Sehwag more destructive than Richards

[Mr. Wicket]

You think its OUR amits ? :omg:

who else?

[Malcolm Merlyn]

I actually joined this forum just because of that debate... Mr samit was ot letting me post on cricinfo... you know why? Just beucase i said that a stupid indian was bringing in false statistics, that man said , that tendulkar, ponting and lare scores century every 4.2 , 4.. etc innings... Man why you indian always make your cricketer bigger than what they are? I personnally think sehwag is a very good test opener, i also think thattendulkar is a great batsman, he is an all time great, better than all pakistani batsmen so far... But that doen't look enough for you indians,and the star talking about sehwag and richard in the same thread.... Are you going to apreciate if someone say that kevin iterssen is more destructive than sachin tendulkar even if he has a betterstrike rate? No, because they are just not the same class. So compare sehwag with players that are in the same class, he will end better than some, and then we can all have our own opinion, sehwag, graeme smith, ab devilliers, younis khan, ab devilliers, vvs laxman, mickeal clarke, mickal hussey, gautm ghambir, andrew strauss etc... but you just can't compare one of them with the likes of richards, tendulkar, lara, ponting, inzi, dravid... even f they are more destructive or more solid than one of them.... Tomorrow you will have sambit saying that ghambir is more solid than lara....

If a batsman is great doesnt matter there cant be better ones......richards was great but not infallible.......he was never tested by quality spinners...the only quality spinner of that time abdul qadir had them in twists.....even a narendra hirwani was making them look like headless chickens....cricket is not only about fast bowlers it is about spinners tooo......lot of so called greats who played fast bowling very well were found out on spinning tracks againist good spinners.so if gambhir avgs 60 as an opener u will still not consider him better then lara

[The Outsider]

Good write up Bumper. I would like to add a couple of things : 1. Of course, there is no denying Richards' class but a lot of his untouchable status comes from the English media and his performances in county cricket. No doubt, the standard of county cricket was higher in those days but it certainly wasn't test cricket. But during those days, essentially all of the good cricket writers and media houses were British and naturally their writings were Anglo-centric. It made players like Richards and Zaheer Abbas bigger than they actually were. Heck, India did not even have TV broadcast of matches outside India till the Pakistan tour of the early 80s. 2. The class of bowlers that Richards faced was not much higher than what Sehwag has faced. The best and only quality spinner Richards faced was Qadir, who in fact troubled him a fair bit. Qadir would be in the Saqlain/Harbhajan/MacGill kind of league. It's a complete unknown how he would have fared against someone like Warne or Murali. Sehwag has obliterated both and the likes of Saqlain and MacGill. People often forget that Richards actually sought psychological counseling after being devastated by Lillee and Thompson at their best. 3. Richards had one monster season and a couple of good ones. Even during his peak years he was never a consistent destroyer that he is portrayed to be. The less about the last few years of his career the better - though to be fair to him, Sehwag hasn't reached that stage yet. Sehwag's propensity to pile up the kind of huge totals he does is unmatchable in any batsman I have seen except Lara, who did it at a much more pedestrian strike rate. Sehwag will undoubtedly end up with most 150+ scores, most 200+ scores after Bradman when he is done, IMO.

[S.Bond]

If a batsman is great doesnt matter there cant be better ones......richards was great but not infallible.......he was never tested by quality spinners...the only quality spinner of that time abdul qadir had them in twists.....even a narendra hirwani was making them look like headless chickens....cricket is not only about fast bowlers it is about spinners tooo......lot of so called greats who played fast bowling very well were found out on spinning tracks againist good spinners.so if gambhir avgs 60 as an opener u will still not consider him better then lara

Agree with what you said, that even if you are great, someone can be better... But here the gap between sehwag and richard is too big, i already said, that is the same if someone say that kevin pietersen is better than tendulkar.... These men are not yet finish, but for the moment they are no way near the great vivian richard. And i think that ghambir plays spin bowling very very well. The pitches are not the same, india has beaten their own record of most runs in a day several times this year. Today they have surpassed their highest ever score in test cricket... What does that mean? Indian current battiing better than ever? A mediocre batsman like dilshan averages 67, with a strike rate of 83 and hundreds.... Does that mean he is more destructive than others? No , that eans he is in good form, and he is lucky to play on FORMIDABLE traks...

