Is dhoni playing like sachin?

[adi B]

Opener can still play a role in chasing . Virat is a top order player , but that hasnt stoped him from playing matchwinning knocks . Finishers should be rated ahead of top order players .

some words for u,batting pp,flat tracks in most parts of world nowadays,invent of t20,degraded bowling in odi`s,some teams even play 2nd string sides in odi`s.run making in odi`s nowadays is far far easy than in late 90`s,2000`s..even a player like tamim iqbal has good record in odi`s.. comparing yavraj,kohi to dravid,ganguly is stupidity..dhoni is comparable but he has a different role than what tendu,gang,dravid both.. if these players swap their roles with dhoni or vice versa both would struggle respectively.

[Marut]

Actually, Viv came mostly 1 down during his purple patch six years. As far as Sachin not hacking it as a middle order bat, you must remember that Sachin was extremely young when he made the team and he played he first 3-4 years as 'nurturing future potential' more so than solid performances. Most of Sachin's middle order days are from his early years and he's done fine in middle order roles post 94, when he really blossomed as an allround batsman. Since then, he's batted in the middle order 45 times, averaged over 37 and scored 4 tons. Considering that this is not his normal position and he didn't get any sort of extended run in the middle order ( he batted there in fits and spurts), this is an excellent record. As i said, I consider Viv the 2nd best ODI batsman ever and you won't find me arguing over any other batsman save Tendy when it comes to who's the better ODI bat, but fact remains, Viv's great years lasted six years. Either side of those six years, he was not the very top rung consistently. There are plenty of players who go through a half decade long purple patch ( Ponting, Hussey, to name a few) but they normally do not merit consideration amongst the greatest, since they do not show the longetivity that certain Tendulkars, Laras, Kallises of the world show. Yet, Viv's purple patch was so mindboggling that i must put him near the very top. The only reason why i'd rate Tendu higher, as i said is because: a) He's done it for much longer than Viv, while playing much more matches during it b) He did not decline precipitously like Viv did when his hand-eye coordination failed him c) He is more durable than Viv d) He's been in tougher match-spot far more often than Viv. The thing about Viv, you must consider, is that he had total freedom to do whatever he wanted and very rarely did he bat under pressure. This is because he batted behind two of the best ODI batsmen of their times ( Greenidge and Haynes), along with a very strong middle order and above all, a bowling unit that could defend the total 80% of the time. As prized a wicket as Viv was, he was never the sole threat WI posessed on the field, while Tendu definitely was the sole bastion of Indian batsmanship between 94 and 98 in ODIs and frequently, one of the two players who were gamechangers for India for over half his career. I am sorry but had Viv's performances been more even throughout his career, instead of a six year epic patch, along with a greater capability in his latter years, Viv would've stayed #1. As it is, Sachin has produced a far more complete ODI batting career than Viv and he is ahead.

No, Viv used to come two down frequently during his peak years also and averaged 55 at that slot during his peak years. I think Viv would have averaged like 60 had he been a tad slower and stroked at 80 runs per hundred balls ( which would still be extraordinary for his day). Often he wanted to dominate so much that he lost his wicket cheaply. So much was his dominance, bowlers were genuinely afraid to bowl to him because if you don't get him he would breeze away at run a ball regardless of the conditions. He was Sehwag and Sachin combined into one package - brutal grace! Except for a few early years, Sachin had decent batsmen batting with him or following him over various periods - Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Kambli, Azhar, A.Jadeja, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Raina so batting wise India has been a competitive team for most part of Sachin's career, so Viv did not have a distinct edge here. Another factor is that WI pitches were very difficult to play during the time of Richards and tailor made for fast bowlers, and his career averages are lowered by home matches. Home is where players usually boost their averages and Richards did not play much there and the conditions were such that he could not accumulate much there. Compare that with Sachin who played a huge number of matches on the flat roads of India where India frequently rack up 300. In an era of very hostile fast bowling, Viv batted without a helmet - and did not lower his swagger against the best of fast bowlers. A missed hook or pull (which he played a lot) could have been fatal or leave him with a crippling head injury. That is why he is the most gutsy and devastating ODI batsman of all time.

[JaFanatic]

No, Viv used to come two down frequently during his peak years also and averaged 55 at that slot during his peak years. I think Viv would have averaged like 60 had he been a tad slower and stroked at 80 runs per hundred balls ( which would still be extraordinary for his day). Often he wanted to dominate so much that he lost his wicket cheaply. So much was his dominance, bowlers were genuinely afraid to bowl to him because if you don't get him he would breeze away at run a ball regardless of the conditions. He was Sehwag and Sachin combined into one package - brutal grace! Except for a few early years, Sachin had decent batsmen batting with him or following him over various periods - Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Kambli, Azhar, A.Jadeja, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Raina so batting wise India has been a competitive team for most part of Sachin's career, so Viv did not have a distinct edge here. Another factor is that WI pitches were very difficult to play during the time of Richards and tailor made for fast bowlers, and his career averages are lowered by home matches. Home is where players usually boost their averages and Richards did not play much there and the conditions were such that he could not accumulate much there. Compare that with Sachin who played a huge number of matches on the flat roads of India where India frequently rack up 300. In an era of very hostile fast bowling, Viv batted without a helmet - and did not lower his swagger against the best of fast bowlers. A missed hook or pull (which he played a lot) could have been fatal or leave him with a crippling head injury. That is why he is the most gutsy and devastating ODI batsman of all time.

no he would have averaged less than 20 had he played like that just like how kohli and dhoni tries to be over defensive in tests stop being so jealous:--D

[Marut]

if he played without breaks he would have failed and regarding the comparison they are from different eras so its illogical to compare the legends of different eras also sachin is one of the greatest batsmen of odis dont compare him to richards

I don't understand why you should not compare them? Both are greats during their own eras. It is not as if we are comparing Sachin with Chris Martin here. Sachin will probably get more votes on an Indian forum, look any where else, Viv vs Sachin is no one sided contest. And both will get into any all time ODI XI.

[The Outsider]

Regarding Richards:

Either side of these six years' date=' Viv was top notch, but not a huge standout over the field ( he scored almost 3000 runs at an average of 38 with 4 more tons and IIRC 10 more halfers in) and he declined precipitously when his hand-eye coordination dimmed in his late 30s. [/quote'] Regarding Tendulkar:

[Muloghonto]

He was Sehwag and Sachin combined into one package - brutal grace!

Err no, try Sehwag with a significantly better technique against pacers and tad more questionable against spinners. As i said, when you are talking about the very top of the top, everything factors in and longetivity is one such factor. Viv did not have it. The fact that he declined precipitously after he was 33, Viv's record was an average of 35. As i said, Tendulkar is ahead of him beacause Tendulkar's ODI career has everything- overwhelmingly dominant years, a decade and half of top echelon performance and longetivity. Viv does not have all those going for him.

Except for a few early years, Sachin had decent batsmen batting with him or following him over various periods - Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Kambli, Azhar, A.Jadeja, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Raina so batting wise India has been a competitive team for most part of Sachin's career, so Viv did not have a distinct edge here.

You gotto be kidding. Yes, India's batting in the 90s was no Bangladesh but you are seriously comparing India's batting depth with West Indies of the 70s/80s ? This is like saying the Aussie team of early 2000s were not a better batting unit than Pakistan, who only had Inzamam and a few decent performers. Viv played alongside Desmond Haynes and Gordon Greenidge, one who held the world record for most runs and tons in ODI cricket (before Sachin) and one who averaged greater than any other opener in ODI history before Sachin. Then we have Kallicharan, Lloyd, Richardson- all of whom would be a shoo-in for virtually any lineup of their day.

Another factor is that WI pitches were very difficult to play during the time of Richards and tailor made for fast bowlers, and his career averages are lowered by home matches. Home is where players usually boost their averages and Richards did not play much there and the conditions were such that he could not accumulate much there. Compare that with Sachin who played a huge number of matches on the flat roads of India where India frequently rack up 300.

True, which is why i rate him near the very top. But a purple patch of six years does not the greatest player make.

