Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards?

[Brainfade]

Yup statgurus cant work swagger. You just have take word of trundlers like imran' date=' bothan, hadlee etc. Damn those fools miss the finer things in the game. Maybe we could do a crash course for them on reverse statistical analysis.[/quote'] Here's my point, ravi: It was not Viv's swagger that made the bowlers shake in their boots. It was his ability to belt them out of the park no matter how well they bowled. SRT (and Sehwag) has that ability, too. And sans the swagger, it is just as effective; today's bowlers, I am sure dread having to bowl to those guys when they're on song just the same.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

Here's my point' date=' ravi: It was not Viv's swagger that made the bowlers shake in their boots. It was his ability to belt them out of the park no matter how well they bowled. SRT (and Sehwag) has that ability, too. And sans the swagger, it is just as effective; today's bowlers, I am sure dread having to bowl to those guys when they're on song just the same.[/quote'] My 2 cents: Sirji, having the ability and actually doing it are two different things. Please refer to the S/R of Sehwag and Tendulkar in tests .... I guess Boycott would have that ability too :winky:

[Brainfade]

My 2 cents: Sirji, having the ability and actually doing it are two different things. Please refer to the S/R of Sehwag and Tendulkar in tests .... I guess Boycott would have that ability too :winky:

Sehwag's SR = 81.91, sans swagger. SRT's and IVAR's, I am unable to find. Do enlighten. And, WADR, Boycott did not have the ability to belt the bowlers. Finally, you still don't get the point, so let me rephrase: It is possible to achieve greatness without swagger. Conversely, swagger is not a measure of greatness. Bowlers fear batsmen who thrash them, not ones with swagger. IVAR was feared due to his ability to thrash them, not because he had swagger.

[CSK Fan]

Swagger somehow sounds so gay. Next we will be rating batsmen on the basis of how 'manly' they looked on the pitch. Surely Richards' beard beats Sachin's hands down!!

[The Outsider]

'Swagger' specifically is not relevant, but confidence and body language is important something which Tendulkar, Richards all great players have had in ample measure and the very good players like Cullinan, Vengsarkar, Zaheer Abbas, Inzamam, Clarke had missing, so in tough situations they were more likely to crack despite having plenty of ability as batsmen. In fact, players like Waugh and Dravid have punched above their weight because of the tough as nails and over my dead body attitude.

[Brainfade]

'Swagger' specifically is not relevant, but confidence and body language is important something which Tendulkar, Richards all great players have had in ample measure and the very good players like Cullinan, Vengsarkar, Zaheer Abbas, Inzamam, Clarke had missing, so in tough situations they were more likely to crack despite having plenty of ability as batsmen. In fact, players like Waugh and Dravid have punched above their weight because of the tough as nails and over my dead body attitude.

Well-said. Thus, the argument that swagger was one of the reasons for IVAR's alleged superiority over SRT does not hold water.

[Lurker]

Swagger somehow sounds so gay. Next we will be rating batsmen on the basis of how 'manly' they looked on the pitch. Surely Richards' beard beats Sachin's hands down!!

Hardly true. Depends on the person I beleive but give me a Man's man as a cricketer. Someone who can sport a hairy chest with couple of buttons down, steaming down a batsman's throat only to see similar guy on the other end bulging biceps et all hooking non-chalantly. By the way that would be Richards hooking away Lillee. Dont give me a freaking modern day cricketer who when bounced would lift both his arms towards the umpire claiming a no-ball! xxx

[Lurker]

Lets play the game.... Pulling the chaddi of one of the world's "greatest" ever batsmen using Statsguru :woot:

Yo (b)Ro! You are my new hero. Thank you for picking the fight for Indian teenagers, and the budhaos with mentality of Indian teenagers. FTW!

he has even crapped against Aldermann and Diley.. no clue who these 2 were, must have had more swagger than Richards.

Bro, Dilley and Aldermann were schizzles in 80s bro. Ask Graham Gooch. Only a paanwaala or a cricket enthusiast listening to his tansistor in one hand and driving with other knew about them. But bro we are modern day greatest country. With the biggest GDP and a tournament (IPL) that is bigger than Olympic Games. Dont listen to haters who say otherwise. They will all line up outside the door of Sharad Pawar. Why should we have as much knowledge as a paanwaala?

Even then if u refer to the famous Statsguru software our esteemed Richards the greatest slayer of fast bowling since Bradman strangely averaged very poorly against the following bowlers.