[Lurker]

1) Viv never wore a helmet: There is no question that Viv was never afraid to go out there without a helmet & hook, pull fast bowlers without fear. But this (alone) hardly makes a batsman dominant. Granted, Viv was fearless. But so was Gavaskar. Is it fair to deduce that Gavaskar was as dominant a batsman because he faced hostile bowlers (infact more hostile than Viv), without a helmet ? Simple answer is that helmet or the lack of it does not make a batsman dominant.

Erroneous comparison. Sunny would not wear helmet(and much props to him for that) but he was hardly dominant batsman. When bowlers would bounce him(which is really when helmet is needed), he would simply sway away. There were very few times when he would hook or pull, and when he did everyone was surprised including him possibly. Richards on the other hand would dare fast bowlers to bounce at him and then hook them away. Big difference. Plus of course there is the small matter of him dominating in both forms of the game while Sunny's ODI credentials are hardly anything to brag about.

2) Viv faced tougher odds: Its a fair argument that during Viv's time quality of fast bowling was high & the pitches were far more challenging. But has Sehwag only feasted on low quality opponents on flat pictcjes ? Not really. Sehwag has scored his runs everywhere against all comers. Viv never faced the great WI attack. Nor was he tested as much by quality spinners (he was very suspect against quality spin). He only faced Lilee, Thommo, Imran & the likes more often.

Viv started his career against India. And Chandra would get the better of him first couple of tests but the man was great enough to slam centuries both at home and abroad. So not sure why he would suspect against spin when he was not against Chandra, Prasanna and Bedi. I mean thats as quality as one can get. Unless of course Chandra, Prasanna and co. were not quality in your books.

3) Viv's scoring rate and audacious stroke play: There is no doubt Viv scored quickly & showed utter disrespect for the bowling attack he faced. But Sehwag eclipses Viv interms of scoring rate and audaciousness. The sheer volume of runs, strike rate, variety of strokes (Jeez, reverse sweep in test matches!!) makes Sehwag pound for pound better in this aspect as well.

Variety of strokes?? When was the last time Sehwag hooked, for example? Audacious Sehwag is, and a great hand-eye co-ordination too but Richards was easily a more complete batsman. He practically invented strokes and many of his inventions are being carried over in cricket today. As for the SR etc etc how can you compare an era where 220 in 50 over game was a winnable preposition to an era when 350 in 50 overs does not ensure anything?? If one ever bothered to check stats these days he would see even a Razzak had much better returns than an Imran Khan. Does not prove anything, except these days any tom, dick and jack can, and does, score at a high rate and takes 5 wickets in an LOI game like nobody's business. Lets celebrate Sehwag but lets also keep things in perspective. xxx

[Bumper]

Good write up Bumper. I would like to add a couple of things : 1. Of course, there is no denying Richards' class but a lot of his untouchable status comes from the English media and his performances in county cricket. No doubt, the standard of county cricket was higher in those days but it certainly wasn't test cricket. But during those days, essentially all of the good cricket writers and media houses were British and naturally their writings were Anglo-centric. It made players like Richards and Zaheer Abbas bigger than they actually were. Heck, India did not even have TV broadcast of matches outside India till the Pakistan tour of the early 80s. 2. The class of bowlers that Richards faced was not much higher than what Sehwag has faced. The best and only quality spinner Richards faced was Qadir, who in fact troubled him a fair bit. Qadir would be in the Saqlain/Harbhajan/MacGill kind of league. It's a complete unknown how he would have fared against someone like Warne or Murali. Sehwag has obliterated both and the likes of Saqlain and MacGill. People often forget that Richards actually sought psychological counseling after being devastated by Lillee and Thompson at their best. 3. Richards had one monster season and a couple of good ones. Even during his peak years he was never a consistent destroyer that he is portrayed to be. The less about the last few years of his career the better - though to be fair to him, Sehwag hasn't reached that stage yet. Sehwag's propensity to pile up the kind of huge totals he does is unmatchable in any batsman I have seen except Lara, who did it at a much more pedestrian strike rate. Sehwag will undoubtedly end up with most 150+ scores, most 200+ scores after Bradman when he is done, IMO.

