Furball
Evil Scotsman
It's forgotten because slap bang in the middle of the slump he had an ATG series vs Australia where the series was basically tied off his own bat. Most batsmen don't have a series like that in the middle of a slump.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
What made Viv Richards special?
- Thread starter Xuhaib
- Start date
wellAlbidarned
International Coach
Prehaps because his statistics WERE absolutely phenomenal back in his day?
robelinda
International Vice-Captain
Viv. At any time he could hit any fast bowler back over his head for six, seemingly whenever the hell he felt like it. The most fearless player of all time? No bowler could beat his hook shot, devastating stuff. He was a total ****, but he just meant business. Speaking of business.....ROCK BACK TO DO DA BUSINESS....
VIV RICHARDS - BATTING COACH - YouTube
VIV RICHARDS - BATTING COACH - YouTube
in his absolute pomp noone except for sobers (based on hearsay and the memories of a wee un) and perhaps the other richards (in his youthful prime) could match the kind of devastation he could wreak on opposition bowling attacks and their psyche. what diminishes - marginally - the lustre of his overall reputation is the way he did not manage to adapt his batting once his preternatural gifts started waning. reams have been written about the eye hand coordination batsmen as opposed to the technique ones and so i will not go down that path.
this is why, to me, he is special, even though i do consider both tendulkar and lara as better batsmen though not by much.
this is why, to me, he is special, even though i do consider both tendulkar and lara as better batsmen though not by much.
Last edited:
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Change the bolded word to 'want' and I'll agree. He was as stubborn as Ponting, if not more.
perhaps it was a combination of not want and not manage. it is not that he only got out to aggressive strokes in his sunset years.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
He was a master of black magic.
Shri
Mr. Glass
Thilan Samaraweera was his victim?
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
I watched him live during his last few years (well past his heyday), and his batting had lost all the charm by then.
My father is a big Richards-fan. And he says that style-wise the closest someone came to Viv in the last 20 years is Matthew Hayden during 2007 World Cup. (only style-wise though; as my dad doesn't rate Hayden at all - thinks even Langer was better).
smash84
The Tiger King
Moa
robelinda
International Vice-Captain
Everything i saw live of Viv, i taped! And thank christ i did. Saw him most live at the MCG in 88/89.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
I have seen almost all his international innings starting with his first test series and the world cup finals of 1975 where he made most of his contribution when Windies were fielding.
In the preceding winter he had made his Test debut in India. (1974-745)
Chandra got him in both innings of the first test. He did not reach double digits for the match !
Next test was at Delhi where I lived. West Indies lost 3 wickets by around lunch time and then he came in. Chandra was not playing, I cant remember why, but Prasanna and Bedi made him look like an absolute novice and during the course of his first fifty runs he looked like getting out half a dozen times. But he survived and went on to score an unbeaten 192.
Even in the next three matches he had a top score of 50 in six innings. I wasn't impressed and for a long time the image of him struggling before the Indian spinners stayed with me and I refused to accept him as the giant he was proclaimed in England and Australia.
The series in India was immediately followed by one against Pakistan where he scored 17 runs in the three innings he played falling twice to spinners Intikhab Alam and Mushtaq Mohammad.
He was not a sensation (with the bat in the 1975 world cup) and in the winter he went to Australia for a 6 test series. He scored 0, 12 and 12 in the first two tests but West Indies persisted with him. In the next two tests he batted pretty aggressively but managed just a couple of forties and a thirty. Lillee and Thomsons seemed to have his measure.
The he decided to open the batting. In the last two tests, as opener, he scored 30 (38 balls), 101 (138 balls), 50 (54 balls) and 98 (103 balls) !! He averaged under 40 for the series but his last two tests showed batting of a very high order with brilliant and fearless strokeplay.
Windies returned hom to face India within weeks. This time Richards was ready and scored over 500 runs with three centuries and an average in the 90's. We did not watch that series live and had our own explanation for Richards' change of fortune.
Prasanna was injured during the first innings of the first test and did not play any more on the tour. The attack was never the same without him. This was true but we were being less than gracious. Venkatraghvan was no Prasanna but he was a very good bowler and there was Bedi besides Chandra.
The next series in England should have shut all of us for all time to come.
In just four test matches, Richards scored 829 runs in the series starting off with 232 at trent Bridge and signing off with 291 at the Oval. He averaged 118 plus for the series.
