Best Indian batsmen overseas

[rkt.india]

Who said batsmen today have no fear or don't get happy feet, did you see Phil Hughes in last test, once he got hit he was totally different player. Watch how Virat Kohli looked in WI tour after he was tested with few short pitch balls delivered by Edwards and Rampaul or look at how Indians batted in world T-20 against Australia in Bridgetown in 2010 and they were facing Nannes and Tait who could bowl fast but they never are in class of WI bowlers. If you get that awkward bounce and are pacy while being deadly accurate you will be lethal That is the formula those WI bowlers had, they did not have one or two they had four and four waiting in the wings. There was simply no respite for the batsmen from them if they got pitch with some bounce you bet it was over. Rules were changed (especially by Aussies and Pommies) to combat them like one bouncer per over and over rates so they could not be bombarded by them all day and they had to bowl spinners. Now a days you have one or two fast bowlers max per team they had four, they had all other tricks in their bag in addition to being fast. Look at bounce Garner was getting that from short of good length how do you play those.This guy bowled meanest yorkers to boot with those bouncy deliveries.

Did they get out because of fear? No. There were just not good enough to play them and were far quicker than most WI quicks and Indian batsmen traditionally are not the best players of pace. Check how Rohit Sharma and Raina bludgeoned runs in the the same T20 WC. Check fast bowling competition of 1978 video and you would know who clocked what pace. My main point is pace of the bowlers in the past is exaggerated a bit too much. Regarding Garner, he is not the only one who can bowl such deliveries, watch Mitchell Starc in the recent ODIs played in Aus. He can bowl as good yorkers and bouncers. Any bowler who is as tall as Garner can bowl such deliveries, Check Finn and Tremlett or Harmison, they all have bowled and at a quicker pace. Garner was the slowest of the quartet and on that the video is he is bound to get such bounce.

[Lurker]

Marut wrote: In the 74/75 home series' date= Gavaskar scored only 108 runs at 27 against an attack spearheaded by the young and fiery Andy Roberts. I absolutely don't hold this against Gavaskar since he was recovering from injury and played Test 1 and then Test 5, scoring 86 on comeback. Nothing to conclude from that series. Instead I will pick his performance in England few months earlier against an all-mighty bowling attack. Test 1: 101 & 58 at Old Trafford, the famous test where you could not make out the pitch from the outfield, it was that green! SMG was the lone Indian batsman to stay long enough in the middle. Moreover this was only 3 years into his debut and it was the first time he was seeing such a swinging wicket, and against a 5-pronged attack(Willis, Hendrick, Deadly, Old, Greig). Sunil himself called it his most difficult hundred and equated that 57 to a century as well. Marut wrote:In 75/76 away series, Gavaskar did very well with 390 runs at 55. But WI attack was still not the four pronged pace attack, though Roberts and Holding were there and they did not figure together in all the matches. 390 runs @ 56, 2 100s and 1 50. Why is this not considered a very good series? This is after all the Bloodbath Jamaica series. His 2nd 100 laid the foundation for the victory chase of 406-4 in the fourth innings. He made 66 in the Jamaica Test when Holding was bowling 5 bouncers an over with the crowd shouting 'Kill him'. I personally rate it an epic series for him, even if he had 2 hundreds at Port of Spain which is not all that pacy. Are there any 4th innings hundreds in a victory chase by SRT/Dravid/VVS that ICFers would happily dismiss against the world's No.2 team as trivial? Some more great away series by Gavaskar: 1977: 450@50.00, 3 100s vs Packerized australia. They still had Thomson and Clarke who were quite pacy. Clarke you can cut some slack but personally I think this Aussie attack was comparable to the 2003 attack where Dravid, Sachin, VVS came to the party. 1979: 542@77; 61, 68, 42, 59, 78, 13, 221 in 6 innings vs England. Check out how Willis, Botham, Hendrick overran several batting lineups in those conditions between 1977 and 1979. I personally consider that attack equivalent to Walsh/Ambrose/Rose in WI 1997 Marut wrote: For me, Tendulkar edges Gavaskar, but not by a big margin. I'd conclude the same too, but for 2 things - I only consider Tendulkar upto 2008, secondly the margin is a lot more, as I'd give extra points to Tendulkar for all his one day achievements and still continuing to do decently in Tests.

