Sehwag more destructive than Richards

[Karan114]

^^ Interesting, but you have to give the number of matches played in each decade to give those numbers more context.

[Lurker]

I have seen Demel in one dayers against cheeka. He just murdered him. Richards himself murdered him in the world cup. He is a crap bowler. Don't go by stats. I have seen that guy. Rumesh Ratnayake big chucker. You are saying this is flat pitch era. Look at Steyn's average and strike rate in flat pitch era. Does that make him better than any bowler in the 80s?

Phir wahi baat? Where did Cheeka murdered De Mel? As for richards well he murdered everyone and that is the reason why we are comparing him with Sehwag here. Are you telling me you seriously think De Mel was a worse bowler than Welgedera and Kulashekhra? What is the reason for such misplaced confidence??

[vvvslaxman]

Phir wahi baat? Where did Cheeka murdered De Mel? As for richards well he murdered everyone and that is the reason why we are comparing him with Sehwag here. Are you telling me you seriously think De Mel was a worse bowler than Welgedera and Kulashekhra? What is the reason for such misplaced confidence??

Ofcourse. Demel.was one of the worst bowler of the 80s .

[varun]

^^ Interesting' date=' but you have to give the number of matches played in each decade to give those numbers more context.[/quote'] Hmm.. interestingly, the average total runs scored by batsmen per match is not the highest in this decade:

+-----------+--------+---------+--------+
| Decade    | Runs   | Matches | Avg    |
+-----------+--------+---------+--------+
| 1870-1879 |   1837 |       3 | 612.33 | 
| 1880-1889 |  17618 |      29 | 607.52 | 
| 1890-1899 |  26149 |      33 | 792.39 | 
| 1900-1909 |  33133 |      41 | 808.12 | 
| 1910-1919 |  24591 |      29 | 847.97 | 
| 1920-1929 |  48620 |      51 | 953.33 | 
| 1930-1939 |  81544 |      90 | 906.04 | 
| 1940-1949 |  44926 |      45 | 998.36 | 
| 1950-1959 | 137508 |     164 | 838.46 | 
| 1960-1969 | 178064 |     186 | 957.33 | 
| 1970-1979 | 188130 |     199 | 945.38 | 
| 1980-1989 | 235573 |     267 | 882.30 | 
| 1990-1999 | 311162 |     349 | 891.58 | 
| 2000-2009 | 451921 |     460 | 982.44 | 
+-----------+--------+---------+--------+

[Karan114]

^^ Nice figures Varun - the one I find most surprising is 945 in the 70's. Huge jump between the 90's and this decade though

[Gambit]

Some more comments from incensed Viv fanatics -

Have you ever bore witness to the breathless anticipation as the crowd as one peers towards the pavilion to be the first one to glimpse the first sighting of Viv? Have you ever heard the sharp collective intake of breath as shoulder rolling he comes bounding down the pavilion stairs? Have you been there to see him as he manacingly swings his SS Jumbo, eyes narrowed furiously chewing on his gum? Have you seen the way he surveys the field as he looks down his hawklike nose at his already cowering opposition, burgundy WI cap jauntily perched on his afro just so, like some haughty Roman emperor about to lay waste to some poor city? Have you seen Viv thump with awesome power, the perfectly bowled ball as far as line length and pace are concerned into the midwicket stands; perfect only in that it was bowled to Viv? If you can answer yes and still say Viru is better, then, surely you have deluded yourself....

Another stat - 12 of Sehwag's 17 tons were scored on pitches flatter than the local rotis in India (9), Pakistan (2) and SL (1). Viv only scored 4 of his 24 tons in the subcontinent. The rest were on bouncy pitches in OZ and the Caribbean or seaming tracks in England.

BTW Outsider,observer vvvs and Lurker - given you guys have seen both batsmen, you might bicker on who's more destructive but what's your view on who's the better batsman? Is it Sehwag or Richards?

[vvvslaxman]

BTW Outsider,observer vvvs and Lurker - given you guys have seen both batsmen, you might bicker on who's more destructive but what's your view on who's the better batsman? Is it Sehwag or Richards?