But he had another two ordinary series against Pakistan and Australia at home averaging under 30 for the two series.
I always thought him to be suspect against the really top class spinners. He enjoyed the ball coming on to the bat and I suspect a crafty spinner on a slow wicket was not his cup of tea. Unfortunately he did not play the great Indian spinners again in a test match. By the time he played India next in the 80's the spin department was in the hands of Shastri and Maninder and an ageing Venkat. Still in two series one at home and one away in two years he averaged in the 40's and 30's.
Even overall he never got close to what he had promised in that summer of '76 in England.
In 24 series (100 tests) after that one, he managed 400 runs in a series only once - and scored just 16 centuries in those 100 tests - managing more than a single century in a series just once and a top score of 208 not out against Australia.
So he never really dominated a series in the manner of Bradman or a Sobers or even a Lara after that year in the England and the series at home against India just before that.
Yet when he came on the crease you expected your team to be slaughtered and if he fell early you felt somehow robbed. His very presence at the crease demoralised the bowlers. I agree with the father of the poster who compared this aspect with Hayden. I too wrote once about the impact Hayden must have on bowlers when they see this huge hulk of a man walking casually down the track, the bat a toy in his massive hands, even as the bowler is planning to let go a thunderbolt. You wouldn't like to be in a dark alley with a guy like Hayden you would think. Richards had the same impact. The difference was in class of stroke play.
Richards, inspite of his Sehwag like disregard for reputations as well as a complete lack of fear of dismissal, played all the strokes in an orthodox manner as far as execution was concerned but wioth a complete disregard of which line and which type of movement should be hit in which direction. He decided where he would hit the bal;l and that is where it stayed hit.
His footwork, unlike Sehwag's, was exemplary in so far as he moved back and across (not always to the off stump though) and played perfect square cuts from the leg stump and ferocious pulls from outside off and he never looked like he was going to hit the ball with anything except the middle of the blade. When he moved forward he took a giant stump, even far outside the off stump, except that from there he might whip a perfect delivery anywhere between covers and square leg - all from the middle of the bat and you knew it.
It was awesome to see him move back outside the leg stump (before the ball left the hand almost) to hit ferociously to cover or over square leg. The six he hit to finish an innings in a one dayer when he moved back and across outside the off stump and picked up what looked like a middle stump yorker to far beyond the top of the square leg fence. You gasped.
When I read about Trumper I guess he must have had a similar impact on his opponents and fans except that he was gentle in his demeanour while Richards made you feel you were about to be owned.
to be continued . . .
In the preceding winter he had made his Test debut in India. (1974-745)
Chandra got him in both innings of the first test. He did not reach double digits for the match !
Next test was at Delhi where I lived. West Indies lost 3 wickets by around lunch time and then he came in. Chandra was not playing, I cant remember why, but Prasanna and Bedi made him look like an absolute novice and during the course of his first fifty runs he looked like getting out half a dozen times. But he survived and went on to score an unbeaten 192.
Even in the next three matches he had a top score of 50 in six innings. I wasn't impressed and for a long time the image of him struggling before the Indian spinners stayed with me and I refused to accept him as the giant he was proclaimed in England and Australia.
The series in India was immediately followed by one against Pakistan where he scored 17 runs in the three innings he played falling twice to spinners Intikhab Alam and Mushtaq Mohammad.
He was not a sensation (with the bat in the 1975 world cup) and in the winter he went to Australia for a 6 test series. He scored 0, 12 and 12 in the first two tests but West Indies persisted with him. In the next two tests he batted pretty aggressively but managed just a couple of forties and a thirty. Lillee and Thomsons seemed to have his measure.
The he decided to open the batting. In the last two tests, as opener, he scored 30 (38 balls), 101 (138 balls), 50 (54 balls) and 98 (103 balls) !! He averaged under 40 for the series but his last two tests showed batting of a very high order with brilliant and fearless strokeplay.
Windies returned hom to face India within weeks. This time Richards was ready and scored over 500 runs with three centuries and an average in the 90's. We did not watch that series live and had our own explanation for Richards' change of fortune.
Prasanna was injured during the first innings of the first test and did not play any more on the tour. The attack was never the same without him. This was true but we were being less than gracious. Venkatraghvan was no Prasanna but he was a very good bowler and there was Bedi besides Chandra.
The next series in England should have shut all of us for all time to come.