Eggjactly bro. Statsguru was made for Indians, is operated by Indians and used by Indians. Thats all that counts. It is the most famous software known by Indians, and is on the most frequented website visited by Indians..Okay second after desibaba.com

Greatest batsman my arsse :hysterical:

But bro what about my arrsse Let me do the same to that other famous batsman of the era. Sunil Gavaskar pffft. Lets utilize our Chitragupta - Statsguru. JR Thomspon @ 18.66 RJ Hadlee @ 26 Dilley(Who the FRACK was he) @28 :hysterical::hysterical: Greatest Indian batsmen my ****. Now that we both have dismantled 1st and 2nd greatest batsmen of their era lets swing our mighty arses and watch the Stats masters sing "I like big butt and I can not lie" xxx

[Prakat]

:hysterical::hysterical: too funny!

[zen]

Sehwag's SR = 81.91, sans swagger. SRT's and IVAR's, I am unable to find. Do enlighten. And, WADR, Boycott did not have the ability to belt the bowlers. Finally, you still don't get the point, so let me rephrase: It is possible to achieve greatness without swagger. Conversely, swagger is not a measure of greatness. Bowlers fear batsmen who thrash them, not ones with swagger. IVAR was feared due to his ability to thrash them, not because he had swagger.

LINK That^ should give you a rough idea about that .... I am not sure if the data for pre-2000 is available, which is why I didn't ask you to look up IVAR's S/R I guess, it should be understood what is being disccused about Richards :winky:

[ravishingravi]

:hysterical::hysterical:

[ravishingravi]

Let me just make one serious post on what has gone down the usual mud slinging route. Lets be honest. We love Sachin as much if not more than any other celebrity. In fact the word celebrity demeans him. There is not man who has lived in sachin'era and not been effected by him in India. We have shed buckets of tears through the 90s when he fought like a lone warrior invariably on losing side. So,this now usual defensive reaction to anything that can even remotely threaten the bubble is perfectly understandable at some level. However, this thread was not supposed to be "bring on the stats" for viv v/s sachin and show who is greatest and who is mediocre. Although, it is quite interesting how sachin fanatics jump to stats on some occasions and deride stats on other occasion ( bradman ) , how opposition becomes world class all of a sudden or mediocre, how uncovered wickets suddenly become conducive to batting, how lack of protection becomes immaterial etc etc. I put it down to the love of fans. I am one of them, less blind though. Because of this inherently defensive mindset to compensate for which sothe fans conjure sone ridiculous arguments either to denigrate another great player or the poster. Onthe question of Swagger, on which most of these boys seemed to have jumped, read the post again. Did you notice anythng that suggested Viv is better because of swagger or Sachin is worse for lack of it. It was merely an admiration for this personality. Now unlike some boys who create models and do reverse stastical analysis, I, after a certain point go merely by my cricketing understanding. If a Jacques Kallis today averages more than Sachin it ipso facto doesnt make him a better player than sachin in my eyes. For me there can be no eternally greatest player ever. After a certain you enter into the greatest league which is where likes of Viv and Sachin belong. Now, if you choose one over the other as your preference or as the best you have seen, it is hardly denigrating to the other one unless you are a rabid fanboy which most of you are lets face it.

[Brainfade]

Onthe question of Swagger, on which most of these boys seemed to have jumped, read the post again. Did you notice anythng that suggested Viv is better because of swagger or Sachin is worse for lack of it. It was merely an admiration for this personality.

Given my penchant for being nit-picky, it was easy to interpret the first paragraph of your original post as a list of reasons you rate IVAR above SRT: (a) the eye, (b) the ability to play a variety of strokes off the front foot, and © swagger. Of those, (a) and (b) are good, strong arguments. © is not. And I jumped on it. And thanks for the "boy" reference. However condescending it was meant to be, it was music to my years ... at my age, I am more used to being called "Kaka" or "Uncle."

[maniac]

I will stick with a cliche while giving my opinion because This is a fact Viv had people like Lloyd,Haynes,Greenidge,Richardson,Kalicharan etc in his team.He could afford that extra swagger as he played in one of the greatest teams of all time.This is not taking away anything from his special status in cricket folklore though.SRT played with a similar flair and agression with a mediocre side in the 90's. He was a one man army and even to this day with a better team at times he is. Comparison should be between Sehwag and Richards or Gilchrist and Richards when playing with swagger is brought up. I would compare Viv with Ponting in terms of skill and ability. SRT is definetely winning this battle.

[zen]

I will stick with a cliche while giving my opinion because This is a fact Viv had people like Lloyd,Haynes,Greenidge,Richardson,Kalicharan etc in his team.He could afford that extra swagger as he played in one of the greatest teams of all time.This is not taking away anything from his special status in cricket folklore though.SRT played with a similar flair and agression with a mediocre side in the 90's. He was a one man army and even to this day with a better team at times he is. Comparison should be between Sehwag and Richards or Gilchrist and Richards when playing with swagger is brought up. I would compare Viv with Ponting in terms of skill and ability. SRT is definetely winning this battle.