Absolutely Prof! I cant overstate how much we are all influenced by what we read as cricket history.

[patriot]

Erroneous comparison. Sunny would not wear helmet(and much props to him for that) but he was hardly dominant batsman. When bowlers would bounce him(which is really when helmet is needed), he would simply sway away. There were very few times when he would hook or pull, and when he did everyone was surprised including him possibly. Richards on the other hand would dare fast bowlers to bounce at him and then hook them away. Big difference. Plus of course there is the small matter of him dominating in both forms of the game while Sunny's ODI credentials are hardly anything to brag about. Viv started his career against India. And Chandra would get the better of him first couple of tests but the man was great enough to slam centuries both at home and abroad. So not sure why he would suspect against spin when he was not against Chandra, Prasanna and Bedi. I mean thats as quality as one can get. Unless of course Chandra, Prasanna and co. were not quality in your books. Variety of strokes?? When was the last time Sehwag hooked, for example? Audacious Sehwag is, and a great hand-eye co-ordination too but Richards was easily a more complete batsman. He practically invented strokes and many of his inventions are being carried over in cricket today. As for the SR etc etc how can you compare an era where 220 in 50 over game was a winnable preposition to an era when 350 in 50 overs does not ensure anything?? If one ever bothered to check stats these days he would see even a Razzak had much better returns than an Imran Khan. Does not prove anything, except these days any tom, dick and jack can, and does, score at a high rate and takes 5 wickets in an LOI game like nobody's business. Lets celebrate Sehwag but lets also keep things in perspective. xxx

Valid points BUT: 1) Viv averages only early 40's against 2 ( Australia and Pakistan)of the best attacks after his ( which ofcourse he din't have to face) 2) We can surely compare relatively. Sehwag in terms of domination is atleast as far ahead of his most worthy peers than Viv ever was.

[The Outsider]

Viv started his career against India. And Chandra would get the better of him first couple of tests but the man was great enough to slam centuries both at home and abroad. So not sure why he would suspect against spin when he was not against Chandra, Prasanna and Bedi. I mean thats as quality as one can get. Unless of course Chandra, Prasanna and co. were not quality in your books.

Put Sehwag in front of Thomspon, Imran, Kapil, and Botham in their last 2-3 seasons and I can guarantee he'll hand them out a pasting twice as much that Richards would have handed the declining and washed up spin quartet.

[vvvslaxman]

There is only one Richards. There is only one Sehwag. There has never been a Sehwag in Test history. I doubt there will ever be one. Best way you can judge Sehwag is by comparing the players of his era. Take Sachin Tendulkar. Some even say he is next thing after Bradman. I mean it is not far fetched to compare Sachin with Richards. Infact Sachin is overall better batsman than him. Just look at the performance of Sehwag in the same matches Tendulkar played. Tendulkar outscored Sehwag rarely in a match where both of them played well. A strike rate of 100 plus in ODI and 80 in Tests is no mean achievement in any era.

[Lurker]

1) Viv averages only early 40's against 2 ( Australia and Pakistan)of the best attacks after his ( which ofcourse he din't have to face)

No offense but this is exactly the kind of trend that has effectively killed the beauty of cricket - the tendency to judge player by numbers. Put it this way, you check those same bowlers from Australia and Pakistan - Lillee, Thommo, Imran, Qadir and they will ALL unanimously vouch for Richards being the best batsman they bowled to. Sunny would be a close second but he was hardly the dominant batsman, which is in question here. I have read Lillee and Imran's autobiography and they put the man far ahead of any contemprory batsmen. Lillee in fact did not even pick Sunny as a great batsman(he picked Vishwanath) although a case can be made Lillee was miffed at Sunny for walking out.

2) We can surely compare relatively. Sehwag in terms of domination is atleast as far ahead of his most worthy peers than Viv ever was.