Thanks for putting things in proper perspective Stats saab. I suspect that whole school of thought - Sunil Gavaskar scored only when top West Indies fast bowlers were not actually playing in a series - was first propogated by certain Indian fans who wanted their own hero(es) to be considered ahead of Sunny. Weird as it may soumd, I have seen this criticism more by Indians, and have actually started to get picked up by non-Indians. I would not be surprised if 5-10 years down the line people start to question if SG made his runs against minnows! Which bring me to a philosophical question I have for you (if you are reading this). Do you think the ascend of SRT has coincided with writing history in a very different way than perhaps what it should/could have been? Let me explain with an example. Lets take the case of 1990 India-Pakistan series in Pakistan. It was a 0-0 draw but it was a very well fought series. This was the last time Kapil & Imran fought in a test series. Kapil took 7 wickets in first test, Imran scored a century (I distinctly renenber reading in Indian Nation, the English daily fron Patna, where Imran connented how this was perhaps how he had batted best ever and he needed all of that to counter Kapil), Kapil scored a brisk half century and bailed out India. Azhar was cleaned up by Wasim Akram on his first delivery and came back swinging with a century in 2nd innings. Akram gave Srikkanth nightmares. Sanjay manjrekar scored a glorious double century. manoj Prabhakar started to cone into his own with wide off the crease inswinging deliveries. So did Waqar. And yet sonehow that series has been rendered today to Sachin Tendulkar bleeding in Sialkot and hitting Qadir for sixes. This is not a slight on Sachin but more perhaps of how consciously/unconsciously history has been re-written to suit one player. Having watched cricket for as long as you have, what do you think?

[putrevus]

Did they get out because of fear? No. There were just not good enough to play them and were far quicker than most WI quicks and Indian batsmen traditionally are not the best players of pace. Check how Rohit Sharma and Raina bludgeoned runs in the the same T20 WC. Check fast bowling competition of 1978 video and you would know who clocked what pace. My main point is pace of the bowlers in the past is exaggerated a bit too much. Regarding Garner, he is not the only one who can bowl such deliveries, watch Mitchell Starc in the recent ODIs played in Aus. He can bowl as good yorkers and bouncers. Any bowler who is as tall as Garner can bowl such deliveries, Check Finn and Tremlett or Harmison, they all have bowled and at a quicker pace. Garner was the slowest of the quartet and on that the video is he is bound to get such bounce.

If you compare Garner to Starc then you have no clue what fast bowling.We will leave that there. Everyone you named might have bowled quick but they never are/were as accurate and consistent as Garner. Those WI bowlers were not just fast but were accurate.No pace bowling unit has matched them so far because they were not just two bowlers they were four no team in history has matched them. There was Colin Craft who was the meanest of all.

[StatsRock]

You see when bowler like Sarfaraz Nawaz is there, you can doubt their words. Look at his bowling first.

This confirms that you are an intellectually dishonest fellow. There were 12 bowlers on that list and you choose to cherry-pick Sarfraz alone to push your theory :haha: Here's some more on Clarke. Papers like Guardian dont talk crap. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/1999/dec/07/guardianobituaries Clarke did not have the forensic intelligence to dismantle batsmen in the way that Marshall and Andy Roberts could. He did not have the athletic grace of Holding or Hall, or the improbable height of Garner or Ambrose. Yet batsmen feared him more than any of these. Rather like the Roy Gilchrist, in the 1950s, and his fellow Bajan, Griffith, in the 1960s, Clarke's weaponry was based more on menace than technical accomplishment. This was an old-fashioned, skull-cracking, batsman-loathing fast bowler, one who threatened not only a batsman's wicket but his very life. But you are welcome to stick to watching Vijay Hazare/Rohinton Baria/CK Nayudu Trophies instead of commenting on stuff you don't have a clue about.