In just four test matches, Richards scored 829 runs in the series starting off with 232 at trent Bridge and signing off with 291 at the Oval. He averaged 118 plus for the series.
But he had another two ordinary series against Pakistan and Australia at home averaging under 30 for the two series.
I always thought him to be suspect against the really top class spinners. He enjoyed the ball coming on to the bat and I suspect a crafty spinner on a slow wicket was not his cup of tea. Unfortunately he did not play the great Indian spinners again in a test match. By the time he played India next in the 80's the spin department was in the hands of Shastri and Maninder and an ageing Venkat. Still in two series one at home and one away in two years he averaged in the 40's and 30's.
Even overall he never got close to what he had promised in that summer of '76 in England.
In 24 series (100 tests) after that one, he managed 400 runs in a series only once - and scored just 16 centuries in those 100 tests - managing more than a single century in a series just once and a top score of 208 not out against Australia.
So he never really dominated a series in the manner of Bradman or a Sobers or even a Lara after that year in the England and the series at home against India just before that.
Yet when he came on the crease you expected your team to be slaughtered and if he fell early you felt somehow robbed. His very presence at the crease demoralised the bowlers. I agree with the father of the poster who compared this aspect with Hayden. I too wrote once about the impact Hayden must have on bowlers when they see this huge hulk of a man walking casually down the track, the bat a toy in his massive hands, even as the bowler is planning to let go a thunderbolt. You wouldn't like to be in a dark alley with a guy like Hayden you would think. Richards had the same impact. The difference was in class of stroke play.
Richards, inspite of his Sehwag like disregard for reputations as well as a complete lack of fear of dismissal, played all the strokes in an orthodox manner as far as execution was concerned but wioth a complete disregard of which line and which type of movement should be hit in which direction. He decided where he would hit the bal;l and that is where it stayed hit.
His footwork, unlike Sehwag's, was exemplary in so far as he moved back and across (not always to the off stump though) and played perfect square cuts from the leg stump and ferocious pulls from outside off and he never looked like he was going to hit the ball with anything except the middle of the blade. When he moved forward he took a giant stump, even far outside the off stump, except that from there he might whip a perfect delivery anywhere between covers and square leg - all from the middle of the bat and you knew it.
It was awesome to see him move back outside the leg stump (before the ball left the hand almost) to hit ferociously to cover or over square leg. The six he hit to finish an innings in a one dayer when he moved back and across outside the off stump and picked up what looked like a middle stump yorker to far beyond the top of the square leg fence. You gasped.
When I read about Trumper I guess he must have had a similar impact on his opponents and fans except that he was gentle in his demeanour while Richards made you feel you were about to be owned.
to be continued . . .
Last edited by a moderator:
ankitj
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I was not fortunate enough to watch Viv Richards live. I will relate this conversation with a friend of mine who started watching cricket about 15 years before me and is keenest observer of the game. We were talking about the ESPN Legends of Cricket series, and he said it made no sense to put Tendulkar and Lillee above Imran and Hadlee given the latter two are ATG as bowlers alone and could bat too. I said, by same token Viv should not be placed above Imran. He thought for a while and then disagreed saying about Viv that one had to watch him to believe him.
Based on such observations, I guess one has to accept that Viv was special. As for his overall stats, after about 80 tests he averaged 55 IIRC.
Based on such observations, I guess one has to accept that Viv was special. As for his overall stats, after about 80 tests he averaged 55 IIRC.
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
Next time ask him whom he considers to be a better cricketer between Viv and George Headley, for example. If he comes back saying that he didn't see George Headley so can't comment, he's a genuine bloke. But if he says that Viv was definitely better, ignore him for being a biased hypocrite I say
smash84
The Tiger King
Imran > Viv. Fact
haha....acid testNext time ask him whom he considers to be a better cricketer between Viv and George Headley, for example. If he comes back saying that he didn't see George Headley so can't comment, he's a genuine bloke. But if he says that Viv was definitely better, ignore him for being a biased hypocrite I say
bagapath
International Captain
i saw a lot of the last 9 years of his test career on tv. saw him in his absolute pomp for 2 or 3 of those years and that is enough for me.
ankitj
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Well, obviously that's not the only argument that a decent follower of the game will give...Next time ask him whom he considers to be a better cricketer between Viv and George Headley, for example. If he comes back saying that he didn't see George Headley so can't comment, he's a genuine bloke. But if he says that Viv was definitely better, ignore him for being a biased hypocrite I say