Not sure how much of that is true. For starters this would have to be a Test only comparison since Veeru's performance in LOI is nothing great at this time. The apt comparison, I think, is restricted only for Test matches and again I find it very hard to do that comparison since Richards played in an era where Test matches were religion and LOI was pajama cricket, every player gave Test cricket its best shot. To battle against top players who played with that passion is something I find amiss these days. xxx

[Lurker]

Put Sehwag in front of Thomspon' date=' Imran, Kapil, and Botham in their last 2-3 seasons and I can guarantee he'll hand them out a pasting twice as much that Richards would have handed the declining and washed up spin quartet.[/quote'] Thats wrong on both accounts. a) Instead of appreciating Richard's ability to fire both at home and abroad(in his debut too) against the best spin attack you refer them as washed up spin quartet. b) You are guaranteeing Sehwag smacking Kapil and Imran without having any background whatsoever. I mean really you can guarantee that? Really?? Even God wont do that, and no I dont mean SRT. xxx

[Bumper]

Erroneous comparison. Sunny would not wear helmet(and much props to him for that) but he was hardly dominant batsman. When bowlers would bounce him(which is really when helmet is needed), he would simply sway away. There were very few times when he would hook or pull, and when he did everyone was surprised including him possibly. Richards on the other hand would dare fast bowlers to bounce at him and then hook them away. Big difference. Plus of course there is the small matter of him dominating in both forms of the game while Sunny's ODI credentials are hardly anything to brag about.

I didnt intend to side track to Sunny vs Viv. Just cited Sunny as an example of a batsman who didnt wear helmets either. I'd credit Viv for hooking & pulling fast bowlers without fear. Infact i have already stated this. But this is just one aspect of domination. Is hitting the bowler over mid on not as damaging to the bowler's confidence ? How about reverse sweeping the "Bradman of bowlers" when he lands the ball a foot outside the leg stump with a packed leg side field ? Or flaying the most freakish spin combo (at Galle) for a double hundred scoring 60% of the team total ? How about doing all this as an opener ? How many times has Viv faced the new ball ? Fortunately for him, he had an all time great opening combo working out the bowlers before he came in.

Viv started his career against India. And Chandra would get the better of him first couple of tests but the man was great enough to slam centuries both at home and abroad. So not sure why he would suspect against spin when he was not against Chandra, Prasanna and Bedi. I mean thats as quality as one can get. Unless of course Chandra, Prasanna and co. were not quality in your books.

I have read Viv himself admitting that he was not that good against quality spin. I myself have seen him humbled by the likes of Hirwani. Regardless, *none* of the spinners you mention are in the same league as Warne & Murali.

Variety of strokes?? When was the last time Sehwag hooked, for example? Audacious Sehwag is, and a great hand-eye co-ordination too but Richards was easily a more complete batsman. He practically invented strokes and many of his inventions are being carried over in cricket today. As for the SR etc etc how can you compare an era where 220 in 50 over game was a winnable preposition to an era when 350 in 50 overs does not ensure anything??

Sehwag does not have variety ? How about reverse sweep, lofted drives, upper cut, traditional off drives, on drives, cut, hitting spinners over the top etc ? Is that not variety enough ? Sehwag does play the odd pull shot, but he knows his limitations. I didnt see Viv play the reverse sweep or upper cut. I'd argue that modern day spinners would tie him up packing the leg side & bowling a foot outside the leg ? Does that make Viv pedestrian ? Dominance, to me, is about imposing your presence on the field. Its about inducing the fear of god in the bowlers. You do that by hitting the bowlers to the furthest parts of the ground anyway possible. I think Sehwag has done that. Hook or Crook! As for strike rate, just like how Viv was ahead of his peers, Sehwag too is waay ahead of his. Tell me which test batsman in the modern day scores 284 in a day's play (need i say with only 79 overs bowled in the day). Sehwag's feats are super human even for modern day standards.

If one ever bothered to check stats these days he would see even a Razzak had much better returns than an Imran Khan. Does not prove anything, except these days any tom, dick and jack can, and does, score at a high rate and takes 5 wickets in an LOI game like nobody's business. Lets celebrate Sehwag but lets also keep things in perspective. xxx

We arent talking ODIs. How do you justify statistically that Razzak is better than Imran in Tests ?

[Sachinism]

Great points Bumper :hatsoff:

[The Outsider]

Thats wrong on both accounts. a) Instead of appreciating Richard's ability to fire both at home and abroad(in his debut too) against the best spin attack you refer them as washed up spin quartet.

