Sunil Gavaskar turns 75 today-2nd best to Bradman ?

[deeppoint]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Cricketer bol dete bhai. We had GOAT contenders in field hockey before Sunny's debut. Even in his time, Vijay Amritraj's achievements in tennis were stellar. 

 

Well, Mr Vijay Amritraj was very very good, but not "world class". If we speak of accolades, Ramesh Krishnan was better. And the first world class act we got in Lawn Tennis has been Leander Paes. But I digress.

 

Overall, your point is valid. There have been a number of exemplary sportsperson prior to Mr Gavaskar. Mr. Dhyanchand being the most prominent example. Dara Singh was another sportsperson of world fame. If we go far back in "British India" days, Gamma Pahalwan!

 

Well, in India, these days at least, nothing other than cricket counts as sports! So! I didn't want to complicate, if you know what I mean.

[Gollum]

53 minutes ago, deeppoint said:

 

Well, Mr Vijay Amritraj was very very good, but not "world class". If we speak of accolades, Ramesh Krishnan was better. And the first world class act we got in Lawn Tennis has been Leander Paes. But I digress.

 

Overall, your point is valid. There have been a number of exemplary sportsperson prior to Mr Gavaskar. Mr. Dhyanchand being the most prominent example. Dara Singh was another sportsperson of world fame. If we go far back in "British India" days, Gamma Pahalwan!

 

Well, in India, these days at least, nothing other than cricket counts as sports! So! I didn't want to complicate, if you know what I mean.

Amritraj is leagues above Ramesh Krishnan, Leander Paes. Leagues, not even close. According to Nadal , Amritraj was the only world class tennis player India had ever produced and he said this to the face of Paes, Bhupathi, Sania etc in a tournament in India 5 years back. Amritraj registered 20+ wins against Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Vilas, Connors, JMac, Borg (I had made a thread here detailing each of his H2Hs, unable to find it presently).....something like 27-42 H2H against former world number ones/slam winners. In terms of endorsements also he was number one in India during his time, then Kapil took over, Gavaskar was never in the race. 

 

Independent India's first great sportsperson was Balbir Singh Sr.. Hockey did count a lot before 80s. 

[Gollum]

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

You cannot blame Sunny for missing most of Lillee, given Lillee was the putz who hid away from the subcontinent as well as being injury prone for extended periods of time and i think they only played 3 tests in the tail end of their careers against each other.

India wasn't a worthy place for superior visiting teams. I can understand Lillee's decision. 

 

Gavaskar made merry against Packer depleted side and their C grade attacks, against first choice Aus it was Vishy who distinguished himself. 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

 

As for versus West Indian fast bowlers, true, Sunny beat the WI attack of '1/2 main fast bowler and bunch of spinners' into an absolute pulp to boost his numbers, but even against the famous quartet or its trio combinations (Macco-Roberts-Garner-Holding, who IIRC only played like 20 tests together, fyi), he did better than almost anyone else did as well. 
He beat the living daylights outta the fearsome WI pacers, scoring the fastest century vs them IIRC ( 100 off of 110 balls), then a 200, then a 90 off of 90 balls too.  He only has 1 failed series against the WI fearsome pacers and thats his last series in WI in 83, near tail end of his career, still manging to average 40+ vs them- which is still daylights better than Border or Miandad, his peers who faced them, let alone any other opener in the world (Boycs included). 

Averaged 30 when 3 of their quartet played. Unlike Border who averaged 50+ against proper WI pace attacks, Aus too was a weak team in the 80s. 

 

He plundered the 1971 spin heavy team, 1979 Packer depleted team. I give him full credit for that, always the most opportunistic scorer of soft runs, against weak attacks. 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Jimmy did not have a greater peak. He and gavaskar pretty much pulled reverse acts vs WI pace attack of the early 80s. Gavaskar failed in the WI and beat them to a pulp in India, Jimmy did the opposite - beat them to a pulp in WI and failed horribly in India.

Jimmy had the greatest peak in cricket history, greater than Bradman, Viv, Sobers etc. What he did in Pak, WI over a season represents the peak of test batting. 

 

Jimmy failed on custom prepared flatties of 1983, Gavaskar made runs, credit to him. Anyway tough run scoring was the job of Jimmy and Vishy. 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

thats joke of century. Border is to Gavaskar as Kohli is to Smith in tests. 

Border is superior in tests, superior in ODIs, superior team man, superior captain. 

