The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[stephen]

2 of the 3 drawn matches in 1983 WI tour of India incidentally had less than 390 overs bowled. Both these matches were 6-8 wickets away from result.

The other drawn match had the entire first day washed out and less than 300 overs bowled.

I suppose the bowling over rates had a huge role to play in these matches. Blame the WI quicks for these.

In the 6th and final match of the series, WI made 313 batting first and India was down 0 for 2 against a red hot Marshall when Gavaskar came in to bat at no.4 for a change.(I think this is the match where Viv made the epic comment about Sunil. "Maan, no matter where you bat, the scoreboard is zero when you come to bat") They were soon 5/92. So WI were Gavaskar's wicket away from taking a big first innings lead. His 236* is all the more epic due to the circumstances, not some meaningless innings on a flat road.

That test was more a testament to how good Marshall was than anything else.

 

[Daemon]

 

[jimmy101]

Tear them to bits if you like.

Out of the 27 tests he played against them, the West Indian bowler that Gavaskar faced the most was Holding. He faced him 15 times. He faced Marshall 14 times, Roberts 11 and Garner 4 times.

Border played the West Indies 31 times. He faced Marshall 19 times, Walsh 20, Ambrose 15, Holding 12, Croft 6, Roberts and Bishop 5 times each.

There's no question who faced the better attacks in the more pace friendly conditions. Border literally completed the set, facing every single one of them.

Cherry-picking stats like this gets a bit pointless after a while. Besides, Border never faced the great Australian & English quicks of the early/mid 70's. I just don't see the point of naming the which bowlers he didn't play against.

 

[harsh.ag]

Odd day:

Anyway, I never said the best post war opener was Hayden, Greenidge, Sehwag or Smith. The best post- war opener is Bob Simpson. Averaged 55 opening, performed against everyone, everywhere (he literally averaged a minimum of 48 as opener in every country he played).

Gavaskar might be second.

Even day:

Hobbs
Hutton
Sutcliffe
Simpson
B Richards
Hayden
Ponsford
Woodfull
Lawry
Morris
Trumper
Gavaskar
G Smith
Greenidge
Sehwag

 

[h_hurricane]

That test was more a testament to how good Marshall was than anything else.

I would take an innings under enormous pressure against an ATG attack(flat pitches or not) than lets say, a 100 against a toothless attack on a green pitch coming in at 300/3.

Cricket is a game of temperament which helps you survive the most adverse circumstances not just technique. Gavaskar had abundance of both.

 

[stephen]

Cherry-picking stats like this gets a bit pointless after a while. Besides, Border never faced the great Australian & English quicks of the early/mid 70's. I just don't see the point of naming the which bowlers he didn't play against.

Because the reason people rate Gavaskar so highly is because of his performance vs the Windies, particularly in the Windies. But the truth is that more often than not here played relatively weak attacks.

4 of his 7 away hundreds against the Windies were against a really ordinary 1971 side. Of the other 3, 2 were in a single test against a Packer- depleted 78 side who had a green Marshall as their only bowler of note and the other one was in a draw where the Windies made 470 in their first innings.

The orthodoxy on here is that Gavaskar is the best post- war opener and the 4th best of all time. But if that orthodoxy is based on his record against the Windies, that record needs scrutiny.

Some here are bringing up the fact that Border is highly rated for much the same reason, but it's clear that Border reacted much stronger attacks on average and played largely in a side just as weak as the Indian sides Gavaskar played in, except instead of playing on dust bowls, he played his home tests on wickets that gave the bowlers plenty to work with.

 

[stephen]

Odd day:



Even day:

I rated him 4th from post war openers. Saying he might be second is consistent.

 

[trundler]

Simmo played way less as an opener and didn't face the quartet either. The 60s were much better for batting than the 70s and 80s. Plus, we're basically comparing peak vs whole career here. Like Langer, Simpson mostly opened in his prime. Simpson > Gavaskar is at least one that has some credibility but Hayden, Sehwag and the rest don't come close really.

I'm not sure what your angle here is, Stephen. If you're saying Sunny G's record versus WI is flattering. Okay, spot on but no one's contested that here since that SJS post. If you're saying he wasn't miles better than his competition - fine, arguable but averages aren't everything. If you're saying he was lucky to average 50 because of roads and such despite playing in the 80s - that's just inaccurate.

Side note: Simpson over Gavaskar is the sort of CW elitist opinion nerds like us tell ourselves because picking a guy from the 50s over a more popular rival means we have galaxy cricket brains.