Richards played one good innings in the entire series in India - how is that firing? By the time he faced them next in WI, they were all in decline.

b) You are guaranteeing Sehwag smacking Kapil and Imran without having any background whatsoever. I mean really you can guarantee that? Really?? Even God wont do that, and no I dont mean SRT. xxx

Yeah, if you read my entire post you will also agree - Imran, Kapil, Botham were nothing but accurate medium pacers in their last 2-4 seasons.

[Lurker]

I'd credit Viv for hooking & pulling fast bowlers without fear. Infact i have already stated this. But this is just one aspect of domination. Is hitting the bowler over mid on not as damaging to the bowler's confidence ? How about reverse sweeping the "Bradman of bowlers" when he lands the ball a foot outside the leg stump with a packed leg side field ? Or flaying the most freakish spin combo (at Galle) for a double hundred scoring 60% of the team total ? How about doing all this as an opener ? How many times has Viv faced the new ball ? Fortunately for him, he had an all time great opening combo working out the bowlers before he came in.

I dont buy into that whole "All fours are the same". Personally the best sight for a cricketing lover is that of a fast bowler charging in and the batsman hooking him for a six. Now put Lillee or Imran as a bowler and Richards as the batsman and that is very different from reverse sweeping Murali for 6. As for Richards opening, well he did when he was required to and did a decent job of it. Shwetabh has hinted at Richards going to pschycologist, it was about the same time. So that should answer that question.

I have read Viv himself admitting that he was not that good against quality spin. I myself have seen him humbled by the likes of Hirwani. Regardless, *none* of the spinners you mention are in the same league as Warne & Murali.

Lets not get caught up with Hirwani game simply because it would mean having a go at India for preparing a sub-standard pitch. The fact is Richards did start his career against mighty Indian spinners and did a fine job. So that should answer the quality question. As for Murali and Warne almost all Indian batsmen have been successful against them, its just not Sehwag so what does it prove/disprove??

Sehwag does not have variety ? How about reverse sweep, lofted drives, upper cut, traditional off drives, on drives, cut, hitting spinners over the top etc ? Is that not variety enough ? Sehwag does play the odd pull shot, but he knows his limitations. I didnt see Viv play the reverse sweep or upper cut. I'd argue that modern day spinners would tie him up packing the leg side & bowling a foot outside the leg ? Does that make Viv pedestrian ?

Then you have not watched Richards I am afraid. All these inside-out strokes, upper cuts etc were used by Richards quite often, if not started by him. Reverse sweep is a fairly recent phenomenon so not sure why it would go against RIchards. I mean no player played that stroke, and most experts till very recently argued against it. heck Mike Gatting lost his captaincy for playing that stroke.

Dominance, to me, is about imposing your presence on the field. Its about inducing the fear of god in the bowlers. You do that by hitting the bowlers to the furthest parts of the ground anyway possible. I think Sehwag has done that. Hook or Crook!

If thats your barometer Richards would instill fear even without facing a ball. His gait to the middle was enough.

We arent talking ODIs. How do you justify statistically that Razzak is better than Imran in Tests ?

I was hinting at ODI. Imran had 1 5 wicket haul(Kapil had 1 too) in his entire LOI career, Razzak has 3 with 8 4 wicket hauls to boot even though he will rarely hold a candle to Imran. Even his batting would not be too far off from Imran statistically. My hint was how these days even ordinary players have performances to prove they are better, or atleast as good, than yesteryear greats. This does not include Sehwag of course. xxx

[patriot]

No offense but this is exactly the kind of trend that has effectively killed the beauty of cricket - the tendency to judge player by numbers. Put it this way, you check those same bowlers from Australia and Pakistan - Lillee, Thommo, Imran, Qadir and they will ALL unanimously vouch for Richards being the best batsman they bowled to. Sunny would be a close second but he was hardly the dominant batsman, which is in question here. I have read Lillee and Imran's autobiography and they put the man far ahead of any contemprory batsmen. Lillee in fact did not even pick Sunny as a great batsman(he picked Vishwanath) although a case can be made Lillee was miffed at Sunny for walking out.