2 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Viv and Greg are at least in the same ballpark, but I'd rate gavaskar higher than Viv for the simple reason that Viv in tests pretty much continuously declined for most of his career- throughout the 80s till the end ( which is like majority of his career as i think he started in 75 and ended in 91 or 92), his average continuously declined and he never quite put together great years and Viv was significantly weaker than Sunny vs quality spin on spinning tracks. 

With Chappell its close too, but ultimately Chappell him hardly playing in the subcontinent like Lillee counts against him. We all saw what the subcontinent did to Punter for eg, who if he'd pulled a putz move like their oldies, would've gone down right as right up with Lara-Tendy if not better than them in the 'anglo circuit+west indies' world. 

Super tests mein they all showed their level. Viv missed his best years playing a superior form of test cricket, Gavaskar made merry against C and D bowling attacks in that period. Viv was more than just stats, he was the ultimate impact player, imagine reducing a batsman like that to average. Gavaskar, Boycott played only for their individual milestones, stats. 

[Gollum]

In all time list probably just outside top 20 in tests. Shall do the courtesy of ignoring his ODI record.

 

One of the most overrated cricketers in history. Celebrated by a sporting minnow like India which is understandable, we didn't have much to cheer for those days. 

 

PS- Anyway I'll avoid this thread, he is a sacred cow on ICF and people may not like if I dissect his stats and talk about how those runs were made, which great WI attacks he conquered, which ATG fast bowlers he mastered, his matchwinning knocks etc. Feel I (and @Jimmy Cliff) have made enough posts about him in the past, feel free to dig them up. 

 

Had to mark my presence here because of a post about how Sunny was the first world class sportsperson from India. 

Edited July 17, 2024 by Gollum

[Adamant]

3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

 

pre-war players never faced bowlers who were much above 85mph despite the front foot dragging rule. 
Hobbs, Sutcliffe, etc are basically Indian Ranji maharathis of the 80s & 90s - playing on crumbling pitches against seriously good spinners and slow bowlers but only against military medium or slow medium as pacers and put them up against serious speed and they'd be dead. 

There's plenty such examples of Indian batsmen of that period who have 50+ FC average, who look like headless chicken against serious pace and dont even last 10 tests.

 

Isn't it obvious that players who played during the initial years of the game will be less skilled compared to the modern crop?
Same thing applies in all sports including football, hockey.
Yes there comes a period where quality of players can decline over a period of time  but its obvious that pre war players wont be anywhere near the current lot.

Cricket has gone through evolution and hence we have better skills now, doesnt make the past players noobs though

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

India wasn't a worthy place for superior visiting teams. I can understand Lillee's decision. 

If it was worthy enough to visit for the team that broke Lillee's team 4-1 and then hammered them for 20+ years, then its worthy enough for Lillee. It was also worthy enough for England, which pretty much held the upper hand with Australia in the 70s. So that cope isn't gonna work. 

 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

 

Gavaskar made merry against Packer depleted side and their C grade attacks, against first choice Aus it was Vishy who distinguished himself. 

Averaged 30 when 3 of their quartet played. Unlike Border who averaged 50+ against proper WI pace attacks, Aus too was a weak team in the 80s. 

Gavaskar absolutely hammered the daylights outta Thommo. Its Lillee who missed out on Gavaskar's wrath for being injured and also chickening out of comming to India. 

Border does not average 50+ against west indian attacks. he doesnt even average 40 against the west indies. 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

 

He plundered the 1971 spin heavy team, 1979 Packer depleted team. I give him full credit for that, always the most opportunistic scorer of soft runs, against weak attacks. 

He also has higher average, despite batting as opener, than Border vs 3 or more of WI's pace bowlers. 

 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Jimmy had the greatest peak in cricket history, greater than Bradman, Viv, Sobers etc. What he did in Pak, WI over a season represents the peak of test batting. 

LoL. No. 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

 

Jimmy failed on custom prepared flatties of 1983, Gavaskar made runs, credit to him. Anyway tough run scoring was the job of Jimmy and Vishy. 

And Jimmy failed at that job at home vs WI. There are no easy runs at home vs WI either.  Also, those were not custom prepared flatties. If that was the case, Kapil dev being lone ranger wouldn't have demolished the WI battling lineup of Greenidge-Haynes-Richards-Lloyds at home. 

 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Border is superior in tests, superior in ODIs, superior team man, superior captain. 

Objectively and statistically false in tests. As for team man, thats pretty nebulous and border was a mediocre captain, mediocre fielder. 

