Jump to content

Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards?

ravishingravi

By ravishingravi
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

ananthd Newbie

ananthd

Posted
Posted
I have no idea what you are trying to say here by saying SRTs ODI stats are otherworldy and then try to devalue them using Mahelas Test Stats when it appears that you are trying to comment about SRT in Tests ... that makes no sense because Mahela's ODI stats are ordinary.
I used Mahela, since he's one of very many batters who doesn't look like he'd have averaged 50 in Tests pre-2K. I used it and the Test double hundred numbers to illustrate the general flattening of the game & batter friendly course it has become. I used it say that the 'otherworldy/godly' stats of Tendulkar may not have held up in less batter friendly conditions of earlier times.
And if Viv Separated himself from the pack in ODIs what makes you think that anyone is even remotely close to SRT in ODIs ? I mean he has more than Twice as many runs as Viv just as an opener and before you bring in the "ohhh but Viv played very few ODIs wonly argument" look at Viv's List-A stats ... Tendulkar has gone waay past that in far lesser games and that too in just International games. As is Tendulkar or infact so many modern batsmen. It means nothing.
Did I ever say, Viv's stats are better than Tendulkars? I'd prefer a Richards to a Tendulkar in my ODI side(both at respective peaks) that's it. That's just a subjective thing. I just feel The King was a better big match and more intimidating player. Obviously there are few records that Tendulkar doesn't posses. But Viv did average 47@90 in ODIs the 70s & 80s when 40@60 was considered excellent. He was an outlier of his time. To me only Sehwag & Kapil matched Viv for the sheer violence with which he played and that's more important TO ME. It also doesn't hurt that he was instrumental in the 75 & 79 WC wins and averaged near 60 in the Packer sabbatical. Tendulkar for all his genius can't say he outdistanced his peers by that much; he certainly is the best of his time, but a guy like Ricky Ponting could make a case(not the Ponting Post 07) during a significant phase of his career. It's the same thing with Bradman; Bradman's opposition might have been *****y(this cannot be verified, since none of us see it other lossy video); but why didn't excellent players like Hutton, Hammond etc average in the 70s then? Did Bradman drug the bowlers & fielders somehow to donate runs to him?
I cant believe people are really peddling this Horse manure as though it is some serious argument or a theory. I cant be bothered to list the no.of holes I have drilled into this nonsense but here is another one : Sunny Gavaskar who you have mentioned here actually bowed down to Tendulkar on live TV awestruck by that surreal Double hundred in a ODI vs SAF. I hope you realize the significance of this event considering how SMG is a father figure/Mentor/Idol for Tendulkar and that elder statesmen dont do this to people so significantly younger in age in Indian tradition. The reason for SMG's awe is not hard to figure out. It took SMG considerable effort to just notch up his first and only one day hundred. It is not easy at all to adapt to both forms of the game and dominate like Tendulkar has. FFS he just owned all the johnny come lately's in our team when he ended up outscoring them by a considerable margin in the Worldcup ( infact The only one who escaped was Dilshan ) But still lets look at the records of all those Great cricketers you are talking about in your post. Tendulkar will go past the combined Test runs of SMG and Neil Harvey ( roughly 16,300 runs ) in a year or so. Infact I wont be surprised if he gets close to SMG + Sobers tally of 18K test runs. In other words no Player has gone on to surpass combined run tallies of past two greats in this "chain" that you are trying to construct. once you realize how earth shattering and mammoth that achievement is and you will understand why there is no need to be shy about saying that Tendulkar is the very best that there EVER was.
I'm not sure why you're even trying to argue that Tendulkar's stats are great or that he's one of the greatest. I'm not disputing anything at all. All I meant by the Harvey-Sobers-Sunny-SRT chain was to counter the fact that all of Don's adversaries/contemporaries were pie chuckers. If Harvey was bred on pie-chucking he surely should have struggled against crazies such as Frank Tyson or Charlie Griffith?(I don't have the numbers don't shoot me). If Sobers was a minnow-king he surely wouldn't have carted Lillee & co for 254? Same goes for guys like Pollock & Barry Richards who played excellent in their limited opportunities. My point: a guy like Bradman has NEVER happened EVER in any sport and that needs to be respected. What he did statistically is still unfathomable. I'm NOT claiming that Bradman is the greatest. What he did is unthinkable. Nor am I saying SRT is the greatest of all time. I think the whole GOAT business is flawed, since you cannot travel back & forth in time and have a level playing field. As for the Viv vs SRT ODI debate, it's not all about the numbers; It's personal choice and I prefer IVAR over SRT.
Link to comment
ananthd Newbie

