SRT the energizer bunny

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Bongosamaj]

Harder Bowlers ... LMAO ... the best bowlers of Vivs time were all invariably in his side .

So ? he still had to face Lillee, Thommo, Akram, Imran, Qadir, Hadlee, Kapil, etc. A better quality of bowling than Tendy has faced for his career- Viv didn't face many bowling attacks with Naved-ul-Hassan as their best bowler.

SRT's case was the exact opposite ... and to add to that there was no South Africa during Vivs time ... which has produced some of the finest fast bowlers durnig the llast 2 decades ...

SRT also had namby-pamby Kenyas and bangladesh to fatten his average against. Viv hardly played against anything but the quality sides.

ownage ... pay your respects ...

You know what they say when you toot your own horn ? Its coz no one else will ! Sure sign of losing a debate is when you are declaring your own victory, champ. Viv was better than tendy because he batted against harder bowling units, he batted on harder pitches, he didnt have run-making rules like fielders in the circle, he dominated his era more than Tendy dominates his, etc etc. Tendy comes in #2 behind Viv in ODIs. Oh btw, i will point you towards cricketweb, where the NEUTRALS (non-Indians and non-west indians) collectively found Viv> Tendy in ODIs. If not anything, opinion of neutrals count for more due to their neutrality.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Bongosamaj]

the figures are lopsidedly in favour of SRT .

They are not, figures are lopsided in Viv's favour. Only thing Tendy has in his favour is playing more matches. Viv has a better average, a better strike rate and a better relative average + strike rate score from his era compared to Tendy. Viv also batted on harder pitches ( average runs/innings and average runs/wicket in 70s and 80s are lower than in the 90s and 2000s) and he also batted against better bowlers ( better average and economy rate collectively per side than todays). It is very simple- Viv > Tendy in ODIs.

Repeat after me SRT owns Viv

Nomatter how many times you repeat it, you won't make it come true, sonny. PS: Interesting to see how you RAN AWAY from the Viv Richards vs Lillee thread after i exposed your LIE about West Indies not winning a series vs Pakistan 'in their lifetimes'. Too small a man to owe up to your mistakes, champ ?

[Lurker]

Viv was better than tendy because he batted against harder bowling units, he batted on harder pitches, he didnt have run-making rules like fielders in the circle, he dominated his era more than Tendy dominates his, etc etc.

More importantly he played in an era where there were no restrictions. SRT averaged 44 plus in an era where Ganguly averaged 41. Would Ganguly have averaged 41 in a no-limit-bouncer era?? Fat chance.

[Bongosamaj]

More importantly he played in an era where there were no restrictions. SRT averaged 44 plus in an era where Ganguly averaged 41. Would Ganguly have averaged 41 in a no-limit-bouncer era?? Fat chance.

Ditto.

[Anakin]

More importantly he played in an era where there were no restrictions. SRT averaged 44 plus in an era where Ganguly averaged 41. Would Ganguly have averaged 41 in a no-limit-bouncer era?? Fat chance.

On what basis? Actually let's not even go there, because I'm too familiar with your "thinking". SCG usually scores faster when there is no powerplay.

[Bongosamaj]

SCG usually scores faster when there is no powerplay.

That is because when there is no powerplay, SCG has managed to survive the new-ball spell. SCG's weakness is the new ball, not powerplay.... The basis that SCG would've been a bunny in the 70s/80s is simple- there were no field restrictions, there were no 300 in 50 over pitches..or atleast, they were 1/10th as common. Pitches were lightning quick in the 70s & 80s and Gangu would've been owned there.

[Anakin]

Kapil Dev had 434 wkts almost twice as much as Srinath (228). But was Kapil Dev a better bowler than Srinath, based on number of wickets alone? Longevity can't be the basis for comparison when we are talking about cricketers of two different era. Abilitywise Richards was devastating even without Powerplays. SRT is devastating as an opener when Powerplays came into effect. Tendulkar's stats before this match in 1994: http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64463.html is: filtered 69 1758 84 30.84 0 13 21 4/34 48.33 0 18 0 IVAR's first 69 ODI matches: filtered 69 2769 153* 50.34 6 16 42 3/41 36.52 0 26 0 [but a lot of these matches were 55/60 overs too].

Again, SRT's SR is quite good even when there is no PP. BTW you are forgetting a very simple thing which is opening is not that easy job. If there is something in the pitch for the bowlers, it's usually during the opening of the innings in ODIs.

