Africa.

So yes, if we're choosing a first team based on pure quality, value and (unique) skill set (to win) he's my first choice to open. No modern opener can do what he could, nor bring the over all package that he possessed.

I could care less about the labels, he faced great and ATG bowlers and dominated them. In red ball cricket he's one of one. Good enough for me.

All those reasons are fine and I don't mind you putting Barry in an ATG XI as much as you ranking him in the ten best bats ever which to me is mind boggling.

The Imran analogy can only carry so far again because he had a 21 year long international career.

 

[subshakerz]

Graeme Pollock was South Africa's cricketer of the Century yes, Kapil Dev was India's cricketer of the century. Is Kapil better than Sachin and Sunny?

Kapil was voted based on ODI achievements and tests, he helped win a WC, Tendulkar was still early career.

Whereas in SAs case, it was clear that Pollock was just seen as a better bat, no real ambiguity there.

Yes Pollock was an ATG batsman and cricketer. He's in all of my lists as well.

For me, and this doesn't have to count for you. Barry was better tested. Pollock, who says Barry was one of the two best batsmen he's seen, and this was decades later, were Barry and Garry, started home, while Barry went out and challenged himself in all of the toughest arenas.

He faced better bowlers in WSC, fc (England and Australia) and especially vs touring test teams than Pollock did during his test career. And he dominated them, like destroyed them. Lillee, Thompson, Procter, Snow.

But this is my objective opinion, doesn't have to be yours.

Pollock was better tested by virtue of having a 7 year international career as a teen onwards where he toured, scored and he was rated along with Sobers in an actual test arena.

There is no metric, performance sample, rankings or peer review, by which Barry gets ahead of Pollock. Sorry.

 

[kyear2]

All those reasons are fine and I don't mind you putting Barry in an ATG XI as much as you ranking him in the ten best bats ever which to me is mind boggling.

The Imran analogy can only carry so far again because he had a 21 year long international career.

Pure quality my friend.

And he was a better batsman than Chappell and Gavaskar. While he played in the 70's the only batsman seen as being his equal or superior was Viv.

I hence slot him in accordingly.

 

[subshakerz]

Pure quality my friend.

And he was a better batsman than Chappell and Gavaskar. While he played in the 70's the only batsman seen as being his equal or superior was Viv.

I hence slot him in accordingly.

Yeah but how can you toss longevity out of the window?

 

[kyear2]

Kapil was voted based on ODI achievements and tests, he helped win a WC, Tendulkar was still early career.

Whereas in SAs case, it was clear that Pollock was just seen as a better bat, no real ambiguity there.


Pollock was better tested by virtue of having a 7 year international career as a teen onwards where he toured, scored and he was rated along with Sobers. Pollock faced a handful of worldclass bowlers in an actual test arena.

There is no metric, performance sample, rankings or peer review, by which Barry gets ahead of Pollock. Sorry.

That's your opinion dude, it's not universal and it's not definitive.

And Sachin was 11 years into his career and already made the Cricinfo and Widen's all time teams.

It was because Kapil was more important to Indian cricket, the first modern pacer and won a world cup.

I can show you plenty of lists from CMJ, to Crowe to Gower etc that has Barry higher.

There's also a list of players who have called Barry the best they've seen and best since Bradman, there's no such list for Pollock.

We can very easily just agree to disagree.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah but how can you toss longevity out of the window?

Never cared for it.

And he played for well over a decade, more than long enough.

 

[subshakerz]

Never cared for it.

Wow. I will remember that.

 

[kyear2]

Wow. I will remember that.

Remember the second line as well.

Once you reach a certain plateau, it's all the same. He played for over a decade and the was the best till Viv took over.

The list if players who called Barry the best they've ever seen btw

Lillee, Gooch, Bob Taylor, Dickie Bird, McKenzie, Procter and Pollock himself.

Also Thompson did say that while he rated Chappell the greatest he's played with or against, that if he got to play against Barry a bit more that would have switched. "Still at least as good as Chappell though"

 

[subshakerz]

That's your opinion dude, it's not universal and it's not definitive.

And Sachin was 11 years into his career and already made the Cricinfo and Widen's all time teams.

It was because Kapil was more important to Indian cricket, the first modern pacer and won a world cup.

I can show you plenty of lists from CMJ, to Crowe to Gower etc that has Barry higher.

There's also a list of players who have called Barry the best they've seen and best since Bradman, there's no such list for Pollock.

We can very easily just agree to disagree.

So that's the excuse for Kapil. What was the excuse for Cricket SA to rate Pollock higher?

And there are lists of those rating Pollock with Sobers as a bat, which is as high a top tier rating you can expect.

And more credible rankings putting Pollock ahead of Barry. And I can find other peer ratings where Pollock is ahead.

At the very least, you need to acknowledge Pollock has as good a case.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Let me add another, Gavaskar opened. No opener is a sure shot ATG to debut post War except him.

And it was the toughest era for openers. Gavaskar never had proper support from the other end.
Gavaskar Scored 33 centuries as Opener in 200 innings.
All other Indian openers scored a combined total of 6 centuries in 250 innings during Gavaskar career. Highest being Srikanth with 2 100s.

 

[subshakerz]

Remember the second line as well.

Once you reach a certain plateau, it's all the same. He played for over a decade and the was the best till Viv took over.

The list if players who called Barry the best they've ever seen btw

Lillee, Gooch, Bob Taylor, Dickie Bird, McKenzie, Procter and Pollock himself.

Also Thompson did say that while he rated Chappell the greatest he's played with or against, that if he got to play against Barry a bit more that would have switched. "Still at least as good as Chappell though"

Nah I got it. You don't care about long term career performance as long as peer rating can guide you. Pretty shocking statement.

By the way, many of those you named I know for a fact have rated Viv ahead of Barry.

 

[kyear2]

So that's the excuse for Kapil. What was the excuse for Cricket SA to rate Pollock higher?

And there are lists of those rating Pollock with Sobers as a bat, which is as high a top tier rating you can expect.

And more credible rankings putting Pollock ahead of Barry. And I can find other peer ratings where Pollock is ahead.

At the very least, you need to acknowledge Pollock has as good a case.

I answered you this 3 weeks ago.

Pollock was loyal and stayed home to play in and support SA cricket. Barry was the mercenary who played his trade around the world.
During the expulsion Pollock was more important to SA cricket.

And I literally just gave you a list of players who called Barry the best they've seen.

Where have I ever said Pollock doesn't have a case, they are both ATG bats.
My personal and objective opinion is that Barry was better, and being at the top was another plus.

I've also watched the two of them extensively and I also use that too as a gauge.

I literally said less than an hour ago, that it's my opinion, you don't have to agree. I'm not trying to convince you.

Barry was top tier elite to me, and many who saw him called him the very best they've seen.

 

[kyear2]

Nah I got it. You don't care about long term career performance as long as peer rating can guide you. Pretty shocking statement.

By the way, many of those you named I know for a fact have rated Viv ahead of Barry.

Parse my words as you like, it doesn't matter.

Once it's last a certain amount of time, I'm good.