When playing in India, the side in the 90s was pretty good. We hardly lost tests in India. On top of that there were phenominal performances by the likes of Kambli ( 2 or 3 back to back double 100s) and Azhar. Sidhu was a consistent performer. Mangrekar was not bad. Then Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman came in. How was he an one-man army? PS LINK .... there are 9 batsmen averaging over 40

[maniac]

Going by your query Gagan Khoda and Vijay Bharadwaj make it into the Top 10 as well in ODI's.May be Sachin was not the greatest ODI player afterall Let me recap the 90's for you rett-Manjrekar was on a decline after after 92 Aus tour,Kambli had one season of promise that's it, Kumble was ineffective outside the subcontinent, Kapil Dev retired,Shastri and Srikkanth phased out, Ajay Jadeja was inconsistent. Amre and Ramesh...Seriously??? I am not even going to mention the mediocre talent we tried during this period.I am only talking about our main players in the 90's Azhar was the only other potential match winner but the word their was potential. Dravid was a useless one day player IN THE 90'S. Ganguly's peak as a ODI player was in the early 2000's and late 90's Our bowling attack was mediocre. Laxman was not a regular member of the team. How many games has Sidhu's constitency won? Now tell me who was the guy 'consistently' winning matches for us with little support.I put that word in quote because it was more often than not a Sachin innings at the top that sealed a game in our favour. Compare the best 90's Indian team to the 70's and 80's WI team and that will give us the answer why Sachin is better

[akshayxyz]

When playing in India, the side in the 90s was pretty good. We hardly lost tests in India. On top of that there were phenominal performances by the likes of Kambli ( 2 or 3 back to back double 100s) and Azhar. Sidhu was a consistent performer. Mangrekar was not bad. Then Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman came in. How was he an one-man army? PS LINK .... there are 9 batsmen averaging over 40

Did you see any matches in 90s?? were you unborn or trolling some cave animals!!

[zen]

Going by your query Gagan Khoda and Vijay Bharadwaj make it into the Top 10 as well in ODI's.May be Sachin was not the greatest ODI player afterall Let me recap the 90's for you rett-Manjrekar was on a decline after after 92 Aus tour,Kambli had one season of promise that's it, Kumble was ineffective outside the subcontinent, Kapil Dev retired,Shastri and Srikkanth phased out, Ajay Jadeja was inconsistent. Amre and Ramesh...Seriously??? I am not even going to mention the mediocre talent we tried during this period.I am only talking about our main players in the 90's Azhar was the only other potential match winner but the word their was potential. Dravid was a useless one day player IN THE 90'S. Ganguly's peak as a ODI player was in the early 2000's and late 90's Our bowling attack was mediocre. Laxman was not a regular member of the team. How many games has Sidhu's constitency won? Now tell me who was the guy 'consistently' winning matches for us with little support.I put that word in quote because it was more often than not a Sachin innings at the top that sealed a game in our favour. Compare the best 90's Indian team to the 70's and 80's WI team and that will give us the answer why Sachin is better

I gave the link to tests, not ODIs! In 90s, there were not too many batsmen who avg 50+. In fact only 6 batsmen avg 50 (rounded, min 2000 runs) or more and of that 3 were from India! LINK Going by your logic, Lara and Gooch would be one-man army too. So would be Steve Waugh. Ind wasn't weak in India. It was a poor traveler (which changed from 2000 onwards) In ODIs, we did pretty well too with Wadekar and Gaekwad as coaches. In 1993, we won the hero cup, 1994, we won the singer cup in SL In ODIs: 1990-1994 Sidhu and Azhar are the top batsmen in this period 1995-1999 In this period, Tendulkar definately was the key player but Ganguly was doing well too. Later part, Dravid started doing well too. Remember the 1999 WC where Ganguly-Dravid smashed SL? What you are refering to is probably some 1-2 years period probably around that Sharjah cup. That doesn't qualify as whole 90s :winky: In the 2000s, he was playing with the strongest batting side in the world so things more than evened out. Now ofc, the world #1 test team and ODI world champs I don't know what you are trying to say by compare 70s-80s WI team with 90s team of Ind. Have you realized that someone can argue that if Sachin played for such a side, he may not avg as much as he is now? There is no way those sides would allow Sachin to take 20 singles to get to his 100 in a game (It was Tendulkar who showed such a thing could be done. I don't recall anyone taking singles to get to his 100 once you get to 80 before that) .... And if Viv had played for a weaker batting side, who knows he would have averaged even more with added responsibility .... There are pros and cons of either case :P

[Lurker]

He was a one man army and even to this day with a better team at times he is.

There is a nauseating sense of hyperbole in that statement spoken many a times by Sachin bhakts. Kapil was a one-man band that operated. Richard Hadlee was a one-man band that operated. Even Srinath and Zaheer could be considered one-man army but perhaps for a few years at best. Sachin a one-man band?? He always had a support cast. Heck when he started he was simply a blue eyed boy, it was Azhar who was the toast of the nation and the lead batsman way into early to mid 90s. xxx