Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards?

[thongale]

Donald and McGrath definitely hold the edge over Tendulkar - you don't need mindless number crunching to demonstrate that if you watch and understand the game. Obviously' date=' it does not detract from what Tendulkar is because they were great bowlers in their own rights and for his part Tendulkar has held the edge over several other great bowlers.[/quote']Your own BS Chandrashekar had the edge over Viv.

[zen]

At their respective peaks, Richards would be more efective (runs+destruction+low morale for the opposition) In the decade from 1976 to 1985, Viv was amazing! Link vs SRT's top decade 1994-2003 Link (excluding BD and Zim) Overall, I would rate their ability to do well in all formats as similar so in the end you can't go terribly wrong by picking one over the other :nice: PS at their respective peaks for a decade Tests Viv 67 (99 inngs) Ten 74 (125 inngs) Avg Viv 57.63 (58) with 5 not outs Ten 55.34 (55) with 10 not outs 100s Viv 18 in 99 inngs (one in every 5.5 inng) Ten 22 in 125 inngs (one in every 5.7 inngs)

[Gambit]

I would side with Viv because of the stories I have heard about him being such a monster. However, having 4 fearsome fast bowlers and a monstrous opening partnership and solid middle order to aid you does help a lot. How would Viv have fared in a 90s Indian batting lineup or the one Lara played with post 2000(without Amby/Walsh) is anyone's guess.

[saneindian]

At their respective peaks, Richards would be more efective (runs+destruction+low morale for the opposition) In the decade from 1976 to 1985, Viv was amazing! Link vs SRT's top decade 1994-2003 Link (excluding BD and Zim) Overall, I would rate their ability to do well in all formats as similar so in the end you can't go terribly wrong by picking one over the other :nice: PS at their respective peaks for a decade Tests Viv 67 (99 inngs) Ten 74 (125 inngs) Avg Viv 57.63 (58) with 5 not outs Ten 55.34 (55) with 10 not outs 100s Viv 18 in 99 inngs (one in every 5.5 inng) Ten 22 in 125 inngs (one in every 5.7 inngs)

All you need is for Sachin's peak to be advanced by an year and voila what do we get? http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax2=31+dec+2002;spanmin2=01+jan+1993;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting 76 tests, 124 innings, 6790 runs@61, 24 100s Wonder why you wouldn't call this as Sachin'speak? Did those improved numbers play a part or what?

[saneindian]

or what about this 10 year period for Sachin, 1992-2001? http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax2=31+dec+2001;spanmin2=01+jan+1992;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting 68 tests, 111 innings, 6071 runs@61, 24 100s Comparable number of tests with Richards' peak.

[zen]

or what about this 10 year period for Sachin, 1992-2001? http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=7;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax2=31+dec+2001;spanmin2=01+jan+1992;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting 68 tests, 111 innings, 6071 runs@61, 24 100s Comparable number of tests with Richards' peak.

^ :facepalm: The problem with you is you think that a point or two in avg here or there is a deal breaker (obsession with numbers?) and as if a 'small' difference in avg when comparing players from different eras is literally going to show whom to pick (and when Viv is known to play at a higher SR and conduct risky business) :haha: .... If you had read (and importantly understood) my post, you would see that I rated them as equals despite Viv having a 3 point higher avg! With Viv being more effective because of obvious reasons (so even if he had a lesser avg by a few points, it doesn't mean much) But because Viv has a 3 points higher avg in the period shown ,you feel aggrevied (probably see it as some kind of a conspiracy against Sachin) and ignore what's being implied. You would go over to cricinfo looking for periods where SRT would have a higher avg because in your mind a few percent points literally changes the course (and ofc gnore what's implied in the post thorugh selective reading) Coming back to your question, I think 1994-2003 is the period when Sachin was at his peak. He had hit is first ODI 100 and started to look a more mature player. Those periods also co-incides with him being the highest run getter in 1996 and 2003 WCs. Before asking me the question, ask your own self if you would pick Sachin of 1993 vs 2003. IMO, he was really at his peak from 1996 onwards but didn't take the 1996-2005 period because deep down I know that no matter what stats suggest, he wasn't playing at his best in 2004 and 2005 and thus decided to use 2003 as the end of his decade where he was playing superbly. But you are free to play around with cricinfo (and expose the konspiracy) :icflove:

[b555]

^ :facepalm: The problem with you is you think that a point or two in avg here or there is a deal breaker (obsession with numbers?) and as if a 'small' difference in avg when comparing players from different eras is literally going to show whom to pick (and when Viv is known to play at a higher SR and risky game) :haha: .... If you had read (and importantly understood) my post, you would see that I rated them as equals despite Viv having a 3 point higher avg! But because Viv has a 3 points higher avg in the period shown ,you feel aggrevied (probably see it as some kind of a conspiracy against Sachin) and ignore what's being implied. You would go over to cricinfo looking for periods where SRT would have a higher avg because in your mind a few percent points literally changes the course (and ofc gnore what's implied in the post thorugh selective reading) Coming back to your question, I think 1994-2003 is the period when Sachin was at his peak. He had hit is first ODI 100 and started to look a more mature player. Those periods also co-incides with him being the highest run getter in 1996 and 2003 WCs. Before asking me the question, ask your own self if you would pick Sachin of 1993 vs 2003. IMO, he was really at his peak from 1996 onwards but didn't take the 1996-2005 period because deep down I know that no matter what stats suggest, he wasn't playing at his best in 2004 and 2005 and thus decided to use 2003 as the end of his decade where he was playing superbly. But you are free to play around with cricinfo (and expose the konspiracy) :icflove:

haha , i will surely get into the bottom of the konspiracy :D :D anyways good post yours, the previous one.. remove the stats i think the point is correct... anyway the way sachin has comeback after the 2007 debacle is something like wine getting better with age... so as u said , anwyay the 03-05 gap surely does come in a bit.. but he did well in the pakistani series on 04-05 too right? i dont currently remember much of the series in between leaving the aussie one where he did score only in the last test.. coming to odis, he has some great runs down under after the 2007 wc, can surely say hes been doing great almost coparable to his peak like he said in a press conference a week before, ' a 37 year old mind can do what a 17 yr old mine cannot'

[saneindian]

Awesome. So you point out the averages, you point out the not outs, you point out the innings per centuries and then you accuse me of nitpicking/playing around with cricinfo. As for the last line, you are the one giving all those links and all those numbers, I am just trying to show you what the correct numbers in it should be. And how wonderful of you to talk of ODIs and WCs when all you have done is focused on tests. Carry on.

[zen]

Awesome. So you point out the averages, you point out the not outs, you point out the innings per centuries and then you accuse me of nitpicking/playing around with cricinfo. As for the last line, you are the one giving all those links and all those numbers,I am just trying to show you what the correct numbers in it should be. And how wonderful of you to talk of ODIs and WCs when all you have done is focused on tests. Carry on.

Oh yeah, so you are showing what the correct number should be. mr almanac! :hysterical: ODIs and WCs are being mentioned to show that in the period SRT was at his peak. Unless ofc you think that a player like Sachin can be at his peak in one formt and not in the other But ofc, this is all a conspiracy: ODis being mentioned, tests stats being put, .... I want be surprised if the discussions here turn into something like this: A: Who says Mahatha Gandhi is great? He is not a great but is the greatest.

A: Who says Mahatha Gandhi is great? He is not a great but is the greatest.

Saneindian: So Mahatma Gandhi is not a great?

[b555]

rett ignored my message completely :((

[zen]

haha , i will surely get into the bottom of the konspiracy :D :D anyways good post yours, the previous one.. remove the stats i think the point is correct... anyway the way sachin has comeback after the 2007 debacle is something like wine getting better with age... so as u said , anwyay the 03-05 gap surely does come in a bit.. but he did well in the pakistani series on 04-05 too right? i dont currently remember much of the series in between leaving the aussie one where he did score only in the last test.. coming to odis, he has some great runs down under after the 2007 wc, can surely say hes been doing great almost coparable to his peak like he said in a press conference a week before, ' a 37 year old mind can do what a 17 yr old mine cannot'

I agree that Sachin had a two good years period after those lows He did well in that series and was helped by innings like 194*. I can't reall if he was at his peak though. But that doesn't change his avg much (goes down for 95-04 vs 94-03, iirc)

[akshayxyz]

yeah as this stat will tell http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=batting_average;qualmin1=100;qualval1=matches;template=results;type=batting

Interestingly, except for Gayle and SRT.. none of them in top 10 have 80+ SR and 40+ Avg. And Gayle (one of the most destructive/fearless/feared opener of modern batting friendly era) is about 7 points behind in avg, and 4 points behind in SR, in about 140 less innings

[audioman]

If Gayle played half his matches in Indian ODI conditions, he would probably average a lot more too. Especially given how ridiculous he makes batting seem in the IPL. And considering the last time he toured with WI to India when he hit 3 hundreds in a 7-match series.

[Ultimate_Game]

If Gayle played half his matches in Indian ODI conditions' date=' he would probably average a lot more too. Especially given how ridiculous he makes batting seem in the IPL. And considering the last time he toured with WI to India when he hit 3 hundreds in a 7-match series.[/quote'] Gayle was a beast in that series and he never looked like getting out WI surely wasted such a great talent as on a flat wkt he looks unstoppable

[zen]

If Gayle played half his matches in Indian ODI conditions' date=' he would probably average a lot more too. Especially given how ridiculous he makes batting seem in the IPL. And considering the last time he toured with WI to India when he hit 3 hundreds in a 7-match series.[/quote'] Thanks for bringing some perspective to the numbers Taking 'away' and 'neutra'l venues with 50 games or more: Link

[akshayxyz]

If Gayle played half his matches in Indian ODI conditions' date= he would probably average a lot more too. Especially given how ridiculous he makes batting seem in the IPL. And considering the last time he toured with WI to India when he hit 3 hundreds in a 7-match series.

as is the norm on ICF.. check his ODI avg against... excluding Canada, Kenya, Netherlands, Zimbabve, Bangladesh.

[India-KXIP fan]

[Sachinism]

If Gayle played half his matches in Indian ODI conditions' date=' he would probably average a lot more too. Especially given how ridiculous he makes batting seem in the IPL. And considering the last time he toured with WI to India when he hit 3 hundreds in a 7-match series.[/quote'] Such a shame that a talented players as Gayle doesn't get to bat on roads so often and has to deal with the vicious pitches world over bringing his average down. Maybe Robin Uthappa would've been the greatest ever if he was given a chance in the national team, just look at his IPL exploits.

[BeautifulGame]

Now suddenly west indies pitches are bowler friendly wickets? :hysterical:

[audioman]

There is a whole lot of difference between a bowler-friendly pitch and one that is not batsman-friendly.