[CSK Fan]

! Do you think the ascend of SRT has coincided with writing history in a very different way than perhaps what it should/could have been?

Only if the entire world media was involved in the same conspiracy, oft times putting Sachin before their own players. why?

[rkt.india]

This confirms that you are an intellectually dishonest fellow. There were 12 bowlers on that list and you choose to cherry-pick Sarfraz alone to push your theory :haha: Here's some more on Clarke. Papers like Guardian dont talk crap. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/1999/dec/07/guardianobituaries Clarke did not have the forensic intelligence to dismantle batsmen in the way that Marshall and Andy Roberts could. He did not have the athletic grace of Holding or Hall, or the improbable height of Garner or Ambrose. Yet batsmen feared him more than any of these. Rather like the Roy Gilchrist, in the 1950s, and his fellow Bajan, Griffith, in the 1960s, Clarke's weaponry was based more on menace than technical accomplishment. This was an old-fashioned, skull-cracking, batsman-loathing fast bowler, one who threatened not only a batsman's wicket but his very life. But you are welcome to stick to watching Vijay Hazare/Rohinton Baria/CK Nayudu Trophies instead of commenting on stuff you don't have a clue about.

Arey bhai that is what I argue. Those guys like Clarke succeeded because of that hitting factor, that intimidation factor that is not there anymore. Imagine him bowl today with that hit the batsmen mentality and see how he will be thrashed. I have seen his bowling and can tell you he was not the fastest of the bowler. Even today, if you let batsmen bat without those safety guards, today's bowlers will too start intimidating them. I dont think because he intimidated batsmen and got wickets due to that, it makes him a great bowler.

[rkt.india]

If you compare Garner to Starc then you have no clue what fast bowling.We will leave that there. Everyone you named might have bowled quick but they never are/were as accurate and consistent as Garner. Those WI bowlers were not just fast but were accurate.No pace bowling unit has matched them so far because they were not just two bowlers they were four no team in history has matched them. There was Colin Craft who was the meanest of all.

Yaar. Send the batsmen bat without helmet and those safety guards and see how Starc and Pattinson will look like a mean machines to you and see how batsmen start pissing in their pants.

[Lurker]

Arey bhai that is what I argue. Those guys like Clarke succeeded because of that hitting factor' date=' that intimidation factor that is not there anymore. Imagine him bowl today with that hit the batsmen mentality and see how he will be thrashed. I have seen his bowling and can tell you he was not the fastest of the bowler. Even today, if you let batsmen bat without those safety guards, today's bowlers will too start intimidating them. I dont think because he intimidated batsmen and got wickets due to that, it makes him a great bowler.[/quote'] With all due respect, you must be a sad cricket fan if you keep dissing past greats and think you have enough cricketing acumen to judge how good Mike Procter was or how lethal Sylvester Clarke was. But do continue, there is no tax on being incorrect, and sticking to it. :winky:

[Crookbond]

I don't think RKT is "dissing" any past greats. On the other hand, he's just saying that we can't directly extrapolate the effect of a bowler/batsmen in one era to the other. The same bowler may well have been quite good in the modern era but with a different set of skills than what we know them for.

[Sooda]

Hazare should rank higher than Merchant in a top 10 of sorts, and maybe just after Laxman. Two tons in a test vs Lindwall and Miller and runs vs Trueman and Bedser in England

[CSK Fan]

With all due respect, you must be a sad cricket fan if you keep dissing past greats and think you have enough cricketing acumen to judge how good Mike Procter was or how lethal Sylvester Clarke was. But do continue, there is no tax on being incorrect, and sticking to it. :winky:

There is a middle ground between completely dissing past greats and completely glorifying them

[The Outsider]

Gavaskar, and the voting pattern of ICF junta makes every past and future poal invalid.