Who is better hmm 1) Defense - Sehwag to be fair to Richards he usually thrusts his frontfoot and pushes it gently. That is his defense. 2) Off side play - Sehwag 3) On side play - Viv 4) Spin - Sehwag 5) Pace - Viv 6) Power - Viv 7) Timing - Equal 8) Wekaness - Sehwag - ball seaming in, Richards - Playing across the line too much 9) Ability on difficult wickets - Sehwag 10) Stage presence - Richards. (Sehwag is not far off) 11) Repertoire of strokes - Equal.. Richards famous shot is inside out over extra cover and with front foot pressed on drive Sehwag has array of innovative strokes

[S.Bond]

Who is better hmm 1) Defense - Sehwag to be fair to Richards he usually thrusts his frontfoot and pushes it gently. That is his defense. 2) Off side play - Sehwag 3) On side play - Viv 4) Spin - Sehwag 5) Pace - Viv 6) Power - Viv 7) Timing - Equal 8) Wekaness - Sehwag - ball seaming in, Richards - Playing across the line too much 9) Ability on difficult wickets - Sehwag 10) Stage presence - Richards. (Sehwag is not far off) 11) Repertoire of strokes - Equal.. Richards famous shot is inside out over extra cover and with front foot pressed on drive Sehwag has array of innovative strokes

I am seriously asking u, who is the better batsman for you, sehwag or tendulkar? ther can also give their point of view...

[Andy]

I am seriously asking u, who is the better batsman for you, sehwag or tendulkar? ther can also give their point of view...

Offcourse Tendulkar

[S.Bond]

Offcourse Tendulkar

i completely agree, but if you take same stats that are triying to proove sehwag better than richards, you will find sehwag way better than tendulkar.... sehwag is battingin an era were batting is lby farmore easy, i already posed the numbers of batsmen averaging more than fifty in differentes decades.... How can you compare them??? In this decade only once, in 2005 sehwag was indian number one batsmen, alll the other 8 years he has not even been in the top indian batsmen if you look the averages, allawyas 3rd, 4th, 5th.... I think sehwag is very good, but not yet a great, and that is a very big mistake to start comparing sehwag with richard.... i already listedplayers with who sehwag should be compared.... and it's also sure that is not even better than them, kevin pietersen is a way superior batsman than sehwag....

[King Tendulkar]

and it's also sure that is not even better than them' date=' kevin pietersen is a way superior batsman than sehwag....[/quote'] Troll alert:nervous:

[Andy]

i completely agree, but if you take same stats that are triying to proove sehwag better than richards, you will find sehwag way better than tendulkar.... sehwag is battingin an era were batting is lby farmore easy, i already posed the numbers of batsmen averaging more than fifty in differentes decades.... How can you compare them??? In this decade only once, in 2005 sehwag was indian number one batsmen, alll the other 8 years he has not even been in the top indian batsmen if you look the averages, allawyas 3rd, 4th, 5th.... I think sehwag is very good, but not yet a great, and that is a very big mistake to start comparing sehwag with richard.... i already listedplayers with who sehwag should be compared.... and it's also sure that is not even better than them, kevin pietersen is a way superior batsman than sehwag....

Y cant u accept the fact?? The quality of batsmen have improved in this era!! Today the strike rates of batsmen have improved drastically. Just chck the number of balls batsmen face this days and the time u are talking abt.Its almost same!! The differance is dat, today's batsman score more frm equal number of deliveries dan they used to!! Now coming to Richards. Richards was itself playing for the number one team,he never had to face the best bowlers. During his time the 2nd best team was Australia. Richards aveg in Australia was 47.And against Australia overall was 44. During his time there was no quality spinner.But he struggled against Qadir and Hirwani. Leave alone the fact that he never faced Warne, Kumble and Murali. During Richards days a team like South Africa was banned. He never scoored against their bowlers. SL was a minnow team. Richard's avg against Pak was 42 both in pakistan and overall. For more stats abt Richards chk dis http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52812.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround Now coming to Sehwag, His average against the best team in the world is 51.His average in Australia is 60. His avg against pakistan is 91 both home and away. Sehwag has got a triplle century against the 2nd ranked team in the world that is SA. For more abt Sehwag chck dis http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35263.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround Richards have no tripple in his kit. Am not comparing Richards and Sehwag..But if u see...the diferance between dem. U'll see Richards hav played 50 matches more dan sehwag and have scored 2500 runs more. By the time Sehwag plays another 50 match even in his worst form he will surprass richards.

