Is Yuvraj a better batsman than VVS Laxman?

[graphic23]

and the big boss Lax fails at the batsman oriented game....tells me a lot :hmmm: END OF STORY - He can only play the slower game

Does failure mean averaging 20pts more against the greatest team of his generation? If so, what would you categorize Yuvraj's performance vs. Australia as ?

[Jersey #10]

As i said it requires some special skills. Some guys like Jadeja, Robin Singh, Bevan might do well. Bevan averages better than Tendulkar, Punter in one dayer. So would you say he is better than Sachin and Punter? Come on man. Only very few guys succeed at all level. Sehwag sucks in one dayers too if you look at his average. But would you rate him below Nick Knight who averages 40.

Sehwag is special and let's not compare that gunda with any one else...one in million :giggle: Now...Bevan would have def. been better in his time for his team but Tendy and Punter are right there on top with him.

[Jersey #10]

Does failure mean averaging 20pts more against the greatest team of his generation? If so' date=' what would you categorize Yuvraj's performance vs. Australia as ?[/quote'] and how about averaging 7 points in ODI and 34 points in T20 more with a lot better strike rate? ALL OVER AGAIN...UV HAS ONLY PLAYED 2 GAMES AGAINST OZ...GET OVER WITH IT... If you come to me, I ll teach you how to read. I said that, Lax can only play the slower version(test) of CRICKET....how hard is it to read?

[graphic23]

And you think playing quickly is the hall mark of a batsman (forget formats for a moment)?

[Jersey #10]

And you think playing quickly is the hall mark of a batsman (forget formats for a moment)?

If quickly = decent Strike rate then Yes! If quickly = throwing your bat at everything then No!

[Jersey #10]

Average + Strike Rate = Hall mark of a batsman! Only average = :fail: Only SR = :fail: In my views, One needs both

[varun]

And you think playing quickly is the hall mark of a batsman (forget formats for a moment)?

I think the ability to dominate is what separates a great batsman from a good batsman. There have been many good batsmen that are able to survive a testing period, but only few dominate when others are barely surviving (cue. Bradman, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Lara)..

[Karan114]

I think the ability to dominate is what separates a great batsman from a good batsman. There have been many good batsmen that are able to survive a testing period' date=' but only few dominate when others are barely surviving (cue. Bradman, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Lara)..[/quote'] Given that, where would you place Dravid?

[vvvslaxman]

I think the ability to dominate is what separates a great batsman from a good batsman. There have been many good batsmen that are able to survive a testing period' date=' but only few dominate when others are barely surviving (cue. Bradman, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Lara)..[/quote'] Are you suggesting Laxman is not a stroke player. He plundered 52 runs from 5 overs from Lee in Sydney Test. He is a genuine stroke player like Azharuddin was. Occasionally he wasted time like he did in the last Test. But he is never known for his stonewalling. He is more known for his silken carpet drives.

[varun]

Given that' date=' where would you place Dravid?[/quote'] A notch below Bradman, Tendukar, Sehwag, Lara. The good thing is that given all his experience, he is starting to dominate a bit more of late. Lets see where he ends up. Of course, this is just my opinion.

Are you suggesting Laxman is not a stroke player. He plundered 52 runs from 5 overs from Lee in Sydney Test. He is a genuine stroke player like Azharuddin was. Occasionally he wasted time like he did in the last Test. But he is never known for his stonewalling. He is more known for his silken carpet drives.

My comment was just to graphic's statement and had nothing to do with Laxman per se. Sure Laxman dominated one of the best attacks of his time which makes him borderline great, but since he is rather inconsistent he doesn't get there. I'll qualify him as a good batsman with shades of greatness. Yuvi would be in the same category in the shorter format.

[Mr. Wicket]

I think the ability to dominate is what separates a great batsman from a good batsman. There have been many good batsmen that are able to survive a testing period' date=' but only few dominate when others are barely surviving (cue. Bradman, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Lara)..[/quote'] Interesting you say that, as there are plenty of such innings that VVS has played. He's produced a number of knocks where most others did jack ****, and he was taking apart the attack - though with classical wristy shots for fours, rather than slog sweeps and lofted drives. Kolkata 2001; 281 off 452 (s/r 62, 44 fours)? Sydney 2000; 167 off 198 (s/r 84, 27 fours) from a total of 261 against three truly world class bowlers in McGrath, Fleming and Warne. Port Elizabeth 2001; 89 off 121 (s/r 73, 12 fours) from a total of 201 against Pollock, Hayward, Ntini and Kallis Don't forget either the seriously brilliant and largely forgotten 62 (82 balls, 12 fours, s/r 80) at Chennai in 2001 - when we chased down 155, the next highest score in the innings was 25 and VVS OTOH was hitting the bowling around beautifully and finding the boundary with ease. And do note; these are not games where everyone else was piling on runs at a good clip - but where almost every other man (bar Dravid in 01 Kolkata) was really struggling.