 

[harsh.ag]

I rated him 4th from post war openers. Saying he might be second is consistent.

Simpson
B Richards
Hayden
Lawry
Morris

are all post war openers. You ranked Gavaskar 6th.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Gavaskar in his day was the perfect opener. He could graft or go on the attack as the situation demanded. Admittedly his 36 Not Out spread over 60 overs in the 1975 World Cup wasn't ideal.

 

[h_hurricane]

Simpson
B Richards
Hayden
Lawry
Morris

are all post war openers. You ranked Gavaskar 6th.

I guess there was no debate on this on the other forum as mr_mister said it was an individual choice. Thinking more about this though, and this is the right forum to debate this, very similar to a South African rating the below players(on bowling alone) above Mcgrath

Pollock
Philander
Rabada
Procter
Vince van der Bijl

Pretty sure though, that no such South African exists in this planet, let alone this forum.

 

[h_hurricane]

Because the reason people rate Gavaskar so highly is because of his performance vs the Windies, particularly in the Windies. But the truth is that more often than not here played relatively weak attacks.

4 of his 7 away hundreds against the Windies were against a really ordinary 1971 side. Of the other 3, 2 were in a single test against a Packer- depleted 78 side who had a green Marshall as their only bowler of note and the other one was in a draw where the Windies made 470 in their first innings.

The orthodoxy on here is that Gavaskar is the best post- war opener and the 4th best of all time. But if that orthodoxy is based on his record against the Windies, that record needs scrutiny.

Some here are bringing up the fact that Border is highly rated for much the same reason, but it's clear that Border reacted much stronger attacks on average and played largely in a side just as weak as the Indian sides Gavaskar played in, except instead of playing on dust bowls, he played his home tests on wickets that gave the bowlers plenty to work with.

Gavaskar's record against the Windies is just the icing on the cake. The real deal being his enormous record(10K+ runs at 51 along with 34 tons was considered unreachable in the era he played in), that too opening, leaving a great legacy.

Gavaskar being the best opening batsman in the last 6 decades is set in stone, and it is not even close.

 

[stephen]

Simpson
B Richards
Hayden
Lawry
Morris

are all post war openers. You ranked Gavaskar 6th.

Fair enough, I only glanced at the list while the mrs was out of the room.

Anyway, the point was that it's pretty damn close. Gavaskar gets a free pass almost entirely due to his record against the Windies but the truth is that he played a number of Packer depleted sides in his time and the West Indies sides he did well against, particularly overseas were quite weak by the standards of the era.

 

[jimmy101]

TIL the Windies in the 70's/80's were "weak by the standards of the era".

 

[stephen]

TIL the Windies in the 70's/80's were "weak by the standards of the era".

No, the sides Gavaskar faced were weak West Indies sides by the standards of the era. The 71 side had a very ordinary attack tstl.

 

[morgieb]

TIL the Windies in the 70's/80's were "weak by the standards of the era".

I mean the pre-76 ones kind of were. And then there's that series where their entire first choice bowling attack was playing WSC.

I still don't agree with Stephen about Gavaskar - I'd have him as the best opener in the 60 years (Richards is his main opposition but rating him as the best opener of his generation would be kind of like rating Mark Waugh as the best batsman of his genereation) - but I think it's fair enough to argue that his WI record is not quite as good as it first appears, and I'm not sure the gap is as big as some other people are saying it is. Still unlike most of the media I don't think CW falls into that trap?

 

[h_hurricane]

I think it is fair that Gavaskar's record against England is left out as well. He only averaged 38 against them.

Lets slice and dice till the poor guy is left with a record like this.

0 tests, 0 runs, 0 hundreds 0 legacy.

 

[trundler]

It's funny how you can go through every century a batsman scored and discredit all of them but a raw average in wins suffices. Doesn't matter what of his career they came in, against whom or where.

 

[jimmy101]

No, the sides Gavaskar faced were weak West Indies sides by the standards of the era. The 71 side had a very ordinary attack tstl.

Still, it was Sunny's debut series & he played outstandingly well, especially in Trinidad. They were truly Earth-shattering knocks. And the bowling might not have stacked up to the WI pace quartets of later years, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a Test match standard bowling attack by any means. Just seems to be a crazy attempt at discrediting Gavaskar by rattling off the names of bowlers whom he didn't play against. Absolutely pointless.

 

[vcs]

I remember when I joined, Ikki used to be very active in CC and he'd bring this "that attack had rubbish bowlers" argument all the time to discredit any innings Tendulkar ever played.