I totally agree - peer evaluation counts as much as raw numbers - but you can't ignore the latter. Saqlain Mushtaq even today would say that he is more fearful of SRT than Sehwag purely because of the formers aura and Viv had that in bundles . Fact of the matter is that Sehwag dealt with Saqlain like schoolboy bowler. I have no fricking doubt that had Sehwag been steadied into our team earlier - that Chennai 99 test would have had a different result and Saqlain as great as he is would not have had the kind of success he had that series. I have not seen a single spinner even come close to getting the measure of Sehwag. Just re-read Sambit's piece on how both of them dealt with Ashley Giles negative lineon that 2002 tour to India - and what was the end result. Sachin's backers have this perception that he waged a high pressure battle in a one man team - Sehwag simply smokes the opposition so ruthlessly - that the question of pressure doen't even arise. Sehwag's true worth as someone else metioned would be realised only when he hangs his boots. What he has achieved as an opener is outrageous.

Not sure how much of that is true. For starters this would have to be a Test only comparison since Veeru's performance in LOI is nothing great at this time. The apt comparison, I think, is restricted only for Test matches and again I find it very hard to do that comparison since Richards played in an era where Test matches were religion and LOI was pajama cricket, every player gave Test cricket its best shot. To battle against top players who played with that passion is something I find amiss these days.

Only you would have the answers to your doubts. For starters..Sambit's article (OP) clearly mentions how Sehwag's strike rate @81..is many moons above his closest "aggressive" batting peers. xxx

[Lurker]

Richards played one good innings in the entire series in India - how is that firing? By the time he faced them next in WI, they were all in decline. Yeah, if you read my entire post you will also agree - Imran, Kapil, Botham were nothing but accurate medium pacers in their last 2-4 seasons.

All that can be answered by the fact that Richards played 10 of his first 17 Tests against India, including spin quartret, and scored at 70 almost. That is damn good returns against spin quartrets, all of whom played for atleast another 3-4 years, and in case of Venkat another 8-10 years. xxx

[The Outsider]

All that can be answered by the fact that Richards played 10 of his first 17 Tests against India, including spin quartret, and scored at 70 almost. That is damn good returns against spin quartrets, all of whom played for atleast another 3-4 years, and in case of Venkat another 8-10 years. xxx

If you think the spin quartet were near their peak in the '76 series in WI, I guess just agree to disagree and move on. And Venkat was never in the same league as the others anyway. And they were all inferior to Warne and Murali anyways, except Chandra on his good days. Edit : There are several of us here who have followed Richards' career as was possible in those days and would not fall into the jingoistic bias trap, but the fact that all are in unison over the sheer amount of runs at the rate Sehwag scores pales Richards says there is more than an element of truth to it.

[Lurker]

If you think the spin quartet were near their peak in the '76 series in WI' date=' I guess just agree to disagree and move on. And Venkat was never in the same league as the others anyway. And they were all inferior to Warne and Murali anyways, except Chandra on his good days.[/quote'] I am not sure why comparison are being made of spin quartret vis a vis Murali and Warne. Every Indian batsmen I know have great averages against Warne and Murali. How does that strengthen Sehwag's case? And how does it weaken Richards case when he scored against quartret. An apt comparison would be if Sehwag scored at 70 against the top pace bowling of his time at home and abroad in his first 10 tests. Not sure that ever happened.

[vvvslaxman]

I am not sure why comparison are being made of spin quartret vis a vis Murali and Warne. Every Indian batsmen I know have great averages against Warne and Murali. How does that strengthen Sehwag's case? And how does it weaken Richards case when he scored against quartret. An apt comparison would be if Sehwag scored at 70 against the top pace bowling of his time at home and abroad in his first 10 tests. Not sure that ever happened.

You guys are dwelling on mere accumulation of runs . It is about domination, destruction, demolition job they are capable. What you guys are doing is about more ilke Tendulkar vs Lara, Tendulkar vs Ponting, Tendulkar vs Richards. Same old crap overseas avge, underseas average. Who wreaks havoc when they get going. Both. Sehwag can do it for longer period. For christake.. scoring double centuries at a strike rate over 100 is very very very difficult in any era let alone Bradman era, Sobers era, Richards era. He has done it multiple times. I have seen Richards live in so many matches. Take it from me . Richards did have competitios like Kapil dev who was even more destructive on many occasions. At times even Srikkanth was destructive. From our era only Gilly and Sehwag are the one who are capable of uninihibited stroke play regardless of the situation.