Sehwag Stats - A case of Contrast

[siddhu]

That is just your opinion .... I have seen those guys bowl and the current lot that Sehwag faced is no walk in the park. BTW I forgot to mention Pollock' date=' Ntini, Saqlain, Morkel, B Lee in the list of Bowlers faced by Sehwag.[/quote'] Not to forget. All these bowlers listed have a lot more wickets on FLAT tracks (as thongale puts it) as compared to West Indies bowlers on BOWLING Tracks (again thongale's words).... so they must be doing something right.

[Andy]

Sehwag has a debut Hundred in SA, still he needs to prove he can bat there?

[Cricketics]

Sehwag started his test career from South Africa, forming a classy p'ship with Tendulkar. He doens't have anything to prove in South Africa. What you talkinga bout SaneIndian. He just gotta live up to his standards perhaps, thats the only thing all would want.

[saneindian]

Sehwag started his test career from South Africa, forming a classy p'ship with Tendulkar. He doens't have anything to prove in South Africa. What you talkinga bout SaneIndian. He just gotta live up to his standards perhaps, thats the only thing all would want.

Naah, am not having any doubts at all. If you read my posts again, I said with a good performance in SA, he will shut his few critics for once and all (go through a few of the posts on previous pages on this thread and you will know who I am talking about).

[saneindian]

You are actually one of the most sane people. If Sehwag does well in SAF' date=' there is nothing to prevent from being identified as a ATG.[/quote'] No sir, Sehwag doesn't have to do anyhting else to become an ATG. Even if he were to quit playing today, he will go down as one of the greatest openers of all time and would find a place in the ATG 11s of most experts! I don't have to defend his stats, those numbers alone tell you the entire story. No batsman in the modern era (perhaps Richards will be the closest) comes close to the kind of impact he has had on the way test cricket is played. I can bet that SA would not have declared with a lead of 350+ with 80 overs to go had Sehwag been in the opposition. Thats the kind of effect Viru has on the psyche of the opposition.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thongale]

His "A game" was to consume overs session after session ... not make runs .. so yeah he did bring his A Game against those opponents :--D

My ****, averages 20 in SAF, if that defines putting bowling in to sword. :--D And why did you include spinners against Sehwag? We are talking about strengths of the opening attacks, not spin attacks. And that list of Sehwag looks very very thin when compared to that of Boycotts. Set 1: Marshall, Hadlee, Holding, Roberts, Croft, Imran, Lillee, Thompson, Garner Set 2: McGrath, Pollock, Ntini, Shoaib, Lee, Steyn, Senile Donald Well, is there a comparison at all? Have your own conclusions BossBhai.

[thongale]

What Kind of? Care to explain?

You know it, pretending not to know will not help. I'll give two examples. Handling of 1. Short ball 2. Moving ball which needs "tighter" technique, which you need to play close to the body. (Look for Dravid for an example)

[thongale]

Sehwag has a debut Hundred in SA' date=' still he needs to prove he can bat there?[/quote']Yes he needs because he averages 20 there:--D

[Andy]

You know it, pretending not to know will not help. I'll give two examples. Handling of 1. Short ball 2. Moving ball which needs "tighter" technique, which you need to play close to the body. (Look for Dravid for an example)

If Sehwag cant play short ball and the Moving ball no batsman in the world Can. As he has Hundreds against the Top Pace Batteries in the World, They wont be Pitching up to him (Express bowlers). As far as the Moving ball goes Tons in England, SA, Aus, WI Should bury that query too. Ricky Ponting has a miserable average in IND, that means he cant play Spinners? Michael Clarke made 46 in the whole of Last series that means he cant play spinners? If i have to go by your argument all the answers to my questions will be "YES"

[Andy]

Yes he needs because he averages 20 there:--D

Anyone can have one bad series, Is that a way to prove who can and cannot play in SA?Its your Intellectual Dishonesty to Ignore his First series in SA. If he couldnt handle short and moving balls he should not have made runs then rather than 5 years later when he was much more experienced as a batsman.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[thongale]

And this special is for Boss Bhai who claims Greame Smith is n where close to Sehwag.