[S.Bond]

Y cant u accept the fact?? The quality of batsmen have improved in this era!! Today the strike rates of batsmen have improved drastically. Just chck the number of balls batsmen face this days and the time u are talking abt.Its almost same!! The differance is dat, today's batsman score more frm equal number of deliveries dan they used to!! Now coming to Richards. Richards was itself playing for the number one team,he never had to face the best bowlers. During his time the 2nd best team was Australia. Richards aveg in Australia was 47.And against Australia overall was 44. During his time there was no quality spinner.But he struggled against Qadir and Hirwani. Leave alone the fact that he never faced Warne, Kumble and Murali. During Richards days a team like South Africa was banned. He never scoored against their bowlers. SL was a minnow team. Richard's avg against Pak was 42 both in pakistan and overall. For more stats abt Richards chk dis http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52812.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround Now coming to Sehwag, His average against the best team in the world is 51.His average in Australia is 60. His avg against pakistan is 91 both home and away. Sehwag has got a triplle century against the 2nd ranked team in the world that is SA. For more abt Sehwag chck dis http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35263.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround Richards have no tripple in his kit. Am not comparing Richards and Sehwag..But if u see...the diferance between dem. U'll see Richards hav played 50 matches more dan sehwag and have scored 2500 runs more. By the time Sehwag plays another 50 match even in his worst form he will surprass richards.

ok so explain me y using this same stats u don't say that sehwag is better than tendulkar? he scores more runs pur innings, hasbetter average against, south afric,a pak, has 6 double hundreds in wich two are 300... tendulkar has three, agaisnt zim bangladesh.. and one draw agaisnt australia.

[DomainK]

ok so explain me y using this same stats u don't say that sehwag is better than tendulkar? he scores more runs pur innings, hasbetter average against, south afric,a pak, has 6 double hundreds in wich two are 300... tendulkar has three, agaisnt zim bangladesh.. and one draw agaisnt australia.

You are missing the point of the thread. It's a question of who is a more destructive batsman and not who is a better batsman.

[Andy]

ok so explain me y using this same stats u don't say that sehwag is better than tendulkar? he scores more runs pur innings, hasbetter average against, south afric,a pak, has 6 double hundreds in wich two are 300... tendulkar has three, agaisnt zim bangladesh.. and one draw agaisnt australia.

Chck the differance between the number of Runs they scored.Sehwag can never score 30k Runs in Cricket!!

[S.Bond]

You are missing the point of the thread. It's a question of who is a more destructive batsman and not who is a better batsman.

i amsorry but lot of u on cricinfo and even here all not talking about destructivness but better, and even n cricinfo the original title was : sehwag better than richards,samit then changed it.... ok so that's automatic, if viru is more destructive than richard, he is wayyy more destructive than sachin....

[S.Bond]

Chck the differance between the number of Runs they scored.Sehwag can never score 30k Runs in Cricket!!

i tought when u compare batsmen u just talkabout test cricket... and logevity is not enough for someone to be greater than the other, that's surely something important but not all... tendulkar can make even 15000 test runs, he can be never as good as brian lara.... Any doubt on that???

[DomainK]

i amsorry but lot of u on cricinfo and even here all not talking about destructivness but better, and even n cricinfo the original title was : sehwag better than richards,samit then changed it.... ok so that's automatic, if viru is more destructive than richard, he is wayyy more destructive than sachin....

"Better" is a superlative word. It's not a quality or characteristic by itself. So I can not see how you are objecting to it. The question is of quality, which is destructiveness as a batsman.

[Lord]

Who is better hmm 1) Defense - Sehwag to be fair to Richards he usually thrusts his frontfoot and pushes it gently. That is his defense. 2) Off side play - Sehwag 3) On side play - Viv 4) Spin - Sehwag 5) Pace - Viv 6) Power - Viv 7) Timing - Equal 8) Wekaness - Sehwag - ball seaming in, Richards - Playing across the line too much 9) Ability on difficult wickets - Sehwag 10) Stage presence - Richards. (Sehwag is not far off) 11) Repertoire of strokes - Equal.. Richards famous shot is inside out over extra cover and with front foot pressed on drive Sehwag has array of innovative strokes

thats a surprise:omg:

[vvvslaxman]

thats a surprise:omg:

Seen on a few matches against Qadir, Hadlee even Hirwani. He just blindly cowlashed everything without connecting much.