Viv Richards vs Sunil Gavaskar

[Thala_0710]

Interesting..... I would say Kallis is closer to Sachin than Ponting is.

Yeah I mean that's basically saying that you rate Kallis higher than Ponting

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah I mean that's basically saying that you rate Kallis higher than Ponting

Yes, yes I just did that basically. On that point, I will say Kohli is closer to Ponting/Kallis/Dravid/Sangakkara than they are to Tendulkar.

 

[Thala_0710]

Yes, yes I just did that basically. On that point, I will say Kohli is closer to Ponting/Kallis/Dravid/Sangakkara than they are to Tendulkar.

Would have to think about that for each one.
But I think some of us have different philosophies while saying X is close to Y. Do you believe that if X is close to Y and Y is close to Z, then X must be close to Z too?

 

[DrWolverine]

Behind Lara yes, I rate Lara higher than most here as is

I rate Lara very highly

No one made batting so effortless and graceful like he did.

I know people say Warne was a magician but for me even he pales in comparison to Lara

 

[Coronis]

Would have to think about that for each one.
But I think some of us have different philosophies while saying X is close to Y. Do you believe that if X is close to Y and Y is close to Z, then X must be close to Z too?

Depends on your definition of close.

 

[Thala_0710]

Depends on your definition of close.

Exactly. For me, this isn't true. For example, I believe Lara is close to Punter and he is close to Dravid. But Lara isn't close to Dravid

 

[Johan]

Interesting..... I would say Kallis is closer to Sachin than Ponting is.

both a bit fraudulent tbh, 2000s merchants

 

[capt_Luffy]

Would have to think about that for each one.
But I think some of us have different philosophies while saying X is close to Y. Do you believe that if X is close to Y and Y is close to Z, then X must be close to Z too?

I mean, mathematically not possible here. There has to be Some max distance for which we can say 2 players are close, after which they aren't anymore.

 

[Thala_0710]

I mean, mathematically not possible here. There has to be Some max distance for which we can say 2 players are close, after which they aren't anymore.

Yeah that is my philosophy too. But some others might not define closeness by a max distance. For example, when we do tiers we don't exactly go by the max distance thing. Someone might say anyone in tier 2 is close to one another, and noone in tier 3 is close to anyone in tier 2.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah that is my philosophy too. But some others might not define closeness by a max distance. For example, when we do tiers we don't exactly go by the max distance thing. Someone might say anyone in tier 2 is close to one another, and noone in tier 3 is close to anyone in tier 2.

That doesn't makes really much sense, even in tiers. Like the one at the bottom of a tier and the one at the top of the very next should be close. Turns truer the further down you guys down the list. Like, Hutton is at the bottom of tier 1 and Hammond at the top of tier 2 for me; but those two definitely are close.

 

[Thala_0710]

That doesn't makes really much sense, even in tiers. Like the one at the bottom of a tier and the one at the top of the very next should be close. Turns truer the further down you guys down the list. Like, Hutton is at the bottom of tier 1 and Hammond at the top of tier 2 for me; but those two definitely are close.

Yeah I agree completely, but not everyone does I guess

 

[kyear2]

lol. Cricket like any other sport only has increasing standards. Viv was a god but Steve Smith would have done just as well if not better

You don't see how batting today is easier?

Not to add that while the general quality of bowling may be comparable, there aren't the giants that existed while Viv played.

Put Richards in the 1970s Indian team and he would have not been allowed to play his natural game and he would have crumbled from that.

Why is this again?

 

[kyear2]

Sunil Gavaskar was the difference between a loss and a draw. Viv never had to face the pressure because he played for the GOAT cricket team.

Imran once said if they can get Gavaskar out in the first session, India would lose within 3 days.

Vivian aside, this is such an over played narrative.

Do you really think every match was over in 3 days and every opponent was crushed?

Every innings was of consequence, every catch was crucial, every wicket mattered.

Of the two great teams, Australia had the edge on the batting front, the WI, the bowling. The WI had one ATG batsman, and at most two world class / great ones.

No Sir, Richards was just about as critical as Sunny to the batting. The only person consistently more critical to the team's success than him, was Maco.

That last statement was hyperbolic at best

 

[kyear2]

1. Viv has played plenty of high pressure quality knocks.

2. people like Viv thrive under presssure, they don't crumble to it, that's one of the merits of having an ego and a strong sense of self

3. Gavaskar himself was a part of a pretty good batting lineup for most of his career. Vengsarkar, Vishwanath, Amarnath being the big examples, at the end of his career also Mohammad Azharrudin and Ravi Shastri and ofcourse Kapil Dev, he wasn't supportless, its insulting to people like Veng and Amarnath to suggest he was.

Ok, you covered this before I did.

 

[kyear2]

If you get out, team will collapse.

Viv never had to face that pressure.

Not saying he can’t. But with his style, it is tough.

Definitively not true.

 

[kyear2]

No Akram has called Viv the best ever many many times

Didn't Imran as well?

Lillee had him in his top 3 with Barry and Sobers.

Also Lillee said as a pure bat, he rated Viv above Sobers, B Richards et al because of the former’s brutality combined with consistency

Yeah, basically getting to my points before me, lol

That's the problem with the spread sheet youngsters though.

 

[Calm_profit]

I prefer Gavaskar and Chappell slightly ahead in tests.

 

[sayon basak]

Would have to think about that for each one.
But I think some of us have different philosophies while saying X is close to Y. Do you believe that if X is close to Y and Y is close to Z, then X must be close to Z too?

Not really.
6-4=2 and 4-2=2, but 6-2 doesn't equal to 2. Now, whether 4 and 2 are close or not is a very different question.

 

[Thala_0710]

Not really.
6-4=2 and 4-2=2, but 6-2 doesn't equal to 2. Now, whether 4 and 2 are close or not is a very different question.

Agree with this completely. Hence, I too don't define closeness like this. But some others do ig

 

[kyear2]

Man Akram was hella inconsistent......

He kinda was, but also depending on context.

He called Viv a class apart, but also said Sunny never gave away his wicket, which he never did.

The difference is that Viv would also take you apart.