[varun]

Interesting you say that, as there are plenty of such innings that VVS has played. He's produced a number of knocks where most others did jack ****, and he was taking apart the attack - though with classical wristy shots for fours, rather than slog sweeps and lofted drives. .

Agreed. Look above :notsmiley: :P

[ludhianvi]

Yuvi is improving in Test Cricket and will surely have a higher average when he finishes Test Cricket. At the moment, Laxman is clearly a a better Test bat. However Yuvi IMO, is just starting to feel comfortable in Test cricket without too much pressure on his place in the side. So he should only improve from here. First 30 Test matches of both players yield a similar average with Yuvi having a slightly higher average. Laxman's average: 36.51 Yuvi's average: 37.12 :regular_smile:

[vvvslaxman]

BACK TO TOPIC Yuvraj is better in one dayers Laxman is better in Tests. Overall who is better batsman? At this point Laxman since he is better against varied attacks on difficult surfaces. Where Yuvraj stands out? He can produce one of those breathless knocks in one dayers/T20s that can be matched only by very few. I can see Yuvi consciously improving his defensive technique especially against spin. Soon he will get there. But both are sublime stroke players. In NZ they were involved in a century partnership. We were treated to some fluent stroke play by both players.

[Jersey #10]

Interesting you say that, as there are plenty of such innings that VVS has played. He's produced a number of knocks where most others did jack ****, and he was taking apart the attack - though with classical wristy shots for fours, rather than slog sweeps and lofted drives. Kolkata 2001; 281 off 452 (s/r 62, 44 fours)? Sydney 2000; 167 off 198 (s/r 84, 27 fours) from a total of 261 against three truly world class bowlers in McGrath, Fleming and Warne. Port Elizabeth 2001; 89 off 121 (s/r 73, 12 fours) from a total of 201 against Pollock, Hayward, Ntini and Kallis Don't forget either the seriously brilliant and largely forgotten 62 (82 balls, 12 fours, s/r 80) at Chennai in 2001 - when we chased down 155, the next highest score in the innings was 25 and VVS OTOH was hitting the bowling around beautifully and finding the boundary with ease. And do note; these are not games where everyone else was piling on runs at a good clip - but where almost every other man (bar Dravid in 01 Kolkata) was really struggling.

I can also find a list of games where UV has played fab innings in ODI while others struggled! He has not gotten to the point in tests as of yet but he soon will. and let's not even talk about what he can do in T20 games as every one knows. He is distructive at times hence not great but still a good player. I can find a LONG list of games where Sachin, Dravid and even Dada have ripped apart quality opponents. and I can assure you that the list would be longer than that of VVS. That's why I will agree with Varun that he is a notch below the caliber of God, Wall and Dada. :two_thumbs_up: At the end, I would like to compare Lax to the greats like god, dada, wall when it comes to tests. and when it comes to allover caliber I will not rate lax above UV, Dhoni, Gambhir. SORRY

[Jersey #10]

BACK TO TOPIC Yuvraj is better in one dayers Laxman is better in Tests. Overall who is better batsman? At this point Laxman since he is better against varied attacks on difficult surfaces. Where Yuvraj stands out? He can produce one of those breathless knocks in one dayers/T20s that can be matched only by very few. I can see Yuvi consciously improving his defensive technique especially against spin. Soon he will get there. But both are sublime stroke players. In NZ they were involved in a century partnership. We were treated to some fluent stroke play by both players.

at bold - in all three formats? I don't think so. I agree to everything except bold.

[graphic23]

And you need to define what this "all over caliber" implies for me.

[vvvslaxman]

at bold - in all three formats? I don't think so. I agree to everything except bold.

That is your opinion. My opinion is Laxman is still better than Yuvi.

[Jersey #10]

And you need to define what this "all over caliber" implies for me.

Can I also teach you ABC's? :giggle:

[Jersey #10]

That is your opinion. My opinion is Laxman is still better than Yuvi.

ok, fair enough :two_thumbs_up: