Gayle vs Sehwag

[Marut]

Sehwag is India's best test batsman along with Gavaskar and probably top 5 of all time.

Not ability and skill wise. But impact wise you are correct - I would even go a step ahead and add that Sehwag was the best thing to have ever happened to Indian cricket.

[rageaddict]

Did Sehwag ever contribute anything towards an overseas victory ? Even a Single Test match ? India were winning matches at home even before Sehwag arrived on the scene , winning at home was never an issue .

[Marut]

Did Sehwag ever contribute anything towards an overseas victory ? Even a Single Test match ? India were winning matches at home even before Sehwag arrived on the scene , winning at home was never an issue .

You should have asked - "Did Sehwag ever contribute anything outside Asia? Even a Single Test match ? He did win for India many matches outside India, and in a style only he is capable of. Outside Asia, his achievements are not so great. In India also, Sehwag's scoring rate converted many potential draws into Indian wins. India is capable of reaching 500 in 100-120 overs when Sehwag fires, so matches rarely end in a draw when Sehwag scores big. No other Indian batsman can even come close to him in this respect.

[vamos_rafa]

You should have asked - "Did Sehwag ever contribute anything outside Asia? Even a Single Test match ? He did win for India many matches outside India, and in a style only he is capable of. Outside Asia, his achievements are not so great. In India also, Sehwag's scoring rate converted many potential draws into Indian wins. India is capable of reaching 500 in 100-120 overs when Sehwag fires, so matches rarely end in a draw when Sehwag scores big. No other Indian batsman can even come close to him in this respect.

That's what kinda baffles me a bit here. No doubt Sehwag is brilliant and I do respect him for the kinda impact he has had. But, isn't it obvious by this particular thread that he and Gayle have had almost similar kinda stats? We generally measure SC players by their records outside Asia and he's not that great outside. Sehwag has succeeded in SC and Gayle in places like SA/OZ and vice-versa as far as failure go. WI Board hasn't been able to take proper care of it's players and which has reduced them to this T20 team now. I remember how Gayle and Hinds murdered our attacks in ODIs in 2002. Not saying he's better than Sehwag but are this impacts and all these intangible talks only for Sehwag and no one else? You don't score a 70 ball 100 at Perth w/o being something special

[carnish]

Gayle before 2007 >>> Sehwag

[Straight Drive]

It's a good comparison. Both are openers in all 3 formats.Just checked that both of them have played almost similar no of tests and ODI's. As per their performances, in tests Sehwag is better In ODI and T20 Gayle has done better

[Sidhoni]

Sehwag. Gayle had a good 4-5 years in int'l cricket but Sehwag pips him overall.

[mastana]

As Aamir Sohail used to pronounced it - Shewag.

[CG]

That's what kinda baffles me a bit here. No doubt Sehwag is brilliant and I do respect him for the kinda impact he has had. But, isn't it obvious by this particular thread that he and Gayle have had almost similar kinda stats? We generally measure SC players by their records outside Asia and he's not that great outside. Sehwag has succeeded in SC and Gayle in places like SA/OZ and vice-versa as far as failure go. WI Board hasn't been able to take proper care of it's players and which has reduced them to this T20 team now. I remember how Gayle and Hinds murdered our attacks in ODIs in 2002. Not saying he's better than Sehwag but are this impacts and all these intangible talks only for Sehwag and no one else? You don't score a 70 ball 100 at Perth w/o being something special

Sehwag has a good record in aus.

[Muloghonto]

That's what kinda baffles me a bit here. No doubt Sehwag is brilliant and I do respect him for the kinda impact he has had. But, isn't it obvious by this particular thread that he and Gayle have had almost similar kinda stats? We generally measure SC players by their records outside Asia and he's not that great outside. Sehwag has succeeded in SC and Gayle in places like SA/OZ and vice-versa as far as failure go. WI Board hasn't been able to take proper care of it's players and which has reduced them to this T20 team now. I remember how Gayle and Hinds murdered our attacks in ODIs in 2002. Not saying he's better than Sehwag but are this impacts and all these intangible talks only for Sehwag and no one else? You don't score a 70 ball 100 at Perth w/o being something special

How on earth is a 42 average in the same ballpark as an almost 50 average ? Thats like saying Waqar Younis and Zaheer Khan are in the same ballpark. Gayle is better in South Africa and England but the difference is only one or two innings. Plus sehwag is way stronger on his strong-suite (home) than Gayle is at his ( batting at home/home-like conditions in OZ/RSA) and Sehwag's weak suit is much better than Gayle's weaksuit ( batting in OZ/RSA vs batting in SC respectively). The other thing is, Sehwag does score at a much higher rate at a more prolific amount than Gayle. But the biggest thing is, while Gayle has obvious vulnerabilities, Sehwag does not. Gayle is a walking wicket against off spinners and left arm bowlers. Vaas, Zaheer made him their bunny and Sehwag does not have an obvious weakness against a particular type of bowling. in odis its closer but again, Sehwag's amazing strike rate wins out, as 35 runs average at 100+ strike rate is definitely better than a 37 run average at low 80s strike rate. You could argue that Gayle is a much better ODI bowler than Sehwag is and that would be true but in batting, its definitely Sehwag. The one arena where Gayle is clearly better is T20s. They are both crappy outfielders but Sehwag is a clearly better close range catcher than Gayle is.

[Straight Drive]

8 runs average difference definitely indicates that one batsman is at least one level higher if not two.

[Marut]

That's what kinda baffles me a bit here. No doubt Sehwag is brilliant and I do respect him for the kinda impact he has had. But' date= isn't it obvious by this particular thread that he and Gayle have had almost similar kinda stats? We generally measure SC players by their records outside Asia and he's not that great outside. Sehwag has succeeded in SC and Gayle in places like SA/OZ and vice-versa as far as failure go. WI Board hasn't been able to take proper care of it's players and which has reduced them to this T20 team now. I remember how Gayle and Hinds murdered our attacks in ODIs in 2002. Not saying he's better than Sehwag but are this impacts and all these intangible talks only for Sehwag and no one else? You don't score a 70 ball 100 at Perth w/o being something special

NO!! Sehwag and Gayle have very different stats. A batsman with average 50 and another with 42 are different levels of batsmen. 40-45 is a good batsman, 50 belongs to the great class. Secondly, Sehwag's strike rates are vastly superior. Sehwag scores as fast in tests as Gayle does in ODIs. Gayle, Lara, KP, Hayden,Dilshan all became famous as destroyers of bowling attacks, but they all had one thing in common - their strike rates were between 60-65. Sehwag took it to another degree altogether. In all of history, only Richards, Gilchirst and Kapil dev can match Sehwag's strike rates. (Richards had lesser strike rate but by the standards of the 80s, Viv was like Sehwag). But what sets Sehwag apart from the likes of Viv, Kapil and Gilly is that Sehwag was an opener, a test opener. A test opener striking at 82 runs per 100 balls over a 100 match span is unheard of, in all of the history of cricket. Sehwag is the biggest phenomenon in modern cricket. Warner may end up emulating Sehwag, but it is too early to say that. Thirdly, Sehwag does not have any distinct weaknesses. He may seem to have moderate stats outside Asia, but often Sehwag lost his wicket not due to technical deficiencies but because he did not respect the bowlers too much. Sehwag normally does not care whether the bowler is a great one like McGrath or a lesser one like Bichel. His game is the same, sight the ball and give it a whack. If Sehwag had paid a bit more respect to the bowlers he would have finished at an average of 60 and S/R of 70 - with strong performances outside Asia. Sehwag did not bat with utmost care on seaming wickets or wickets with bounce, he would try to score very fast even on these wickets, which is not an ideal way of batting. Some times you have to see off the good bowlers, difficult pitch conditions etc, especially when playing away but Sehwag really dug in only occasionally.

[vamos_rafa]

NO!! Sehwag and Gayle have very different stats. A batsman with average 50 and another with 42 are different levels of batsmen. 40-45 is a good batsman, 50 belongs to the great class. Secondly, Sehwag's strike rates are vastly superior. Sehwag scores as fast in tests as Gayle does in ODIs. Gayle, Lara, KP, Hayden,Dilshan all became famous as destroyers of bowling attacks, but they all had one thing in common - their strike rates were between 60-65. Sehwag took it to another degree altogether. In all of history, only Richards, Gilchirst and Kapil dev can match Sehwag's strike rates. (Richards had lesser strike rate but by the standards of the 80s, Viv was like Sehwag). But what sets Sehwag apart from the likes of Viv, Kapil and Gilly is that Sehwag was an opener, a test opener. A test opener striking at 82 runs per 100 balls over a 100 match span is unheard of, in all of the history of cricket. Sehwag is the biggest phenomenon in modern cricket. Warner may end up emulating Sehwag, but it is too early to say that. Thirdly, Sehwag does not have any distinct weaknesses. He may seem to have moderate stats outside Asia, but often Sehwag lost his wicket not due to technical deficiencies but because he did not respect the bowlers too much. Sehwag normally does not care whether the bowler is a great one like McGrath or a lesser one like Bichel. His game is the same, sight the ball and give it a whack. If Sehwag had paid a bit more respect to the bowlers he would have finished at an average of 60 and S/R of 70 - with strong performances outside Asia. Sehwag did not bat with utmost care on seaming wickets or wickets with bounce, he would try to score very fast even on these wickets, which is not an ideal way of batting. Some times you have to see off the good bowlers, difficult pitch conditions etc, especially when playing away but Sehwag really dug in only occasionally.

I don't think Sehwag ever had the game to play with utmost care. Veru rarely could you see him playing the waiting game and hence his average or paltry record outside the SC. And Sehwag's technical defficiency i.e his loose game outside the off stump was one of the prime reason why he failed badly in places like SA and England and NZ(tests).

[Marut]

I don't think Sehwag ever had the game to play with utmost care. Veru rarely could you see him playing the waiting game and hence his average or paltry record outside the SC. And Sehwag's technical defficiency i.e his loose game outside the off stump was one of the prime reason why he failed badly in places like SA and England and NZ(tests).

That Sehwag did not try to play with a lot of care is obvious from the way Sehwag gets to 100s, 200s and 300s with a boundary or exen a six. It is relatively easy to dismiss such a batsman on bowling wickets, and it will appear that he has some weaknesses. While every one was struggling during the miserable tour of NZ, Sehwag was the only Indian batsman to stand up. Check how different he was from others under vicious playing conditions - over 7 matches it was no fluke. It was like Sehwag was batting on the flatbeds of India and others on greentops. Two hundreds by Sehwag in a series in which nobody else got a 100, only one fifty by another Indian. http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/IND_IN_NZ/STATS/IND_IN_NZ_DEC2002-JAN2003_ODI_AVS.html

[vamos_rafa]

That Sehwag did not try to play with a lot of care is obvious from the way Sehwag gets to 100s, 200s and 300s with a boundary or exen a six. It is relatively easy to dismiss such a batsman on bowling wickets, and it will appear that he has some weaknesses. While every one was struggling during the miserable tour of NZ, Sehwag was the only Indian batsman to stand up. Check how different he was from others under vicious playing conditions - over 7 matches it was no fluke. It was like Sehwag was batting on the flatbeds of India and others on greentops. Two hundreds by Sehwag in a series in which nobody else got a 100, only one fifty by another Indian. http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/IND_IN_NZ/STATS/IND_IN_NZ_DEC2002-JAN2003_ODI_AVS.html

I know pretty well about this series which was the ODIs. The pitches were spicy but I guess we are talking tests here. Anyways, a great batsman is someone who is able to adjust his game and tempo as per the situation and for me Sehwag couldn't do that often enough. He tried but failed on most occasions. You yourself are saying that it's pretty easy to dismiss such batsman on bowling wickets, so what are you saying he's an FTB? :cantstop: On a serious note, if this is not weakness then I don't know what is. The fact that he couldn't play his original game on such wickets and neither did he have the game to survive. I guess where Gayle and Sehwag are similar is in the sense that both scored runs under conditions where they were comfortable. Sehwag on SC tracks while Gayle on the bouncier ones. But both couldn't do much in situations where they weren't comfortable..