In an era of very hostile fast bowling, Viv batted without a helmet - and did not lower his swagger against the best of fast bowlers. A missed hook or pull (which he played a lot) could have been fatal or leave him with a crippling head injury. That is why he is the most gutsy and devastating ODI batsman of all time.

Gutsy ? Yes. Most devastating ODI bat ? Yes. The Best ODI batsman ? No. His overall numbers are largely propped by six astonishing years and he declined precipitously near the end. Viv was a much better player than Hayden but his career was Hayden-esque in ODIs- first five years of limited opportunity and not much to boast about, six years of mindboggling dominance and then not much. I cannot give the title of best ODI batsman who does not demonstrate the key factor of longetivity, otherwise we might as well start saying that Graeme Pollock was a better batsman than Tendulkar/Lara, which is absurd.

[Muloghonto]

Regarding Richards: Regarding Tendulkar: Would be interested to know the reasoning behind these seemingly divergent statements. Not that I have an issue with someone considering Tendulkar as the best ODI batsman because between him and Richards it's a very close call and would come down to personal preferences, but the above sounds like you might have been applying different standards to them. I would pick Richards because of his World Cup finals performances. In tests, I would rank Tendulkar above Richards.

I dunno how they are divergent statements ? I said that I do not rate Viv as highly because his record is based on a purple patch of six years. Normally i do not rate players of such trajectory, such as Ponting, Hayden, Hussey, etc. as the best- players who've been mindbogglingly good for a few years but nothing extraordinary either side of it. When someone said that Tendy was mediocre in the middle order, i said that this is a case of stats being misleading, because Tendy was a 16 year old middle order bat trying to get his footing and develop his game for most of his middle order career. When he finally blossomed into the greatest ODI batsman, his middle order record compares well with the alltime great middle order stalwarts of his era ( Ponting, Inzamam, Kallis, etc) despite the fact that he never got settled into that role and did it only in fits and spurts. How are they divergent statements ?

[The Outsider]

I dunno how they are divergent statements ? I said that I do not rate Viv as highly because his record is based on a purple patch of six years. Normally i do not rate players of such trajectory, such as Ponting, Hayden, Hussey, etc. as the best- players who've been mindbogglingly good for a few years but nothing extraordinary either side of it. When someone said that Tendy was mediocre in the middle order, i said that this is a case of stats being misleading, because Tendy was a 16 year old middle order bat trying to get his footing and develop his game for most of his middle order career. When he finally blossomed into the greatest ODI batsman, his middle order record compares well with the alltime great middle order stalwarts of his era ( Ponting, Inzamam, Kallis, etc) despite the fact that he never got settled into that role and did it only in fits and spurts. How are they divergent statements ?

Let's look at Richards' career by your demarcations, but a bit more closely. Prior to 1979, he played a total of 10 ODI innings averaging 44.6 at a strike rate of 83.6 - both numbers are superb even by today's standards. There is no reason to seperate this part of his career. From his debut to 1985 here are his numbers over 11 years: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52812.html?class=2;spanmax1=31+Dec+1985;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting An average of 56.5 and a strike rate of 89.5. Now, let's look at the numbers from 1986 to his retirement: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52812.html?class=2;spanmin1=01+Jan+1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting An average of 35.6 and a strike rate of 91.6. How does that fare with the competition? http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=batting_average;qualmin1=2000;qualval1=runs;spanmax1=27+May+1991;spanmin1=01+Jan+1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Among batsmen with more than 2000 runs in the period he is 11th by batting average, and look at sorting the list by strike rate: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=batting_strike_rate;qualmin1=2000;qualval1=runs;spanmax1=27+May+1991;spanmin1=01+Jan+1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting He leads the field by a huge distance except for Malik. So it's clear that even in the '86-'91 period he was one of the best ODI batsmen in the world, definitely in the top 10. The ICC rankings confirm this assessment, he never dropped out of the top 10 in that period: http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/playerdisplay/odi/batting/?id=1682&graph=ranking Now, the reason I called them divergent views was because for Tendulkar you are saying an average of 37 compares well with all time greats, but for Richards during his last few years an average of 36 and a much better strike rate does not.