[B]Opposition	VS	GCS[/B]
Aus		59.5	37.92
Ban		35.2	67
Eng		39.5	72.2
Ind		58.86	35.91
NZ		20	58
Pak		91.5	45.63
Saf		26.44	45.95
SL		69.2	44.75
WI		51	73

I have omitted Sehwag's games against ZIM where he averages 51 because of uncommon opposition. Sehwag and Smith debuted very closely to each other so the conditions they batted away from their homes are roughly equal. The best way to see how good a batsman is to let them play in same conditions against same bowlers. The closest of this scenario can be achieved by looking at away stats only. Here the bilateral series can be omitted. Note that by doing this Sehwag will lose his games in India and in SAF where he averages 59 and 20 respectively and Smith 35 and 45 respectively (bothwill average close to 40), and the effects on averages will be minimal by doing that. It's hypothesized that each batsmen gets to play similar number of matches against each opposition (say 1 match each). The common opposition is AUS, BAN, ENG, NZ, PAK, SL and WI for these players. The adjusted average is taken by averaging averages against each side.

Against common opposition
[B]Sehwag		52.3
Smith		56.9[/B]

We can do a tweak to include home matches and bilateral series too. Since each players debut, home and visiting players have fared as below

[B]Player	Home batsmen	Visiting batsmen[/B]
Sehwag		32.85		32.14
Smith		36.39		26.39

This shows that at his home Smith has an advantage of 3.54 runs. And Sehwag when visiting will have a 5.75 run disadvantage in SAF. We add this to Sehwag's average in each case. Ex. VS's avg in SAF becomes 25.75 Our new adjusted values

Against common opposition
[B]Sehwag		51.2
Smith		53.4[/B]

BossBhai mate, still Smith has a better average. Since VS is a impact player, I'd add that to his importance as well. So all in all, Sehwag is only equal or just marginally ahead as a batsman than Smith. Not as miles ahead as you claim him to be.

[Andy]

Pontings average in Ind was 20 before the Current Tour in Ind. After this Tour he averages 26 now. Lara's average in Ind is 30. All of them could be called ATG as they are not Indians and whenever its an Indian he has to play in ZYZ Country against ABC bowlers to prove his greatness. Typical Jelous Lankan at Argument here who are pants producing a batsman half as Good as Sehwag.

[Andy]

And this special is for Boss Bhai who claims Greame Smith is n where close to Sehwag.

[B]Opposition	VS	GCS[/B]
Aus		59.5	37.92
Ban		35.2	67
Eng		39.5	72.2
Ind		58.86	35.91
NZ		20	58
Pak		91.5	45.63
Saf		26.44	45.95
SL		69.2	44.75
WI		51	73

I have omitted Sehwag's games against ZIM where he averages 51 because of uncommon opposition. Sehwag and Smith debuted very closely to each other so the conditions they batted away from their homes are roughly equal. The best way to see how good a batsman is to let them play in same conditions against same bowlers. The closest of this scenario can be achieved by looking at away stats only. Here the bilateral series can be omitted. Note that by doing this Sehwag will lose his games in India and in SAF where he averages 59 and 20 respectively and Smith 35 and 45 respectively (bothwill average close to 40), and the effects on averages will be minimal by doing that. It's hypothesized that each batsmen gets to play similar number of matches against each opposition (say 1 match each). The common opposition is AUS, BAN, ENG, NZ, PAK, SL and WI for these players. The adjusted average is taken by averaging averages against each side.

Against common opposition
[B]Sehwag		52.3
Smith		56.9[/B]

I have Got you this Far, why are we taking Minnows into contention?