[vvvslaxman]

Actually Viru's failures were not entirely because of overseas conditions. Sometimes he got out to guys like Vettori with reckless shots. Sometimes they had set an unusual third man position in the very first over and managed to trap him. He lived and died by the sword. But Lot of time it helped us more than it hurt us.

[vamos_rafa]

Actually Viru's failures were not entirely because of overseas conditions. Sometimes he got out to guys like Vettori with reckless shots. Sometimes they had set an unusual third man position in the very first over and managed to trap him. He lived and died by the sword. But Lot of time it helped us more than it hurt us.

Its unusual per se but against Viru, it was actually a catching option. That's how hard he hit the ball :cantstop:

[Marut]

I know pretty well about this series which was the ODIs. The pitches were spicy but I guess we are talking tests here. Anyways, a great batsman is someone who is able to adjust his game and tempo as per the situation and for me Sehwag couldn't do that often enough. He tried but failed on most occasions. You yourself are saying that it's pretty easy to dismiss such batsman on bowling wickets, so what are you saying he's an FTB? :cantstop: On a serious note, if this is not weakness then I don't know what is. The fact that he couldn't play his original game on such wickets and neither did he have the game to survive. I guess where Gayle and Sehwag are similar is in the sense that both scored runs under conditions where they were comfortable. Sehwag on SC tracks while Gayle on the bouncier ones. But both couldn't do much in situations where they weren't comfortable..

It should have been easy to dismiss Sehwag given the way he bats (strike rate of 70+ on green tops, this is the way he bats), but Sehwag usually disrupted the rhythm of the bowlers once he got going, which is why he was partly successful outside Asia. He would have been more successful if he could curb his instincts a bit. Sehwag was far too reckless while playing under difficult conditions. Anyways, I think India may have benefitted more from the Sehwag we know, than from a sedate and disciplined Sehwag. Sehwag created more terror in bowlers than any other Indian batsman in history.

[vvvslaxman]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/221840.html IN this world xi vs Australia match, Viru was going like a train when wickets were falling like nine pins. World XI had lost Smith/Lara/Dravid. Warne deliberately set a field to entice Viru . Viru as a challenge took it on and holed out.

[Marut]

Technically deficient batsmen tend to have lots of bowled and LBWs - but if you check out Sehwag under overseas conditions, his record reads - 91dismissals 11bowled 8lbw 2 stmp 1 runo 66caught, which is basically 73% caught. Yes, Sehwag has been bowled only 12% and LBW 9% - he is one of the batsmen who has the least percentage of bowled and LBW dismissals. This is not the sign of a technically deficient batsman. He may appear to have some weaknesses like lack of adequate feet movement, but Sehwag overcomes them with his tremendous hand-eye coordination. Compare Sehwag with Tendulkar and Dravid under overseas conditions. Tendulkar 159 dismissed 27bowled 40 lbw 87caught, basically 55% caught Dravid 145 dismissals 27bowled 17lbw 92caught, basically 63% caught. It should be obvious that Sehwag plays one shot too many, and this is why he has a very high percentage of caught dismissals. There are other Indian batsmen like Laxman who have high percentage of caught dismissals, but Laxman does not have the strike rate of Sehwag to consider his dismissals arising from too many shots. On green tops and bouncy conditions, Sehwag has often made it appear that he was batting on a flat track by scoring freely, while others around him found it difficult to survive, let alone make runs. A batsman with several fastest triples and doubles in his name is no ordinary batsman regardless of the conditions.