[StatsRock]

Thanks for putting things in proper perspective Stats saab. I suspect that whole school of thought - Sunil Gavaskar scored only when top West Indies fast bowlers were not actually playing in a series - was first propogated by certain Indian fans who wanted their own hero(es) to be considered ahead of Sunny. Weird as it may soumd, I have seen this criticism more by Indians, and have actually started to get picked up by non-Indians. I would not be surprised if 5-10 years down the line people start to question if SG made his runs against minnows! Which bring me to a philosophical question I have for you (if you are reading this). Do you think the ascend of SRT has coincided with writing history in a very different way than perhaps what it should/could have been? Let me explain with an example. Lets take the case of 1990 India-Pakistan series in Pakistan. It was a 0-0 draw but it was a very well fought series. This was the last time Kapil & Imran fought in a test series. Kapil took 7 wickets in first test, Imran scored a century (I distinctly renenber reading in Indian Nation, the English daily fron Patna, where Imran connented how this was perhaps how he had batted best ever and he needed all of that to counter Kapil), Kapil scored a brisk half century and bailed out India. Azhar was cleaned up by Wasim Akram on his first delivery and came back swinging with a century in 2nd innings. Akram gave Srikkanth nightmares. Sanjay manjrekar scored a glorious double century. manoj Prabhakar started to cone into his own with wide off the crease inswinging deliveries. So did Waqar. And yet sonehow that series has been rendered today to Sachin Tendulkar bleeding in Sialkot and hitting Qadir for sixes. This is not a slight on Sachin but more perhaps of how consciously/unconsciously history has been re-written to suit one player. Having watched cricket for as long as you have, what do you think?

Lurker Saab, I will reply in detail to your Qn. Honestly I personally did not realise Tendulkar was going to be a great until 1996 world cup, partly due to our playing all our matches on krumblers between 1993-95. Even this particular series(1989), Qadir bamboozled and knocked out his stumps in the Lahore Test, which did mean he couldn't really read the spinner.

[vvvslaxman]

England - Dravid, Tendulkar,Ganguly Australia - Laxman/Tendulkar South Africa - Tendulkar West Indies - Dravid, Gavaskar Pakistan - Sehwag, Amarnath, Sunny, Dravid Srilanka - Tendulkar, Sehwag Zimbabwe - Dravid Bangladesh - Tendulkar New zealand - Dravid, Azharuddin

[The Outsider]

This thread has descended into stupidity with Garner being compared with Tremlett and Harmison. Helmets have been worn since the 70s and the West Indian pace attack was at it's peak in the 80s when most batsmen used to wear helmets, pads, gloves, chest guards like they do today.

[The Outsider]

+1 It is laughable to suggest bowlers are getting slower in cricket while thinngs are getting faster/better in all other sports.

There is no way to prove that modern bowlers are quicker but they are certainly crappier. Except for Steyn no current bowler is even close to being counted as an all time great.

Check fast bowling competition of 1978 video and you would know who clocked what pace. My main point is pace of the bowlers in the past is exaggerated a bit too much.

In modern times speed guns from one match to another are not consistent. They vary on the broadcaster, country, ground etc. etc. and you are willing to trust the speeds from a one off measurement 24 years ago using completely different technology?

[Raghav_12]

Looking at this page one would think if Sylvester Clarke is being debated as bestt indian batsmen overseas.

[harmuk]

England - Vengsarkar' date= Gavaskar, Vishy, Dravid, Tendulkar,Ganguly Australia - Vishy, Gavaskar, Laxman/Tendulkar South Africa - Laxman, Tendulkar West Indies - Amarnath, Laxman, Dravid, Gavaskar Pakistan - Sehwag, Amarnath, Sunny, Dravid Srilanka - Tendulkar, Sehwag, Laxman Zimbabwe - Dravid Bangladesh - Tendulkar New zealand - Dravid, Azharuddin