 

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Super tests mein they all showed their level. Viv missed his best years playing a superior form of test cricket, Gavaskar made merry against C and D bowling attacks in that period. Viv was more than just stats, he was the ultimate impact player, imagine reducing a batsman like that to average. Gavaskar, Boycott played only for their individual milestones, stats. 

If Viv is the impact player and that matters more than average, then clearly, Sehwag is the greatest impact player of alltime and is also better than Viv and Border by that score. 

You dont understand cricket if you think dour opening batsmen against killer pace attacks means playing for your own score. Especially, you do not understand test cricket, where the job is always to not lost first and foremost and then win as a close second option, especially when the series is still wide open. 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Gollum said:

In all time list probably just outside top 20 in tests. Shall do the courtesy of ignoring his ODI record.

 

One of the most overrated cricketers in history. Celebrated by a sporting minnow like India which is understandable, we didn't have much to cheer for those days. 

 

PS- Anyway I'll avoid this thread, he is a sacred cow on ICF and people may not like if I dissect his stats and talk about how those runs were made, which great WI attacks he conquered, which ATG fast bowlers he mastered, his matchwinning knocks etc. Feel I (and @Jimmy Cliff) have made enough posts about him in the past, feel free to dig them up. 

You can dissect all the stats you wish, but you are dissecting wrong. 

Your errors: 
 

1. ignoring the fact that Gavaskar vs 3 or more WI pacers = higher average than anyone but Greg Chappell of his period

2. ignoring the fact that Border didnt even average 40 vs the WI ( you think it is 50, it isnt)

3. ignoring the fact that Gavaskar beat Thommo & Hogg to a pulp, he only played lillee in 2  test and thats on Lillee, having pussed out of coming to India and keeping his stats inflated. 

 

If you wish to go dissect stats, do it properly. Not shoot and scoot with erroneous stats to support a biassed & nonsensical opinion. 

 

[Gollum]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If it was worthy enough to visit for the team that broke Lillee's team 4-1 and then hammered them for 20+ years, then its worthy enough for Lillee. It was also worthy enough for England, which pretty much held the upper hand with Australia in the 70s. So that cope isn't gonna work. 

 

Gavaskar absolutely hammered the daylights outta Thommo. Its Lillee who missed out on Gavaskar's wrath for being injured and also chickening out of comming to India. 

Border does not average 50+ against west indian attacks. he doesnt even average 40 against the west indies. 

He also has higher average, despite batting as opener, than Border vs 3 or more of WI's pace bowlers. 

 

LoL. No. 

And Jimmy failed at that job at home vs WI. There are no easy runs at home vs WI either.  Also, those were not custom prepared flatties. If that was the case, Kapil dev being lone ranger wouldn't have demolished the WI battling lineup of Greenidge-Haynes-Richards-Lloyds at home. 

 

Objectively and statistically false in tests. As for team man, thats pretty nebulous and border was a mediocre captain, mediocre fielder. 

 

If Viv is the impact player and that matters more than average, then clearly, Sehwag is the greatest impact player of alltime and is also better than Viv and Border by that score. 

You dont understand cricket if you think dour opening batsmen against killer pace attacks means playing for your own score. Especially, you do not understand test cricket, where the job is always to not lost first and foremost and then win as a close second option, especially when the series is still wide open. 

Ok bhai, let it go, we aren't going to change each other's stance, both have been on ICF long enough to know that. 

 

We end up arguing page after page (thankfully in a civil manner), write essays and back to square one . I don't have energy/time for such discussions these days. 

Edited July 17, 2024 by Gollum

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Adamant said:

Isn't it obvious that players who played during the initial years of the game will be less skilled compared to the modern crop?
Same thing applies in all sports including football, hockey.
Yes there comes a period where quality of players can decline over a period of time  but its obvious that pre war players wont be anywhere near the current lot.

Cricket has gone through evolution and hence we have better skills now, doesnt make the past players noobs though

 

If by 'now' you mean mostly post 1950s, then yes, you are correct ( since then the only real skill added to cricket is switch hitting & reverse swing). But yes, cricket has gone through periods of amatuer era of pitches literally being your local farm pitch ( not even rolled) - in the 1800s, to semi amatuer (rolled before the match, not during the match) to modern times ( rolled before each day and each of the innings breaks) period of the early 1900s to pre-ww2 period, to post ww2 professional era. 

 

[Majestic]

10 hours ago, Adamant said:

I wasn't considering pre war players (or around that period), there's no way to make any comparison with them, its a different sport altogether for me.

Yup.. that's understandable. I usually avoid the pre war players too in my discussions but here the OP probably wants to include them as well.