ananthd

Posted
Posted

In a similar vein: there are a lot of arguments for Roger Federer as the GOAT in tennis. Roger's got 16 slams, 23-straight slam semis etc. But how can anyone unequivocally say how he'd have done against someone like Laver or Borg? It's a losing and highly fantastic expedition, IMHO, comparing players across eras.

Link to comment
phaedrus Newbie

phaedrus

Posted
Posted
It's a losing and highly fantastic expedition, IMHO, comparing players across eras.
Totally agree with this one. The reason this is a futile exercise is because there are so many assumptions involved. One of my biggest grips with this whole process is that are you assuming a player of the modern era, with all its advancements of technologies and such is transported to the past and hence plays players of that era or vice versa ? or are you assuming that this person is born in that era and all things being equal grows through the same process and comes up against the same bowling and then the comparisons are made. in either case, its just assuming, that a would be better than b. most of us who have seen cricket for a reasonably long period realise that stats do not tell the whole story and one has to witness a game live to get the whole picture. to feel the pressure, the atmosphere makes the whole difference. i wouldnt be able to appreciate players of a certain era to the fullest just because i havent been able to see them in full flow, no matter how much i read up on them. i can assume (and it might be resonably accurate)but still its all based on second hand accounts. I have been fortunate enough to watch sachin play and he is the best player ive ever seen. doesnt count for much but then again, its not my fault i wasnt born earlier :--D
Link to comment
pensionplan Newbie

pensionplan

Posted
Posted

And by the way since it has become a norm here to mix up ODI's and Tests with the word "International" attached to it in the name of showing which ever player one would prefer as good and make their point without realizing the folly in that sort of an exercise. In the similar lines I too was curious and wanted to see and make a like for like comparison which would be combining the 3 or 4 day games and Tests which are pretty much the same format unlike Tests and ODI's that are as distinctly different as chalk and cheese. So if we use that basis and look at the records of SRT and Viv in FC cricket here is what we have. SRT - 23585 Runs and 78 Centuries Viv - 36212 Runs and 114 Centuries So SRT at this point is trailing Viv by about 13000 runs and 36 Centuries. I seriously doubt if SRT can catch up with Viv in the total number of runs and Centuries. However as a hardcore SRT fan I would want to see him bridge that gap and come as close to Viv as possible.