Again that is a very opinionated listing. For example versus WI'es Laxman has played one of the best match winning knocks in 2002 (in both innings and led India to a win in WI'es in more than 30 years), and in 2006 a critical century to save the follow on that drew the game, and after Dravid twin gems in Jamaica we repeated the feat and this time, we won the series. Similarly Jimmy Amarnath in 1983, against an assembly of best pacemen ever, managed more than 500 runs in a series, in which Gavaskar was pretty much clueless. Plus in the earlier tour of 1976 to the WI'es, he did well and had a match winning knock of 85, in that famous 400 odd chase in the 4th innings which saw Vishy and Gavaskar get centuries. I would say Jimmy with 8 fifty plus scores in 16 innings and VVS with 12 fifty plus knocks, more importantly crucial knocks should be in the list of batsman that performed well in the WI'es. Similarly versus SA, Laxman belongs in the list as well. In the only two wins we had in SA both J'burg in 2006 and Durban in 2011, he is the only player to have a total of 100+ runs in both tests with critical 70+ scores in team second innings in both those Tests we won. He surely deserves to be in the best performers in SA, in my books. Also in SL, VVS with his 4th innings century in Colombo ensured we won the game and that helped us retain the No.1 ranking in the world, plus with an average close to a neat 50 he deserves to be in the list of performers in SL. Versus England I think the trio of Sunny, Vishy and the Colonel are very underrated. Playing in an era of better pitches and attacks these trio played many a great knock and were part of some great games. Sunny's 221 was eight runs away from being rated on par with VVS's 281, when umpires robbed us the win and we had to settle for a draw. Plus there is a certain Colonel the Lord of Lords with 3 centuries in the games most hallowed grounds and his genius at Leeds where he scored a century and a fifty when none from both sides(40 batsmen dismissed) scored more than a 40, was one of the best Test knocks played by an Indian ever. He very much deserves to be there along with the other two. Versus Australia though it tough to include Dravid based on his only succeesful tour in 2003, I am compelled to include Vishy based on his great match winning 114 and other decent scores overall and also Sunny on the strength of his 5 tons in the Aussie land, though he failed overall in the 1981 tour, facing Lillee and company post-packer.

[vvvslaxman]

Again that is a very opinionated listing. For example versus WI'es Laxman has played one of the best match winning knocks in 2002 (in both innings and led India to a win in WI'es in more than 30 years), and in 2006 a critical century to save the follow on that drew the game, and after Dravid twin gems in Jamaica we repeated the feat and this time, we won the series. Similarly Jimmy Amarnath in 1983, against an assembly of best pacemen ever, managed more than 500 runs in a series, in which Gavaskar was pretty much clueless. Plus in the earlier tour of 1976 to the WI'es, he did well and had a match winning knock of 85, in that famous 400 odd chase in the 4th innings which saw Vishy and Gavaskar get centuries. I would say Jimmy with 8 fifty plus scores in 16 innings and VVS with 12 fifty plus knocks, more importantly crucial knocks should be in the list of batsman that performed well in the WI'es. Similarly versus SA, Laxman belongs in the list as well. In the only two wins we had in SA both J'burg in 2006 and Durban in 2011, he is the only player to have a total of 100+ runs in both tests with critical 70+ scores in team second innings in both those Tests we won. He surely deserves to be in the best performers in SA, in my books. Also in SL, VVS with his 4th innings century in Colombo ensured we won the game and that helped us retain the No.1 ranking in the world, plus with an average close to a neat 50 he deserves to be in the list of performers in SL.

Dravid made 233 & 72* to help INdia win a test in Australia. I have omitted his name from Australian performance. Because he had two horror series there besides the one good series. So you have to weigh in overall performance not one or two match winning knocks. Otherwise Agarkar will feature in best overseasl bowler list along with sreesanth.

[India-KXIP fan]

Don't think Sachin averages below 40 anywhere away. Dravid was poor in SA, average 29 after 11 tests Even Pujara might do a bit better than that, but lets see if Kohli beats Tendulkar or will only equal him.