Jump to content

Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards?

ravishingravi

By ravishingravi
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

Bublu Bhuyan Enthusiast

Bublu Bhuyan

Posted
Posted
I will keep it short since I have done this so many times on this MB. Not to be dismissive but you can look it up if you like. Sobers, Kallis are to me batting all-rounders. They have their strength surely and I would pick Sobers in my XI for his batting alone. But if I had to pick on all-round skills I am not sure Sobers would cut it. Possibly all time greatest player but somehow does not invoke all-round comfort in me. Amongst the all-rounders I would put Kapil, Imran, Botham, Miller in the same bracket. Hadlee was greatest bowler of the fab 4 all rounders but his batting was minimal. He was only slightly better than someone like say Malcolm Marshall, and Maco did think of himself as an all-rounder. Miller, to me, would be the most complete all-rounder. Great bat, great bowl of pace, forms one of the best bowling pair, plus I also like his out of field persona. Botham was a great bat, explosive in batting towards the beginning but a lot of his wickets were down to sheer luck. He was fmous for taking wickets off bad balls. Although at one time he possibly had the best outswinger in the game. Imran was a player who made most of his abilities but never did everything at same time. When he batted well his bowling wasnt good, when he bowled well his batting was pants. And his fielding was cr@p. He would stand exposed in today's cricket. Kapil was the complete package me thinks. An explosive bat, an excellent bowler who fit right into Test cricket and was leading India's charge right from day 1. It is hard to put his value in numbers, which most folks end up doing, but think it this way. In his first series against West Indies he got miffed at West Indies pacers for bouncing him and went nuts on West Indies bat, in what is now referred to as "Bumper war" at Chepaulk. Apparently when he was back in the paviliion most batsmen, including a famed opener, shouted at him wondering why he bounced the batsmen, and now West Indies bowlers would come after them. Of course I do not expect Kapil to be made greatest all-rouder because of that anecdote but that shows what kind of player he was and how much did he transform the game. His best period was till 1985-86 and he should have retired a few years early, that proved to be his undoing.
How about Shaun Pollock? That's one guy who I believe doesn't get the appreciation that he deserves from an all rounder's perspective. I rate him way higher than the robotic Kallis. Kallis, for me, is a stats hound who very rarely (until recently) influenced results of Test matches.
Link to comment
maniac Grand Master

maniac

Posted
Posted
Wow' date=' so now an avg of 100 = 100 international 100s :hysterical:[/quote'] In terms of significance and contribution to establish a player's legacy yes...Infact 99 international hundreds is a greater contribution than an average of 99. FYI There are no draws in ODI's and as I mentioned earlier wins and loss matter a lot in tests than they meant in 1930's and 40's
Link to comment
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted
In terms of significance and contribution to establish a player's legacy yes...Infact 99 international hundreds is a greater contribution than an average of 99. FYI There are no draws in ODI's and as I mentioned earlier wins and loss matter a lot in tests than they meant in 1930's and 40's
This feels like watching some cartoon :hysterical:
FYI, * Avg = runs per inning * 100s = already reflected in the avg as runs
Link to comment
Lurker Newbie

Lurker

Posted
Posted
How about Shaun Pollock? That's one guy who I believe doesn't get the appreciation that he deserves from an all rounder's perspective. I rate him way higher than the robotic Kallis. Kallis' date=' for me, is a stats hound who very rarely (until recently) influenced results of Test matches.[/quote'] Shaun Pollock is very underrated I think. His problem was he came too far down the order to be recognized as a batsman. Sure the opposition were worried enough with his exploits with bat to take him lightly but he did not invoke the fear as a batsman. And though he did hit some big sixes he was not very explosive either. As a bowler he was true great. Kinda got overshadowed a bit by Mcgrath since their modus operandi were the same, nagging line outside off stump delivered from a tall height.
Link to comment
ravishingravi Grand Master

ravishingravi

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Shaun Pollock is very underrated I think. His problem was he came too far down the order to be recognized as a batsman. Sure the opposition were worried enough with his exploits with bat to take him lightly but he did not invoke the fear as a batsman. And though he did hit some big sixes he was not very explosive either. As a bowler he was true great. Kinda got overshadowed a bit by Mcgrath since their modus operandi were the same, nagging line outside off stump delivered from a tall height.
Before injuries yes, but not after that. In SA, he was good. Extremely talunted batter
Link to comment
The Outsider Newbie

The Outsider

Posted
Posted
Yeah, nobody else can read :phehehe: In fact its only the Bradman Brigade that knows how to read and they apply that skill in reading 99.94 again and again and again without actually having watched him bat.
Why are you getting so touchy? It's only a message board - so what if you blatant double standards with respect to Dhyanchand and Bradman have been exposed. Take it easy. :dontmentionit:
Link to comment
Bublu Bhuyan Enthusiast

Bublu Bhuyan

Posted
Posted
Shaun Pollock is very underrated I think. His problem was he came too far down the order to be recognized as a batsman. Sure the opposition were worried enough with his exploits with bat to take him lightly but he did not invoke the fear as a batsman. And though he did hit some big sixes he was not very explosive either. As a bowler he was true great. Kinda got overshadowed a bit by Mcgrath since their modus operandi were the same, nagging line outside off stump delivered from a tall height.
Man, as a bowler he was perhaps even better than McGrath (which says a lot) for a large part of his career. I remember the man averaged 20 odd with the ball until about just 3 years of his retirement. His last 2-3 years took a toll on that average. Yes, you're right. McGrath overshadowed him overall since their modus operandi were the same. Add to the fact that McGrath remained uniformly great/good throughout his career in both forms of the game. But what annoys me is why he rarely gets mentioned when talking about all rounders from the modern era? It's a joke for someone like Flintoff to be highlighted but not Pollock. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I'd pick Pollock in a heartbeat over Kallis if I were to pick an all rounder. This article containing quotes from former players on Kallis aptly describes what I've always felt about him - http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/kallis-has-stats-but-doesnt-rate/story-e6frf3g3-1111118261325
Link to comment
Lurker Newbie

Lurker

Posted
Posted
In fact its only the Bradman Brigade that knows how to read and they apply that skill in reading 99.94 again and again and again without actually having watched him bat.
Jeez, you had a stab at Dhyanchand too? Darn man even SRT would hit you with his 6 pound bat..
Link to comment
Sachin=GOD Newbie

Sachin=GOD

Posted
Posted
Why are you getting so touchy? It's only a message board - so what if you blatant double standards with respect to Dhyanchand and Bradman have been exposed. Take it easy. :dontmentionit:
bhai saheb, I was just curious to know how can people claim that a particular player was/is the best ever in a sport when they haven't even watched him. That all :icflove:
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...