Link to comment
ananthd Newbie

ananthd

Posted
Posted
So the reason why the same guy has crap record in ODIs is what ?
Because he's an inferior batter without 2-3 top gears.
This is just YOUR opinion . Nothing more . It is just utterly sad that ardent cricket fans STILL try to peddle this horse sh!t about tendulkar not being a Big match player. WTF does that mean when just 3 months ago he spanked 400+ Runs in a Worldcup for the 3rd time ?
If some disagrees with you it's horse sh!t? Tendulkar has an excellent record against Australia & in many finals. Yet I'll pick Richards since I liked his batting better. Everything doesn't have to be about stats. I'll pick Sunil Gavaskar over every other Test batter as the first selection of my Test team. Is SMG the greatest stats wise? No. But I've seen him bat and I've seen many others including SRT bat(on TV) and I've seen Viv bat live. My choice for Gavaskar as a Test player is based on many reasons, not just stats. If the fact that bozos like Mahela average more than Gavaskar is not a damning indictment of post 2K cricket, I don't know what is.
It is one thing to have an opinion but quite another to back it up by facts (Iam almost certain that you never saw him bat live in a match ) ... because that average of 47 is a result of plenty of Not Outs and having played in 55 and 60 over ODIs where he had lot more overs to play.
I watched the 83 Test in Chennai(when Sunny made the double hundred coming in at 4). Richards made 30 odd, in typical fashion before snicking to keeper. On on the 55/60 over thing: then what were the other nincompoops doing, tortoising along and not taking advantage fo the 30/60 extra balls?
And he scored a grand sum of 38 runs in the entire 1975 Worldcup and never managed to score 400+ in a WC. If you measure Violence by Strike Rates ... Sehwag most certainly owns Richards. If you go by the ability to hit boundaries then Tendulkars Boundary % is higher than Richards. You just dont realize this because he doesnt have that Big badass "yo dude look Iam here and Iam the badass and I chew furiously and Iam here to beat the hell out of you " sorta presence.
Didn't I mention Sehwag & Kapil in Richards ball park? Didn't Richards play 10-15 years before Sehwag, before power-plays field restrictions, 2-bouncer limit etc? How many of Richard's contemporaries even had a 70 SR? Did Viv play in the era where 300-400 scores are routine? This comparsion is simply specious. Again the point is not would I prefer Sehwag or Viv? The OP's question was Viv v SRT and I picked Viv for ODIs.
feel free to point me to this "significant" phase where Tendulkar was matched by Ponting in ODIs.
99-07. This 8 year patch arguably Ponting's purple patch, is very much a wash between the two.
How many times are you going to keep repeating this DGB >>> Peers theory and how many more times does this have to answered ?
You've not answered this. You're merely stating that DGB bashed up minnows. Why didn't the rest of them do similar bashing? Why did he average more than 4 sigma's off the average cricketer?
Could you tell me how this translates into DGB > SRT when SRT never had the same luxury of facing pie chuckers in every single test match he plays ?
Where did I say DGB > SRT? I didn't call DGB the GOAT. I'm saying the GOAT is a myth, since the last initial TIME changes everything.
Perhaps this is your own imagination ? If you think that Bradmans companions were worldclass in their own right having beaten up such bowlers like the one below then Iam afraid that you are pretty lenient in trying to accomodate these oldies. Bill Bowes Bowling to Bradman @ 2:13 http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=61609 Everything about that guy screams trundler and yet this guy has a FC career that is better than Malcolm Marshalls ... Iam sorry but I cant accept that sort of bowling as evidence of Bradman or his peers abilities. You can continue to believe that the Black and white footage is actually making a very mean lethal and Marshallesque bowler look like a innocous trundler.
That's all fine. He was what he was. Bowes was pie-chucker. Please give me the answer to this question: how come noone else managed to kill these pie-chuckers so much? How come only one guy was able to average 100 and the rest less than 60? Was there some kind of giant conspiracy?
It was to highlight the biggest flaw in this chain business where you have conveniently placed SMG in the same brack as Tendulkar when the gap between them is more like a crater. In ODIs this crater is actually bottomless. SMG himself acknowledges that. In other words you were being simply dishonest.
As I've mentioned before, the chain business is just to show that all bowlers/players may not have been so bad as make them out to be in the Don's time. My point was Sachin debuted under SMG's contempories and SMG played with Sobers who played with Harvey who played with DGB. If DGB's technique & time was so ancient, I find it hard to believe a guy like Harvey transcended pretty well into the middle age of cricket.
Who told you Tyson and Griffith were "crazies" ?
No one. I just assumed since they were not immune to hitting batters in the head.
Why are you soo eager to buy such embellished statements at face value as long as it is the older players ?
Who said I did? Why can't make a judgement for myself?
Why don't you likewise accord the same courtesy to Tendulkar when infact all members of this "chain" have openly endorsed Tendulkar ? Perhaps because there is no cure for self loathing ? Those who nit pick on Tendulkars achievements by going to extraordinary lengths remind me of people who go to a restaurant and always whine that they should have ordered what the other guy was eating even though you have the most expensive and popular dish on the menu.
I'm not sure who's nitpicking here. I've picked Sachin over Viv in Tests. For ODIs my personal choice is Viv.
It is not that unthinkable ... as I said beating up minnows is nothing new.
Except that no-one else was able to administer such a beating.
Why is SRT having out scored his nearest contemporary by a significant amount of runs and centuries any lesser achievement given that it happened in a ERA when the very best of fast + spin bowlers were around ?
How do you know this?(i.e the bowlers that SRT faced were the best). Have you seen other bowlers(before SRT's era?). And if the is very best of fast + spin bowlers then how come so many Test batters are averaging in the 50s? Why are ODI scores so much higher? Why are ODI SRs so much higher?
You need to back that up with some solid facts and not by making proclamations. And invariably when challenged you will resort to the : "But ohh its my choice and I will not let the facts and figures get in my way". Well I suggest you not try to sell YOUR choice as fact especially when IVAR himself has gone on and said that SRT is the best batsman he has seen and that if there was someone better he hasnt played yet.
I'm not sure what your position is on stats. I said Viv was my personal choice. You seem to refute it with stats. Yet similar statistical advantage of someone like DGB is pooh-poohed because of your personal stance. And I still don't have the answer to the question, why no one has been able to dominate his peers the way Bradman did other than the reprieve "Bradman was a lollypop hitter". Once again, I think this Greatest Of All Time business is strictly flawed & pointless. All these guys were great players and should be revered as such.
Link to comment
rkt.india Grand Master