[thongale]

If Sehwag cant play short ball and the Moving ball no batsman in the world Can. As he has Hundreds against the Top Pace Batteries in the World, They wont be Pitching up to him (Express bowlers). As far as the Moving ball goes Tons in England, SA, Aus, WI Should bury that query too. Ricky Ponting has a miserable average in IND, that means he cant play Spinners? Michael Clarke made 46 in the whole of Last series that means he cant play spinners? If i have to go by your argument all the answers to my questions will be "YES"

Now you are miles off the argument. Argument was that whether we need a change in technique when you play a super fast bowling battery. The attacks Sehwag played is NO WHERE close to WI quartret of 1980s. We have been not discussing whether Sehwag can play pace of current era or not (obviously he can as you mentioned). The question was whether he can to it against what Boycott faced. Boycott batted on juicy pitches in ENG and lively wickets in WI as well. So he rarely played on roads against WI. Now we have seen that Sehwag has failed against moving ball against good seam bowlers (not jokes that bowled to him in sub continent or in England except Anderson). The obvious examples were Steyn and Pollock. And you may agree that each bowler that I have given in that list (except Thompson) are better than Steyn and Pollock. The challenge is much more stiff for Boycott than for Sehwag in majority of his games. That resulted in a different game plan which was suited to THAT PARTICULAR instance. Looking down on Boycott being slow is hilarious, because you needed to be SLOW to score against those bowlers.

[thongale]

I have Got you this Far' date=' why are we taking Minnows into contention?[/quote']Why get rid of them if everybody gets the same proportion of matches to play against them? Here you are proposing it because you notice by doing it Sehwag's average will jump up. Doing well against minnows is also a part of the game. Unless most of your games are against minnows, it's perfectly all right to have them in the analysis provided everyone gets equal chances to bash them.

[Andy]

Now you are miles off the argument. Argument was that whether we need a change in technique when you play a super fast bowling battery. The attacks Sehwag played is NO WHERE close to WI quartret of 1980s. We have been not discussing whether Sehwag can play pace of current era or not (obviously he can as you mentioned). The question was whether he can to it against what Boycott faced. Boycott batted on juicy pitches in ENG and lively wickets in WI as well. So he rarely played on roads against WI. Now we have seen that Sehwag has failed against moving ball against good seam bowlers (not jokes that bowled to him in sub continent or in England except Anderson). The obvious examples were Steyn and Pollock. And you may agree that each bowler that I have given in that list (except Thompson) are better than Steyn and Pollock. The challenge is much more stiff for Boycott than for Sehwag in majority of his games. That resulted in a different game plan which was suited to THAT PARTICULAR instance. Looking down on Boycott being slow is hilarious' date=' because you needed to be SLOW to score against those bowlers.[/quote'] So no one from the Current era have actually Faced the West Indian Pace Quartret hence no Batsman from the present Generation should be Included among ATG? Sehwag has failed against Moving Ball? In one series in 2006. Ponting has failed against Turing ball in every series. Hence Ponting is not a Great too? And the Ball doesnt move in England and Australia and It didnt move in 2001 in SA? I dont think a Change in technique is Needed, What technique sir DB had? I dont think he changed his technique to play bowlers of his era. Its not about Occupying crease its about Scoring Runs.

[thongale]

Aisa hai ... Boycott couldnt put to sword even a harmless trundler ... never mind any half decent fast bowler even on the flattest of surfaces. There ends the matter. :--D

I won't disagree with you. But even a very good seamer could not get him out too.

YOU are talking about opening attacks ... not me.

Exactly, and you fooled around with the concept of it by bringing in spinners in to it.

Can we see the scorecard of the test match when Boycott played against Imran ?

Check it out. Boycott played from 1964 - 1981. Imran from 1974 - 1992. There may be a very rare case that he has not played Imran. But that still does not alter the fact that the opening attacks Boycott played were much more potent and destructive than what Sehwag played.

[Andy]

Why get rid of them if everybody gets the same proportion of matches to play against them? Here you are proposing it because you notice by doing it Sehwag's average will jump up. Doing well against minnows is also a part of the game. Unless most of your games are against minnows' date= it's perfectly all right to have them in the analysis provided everyone gets equal chances to bash them.

I do not think Minnows need to be brought into arguemnt while we are Judging great players, If it is allowed i can make many batsman look like SRT , Ricky Ponting and Brian Lara. Here you are proposing minnows because you know this guy has fared badly against minnows and His average will drop . Sehwag is 10 times a better batsman against Top 5-6 Teams than what GS is . Yes you may call GS Better against Minnows. But when it comes to the best team in the world Sehwag is way ahead of GS.