rkt.india

Posted
Posted
Who told you Tyson and Griffith were "crazies" ? Why are you soo eager to buy such embellished statements at face value as long as it is the older players ? Why don't you likewise accord the same courtesy to Tendulkar when infact all members of this "chain" have openly endorsed Tendulkar ? Perhaps because there is no cure for self loathing ? Those who nit pick on Tendulkars achievements by going to extraordinary lengths remind me of people who go to a restaurant and always whine that they should have ordered what the other guy was eating even though you have the most expensive and popular dish on the menu.
In the pre-match Straight drive show of Ten Cricket, yesterday or day before yesterday, Tony Greig talked about Jeff Thomson and Frank Tyson and put them in the same bracket of 150K plus. I am sure Thomson was fast which is evident in videos available and Tony Grieg Must have seen Tyson to put him along with Jeff Thomson as one of the fastest bowler ever.
Link to comment
The Outsider Newbie

The Outsider

Posted
Posted
In the pre-match Straight drive show of Ten Cricket' date=' yesterday or day before yesterday, Tony Greig talked about Jeff Thomson and Frank Tyson and put them in the same bracket of 150K plus. I am sure Thomson was fast which is evident in videos available and Tony Grieg Must have seen Tyson to put him along with Jeff Thomson as one of the fastest bowler ever.[/quote'] Everyone was and is a liar dude - some guy doing stop and start on antiquated videos knows more than everyone across multiple generations. :hysterical:
Link to comment
The Outsider Newbie

The Outsider

Posted
Posted
What now morons are trusting loud mouth Tawny Greeg and the old farts who spewed millions of column inches rather than their own eyes ... no wonder all sorts of "chain" theories getting spouted :laugh:
Lindwall was bowling at 200 kmph based on your videos and methodology - enough said. And yeah, Sobers was a better bowler than batsman - world class trolling. B->
Link to comment
Crookbond Newbie

Crookbond

Posted
Posted
My point: a guy like Bradman has NEVER happened EVER in any sport and that needs to be respected. What he did statistically is still unfathomable. I'm NOT claiming that Bradman is the greatest. What he did is unthinkable. .
A certain Dhyan Chand in hockey can match up and probably defeat (by Bradman's own admission) Bradman's achievements. PS : Adding more variables in the discussion to spice the thread :yay:
Link to comment
The Outsider Newbie

The Outsider

Posted
Posted
You may not know this but once the original videos were downloaded and played in a accurate player the results were very consistent ... Cue : time for you to run away :laugh:
Yeah, playing the video in different players is going to increase it's frame rate and quality - don't show your posts to your kids. Everyone in the thread tried to explain that to you like akshay and holy, but you are on your own delusional trip. Carry on! :hysterical:
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...