[Anakin]

That is because when there is no powerplay, SCG has managed to survive the new-ball spell. SCG's weakness is the new ball, not powerplay.... The basis that SCG would've been a bunny in the 70s/80s is simple- there were no field restrictions, there were no 300 in 50 over pitches..or atleast, they were 1/10th as common. Pitches were lightning quick in the 70s & 80s and Gangu would've been owned there.

I'm not contesting the pitches, although may be the attitude of batsmen to go slow had some effect too on the lower scores at that time, but how does exactly the not having PP stop SCG from surviving the new ball spell?

[Bongosamaj]

BTW you are forgetting a very simple thing which is opening is not that easy job.

In ODIs it is. Which is why there are so many ODI openers in the last so many years with 40/almost 40 average- much more than middle order bats. For openers, you have Anwar, MEW, Smith, Hayden, Ganguly,Gayle,Tresco, etc. who are all 40-average or near 40 average openers. For middle order, its not as common to have 39-40+ average batsmen..

[Lurker]

Kapil Dev had 434 wkts almost twice as much as Srinath (228). But was Kapil Dev a better bowler than Srinath' date=' based on number of wickets alone? Longevity can't be the basis for comparison when we are talking about cricketers of two different era. [b']Abilitywise Richards was devastating even without Powerplays. SRT is devastating as an opener when Powerplays came into effect. Tendulkar's stats before this match in 1994:

Indeed. SRT's best performances have come as an opener. And but for a handful of games I can not remember him bludgeoning his way in death overs. Richards was quite capable of doing that. And he could do in initial overs as well. I personally dont rate one ahead of the other. To me they are tied at number 1 spot but I also find this greatly amusing to just take a potshot at Richards to show Sachin was the better bat. He clearly is not. xxx

[Bongosamaj]

I'm not contesting the pitches' date=' although may be the attitude of batsmen to go slow had some effect too on the lower scores at that time, but how does exactly the not having PP stop SCG from surviving the new ball spell?[/quote'] Field is set...Ganguly gets frustrated and throws his wicket away if he doesnt keep ticking 1 boundary per over or so...field spread + faster pitches = wild flays from gangu. Gangu = owned.

[Anakin]

Field is set...Ganguly gets frustrated and throws his wicket away if he doesnt keep ticking 1 boundary per over or so...field spread + faster pitches = wild flays from gangu. Gangu = owned.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:SCG rarely gets one boundary/over, then his SR wouldn't be so modest. Field spread would be even easier for him to survive, pitches faster or not.

[Bongosamaj]

SCG rarely gets one boundary/over, then his SR wouldn't be so modest.

Dude..have you EVER seen SCG bat ? why so blatent twistings of facts ? Gangoo's style is dot,dot,dot,dot, FOUR, dot, dot, dot, ONE,dot,dot,dot, FOUR, dot,dot..... Thats how he starts off his innings 9/10 times!

Field spread would be even easier for him to survive, pitches faster or not.

Dunno about that- Gangoo doesnt last very deep in the middle overs because he throws his wicket when you dry up his boundaries by spreading the field.

[Predator_05]

Indeed. SRT's best performances have come as an opener. And but for a handful of games I can not remember him bludgeoning his way in death overs.

How could he ? Openers don't survive until the death overs - they usually perish sometime between the 25th and 35th over

[Anakin]

Dude..have you EVER seen SCG bat ? why so blatent twistings of facts ? Gangoo's style is dot,dot,dot,dot, FOUR, dot, dot, dot, ONE,dot,dot,dot, FOUR, dot,dot..... Thats how he starts off his innings 9/10 times! Dunno about that- Gangoo doesnt last very deep in the middle overs because he throws his wicket when you dry up his boundaries by spreading the field.

Brother plz, check his SR during the PPs and later.

[Anakin]

How could he ? Openers don't survive until the death overs - they usually perish sometime between the 25th and 35th over

How does that matter, PP is till SRT gets out.

[Bongosamaj]

Brother plz' date=' check his SR during the PPs and later.[/quote'] Brother, please watch him play- i did not say anything about Gangoo being fast/slow scorer- which is what ST/R indicates. I said that Gangoo always starts off by having a plethora of dot balls and mostly scoring his runs through fours. In the 70s/80s, where the field is spread out right from the start, Gangoo's fours would dry up and he wouldn't GET a chance to settle in and play a long innings most of the time.

[Lurker]

How could he ? Openers don't survive until the death overs - they usually perish sometime between the 25th and 35th over

So in other words we would never know how SRT would perform if he was not an opener? Wait a minute, here are his numbers when he does NOT open. 10.2@ 3, 38@4, 28.4@5. Any points for guessing why the chap wants to open all the time? Just in case you were wondering Viv averages 57, 48 and 30 in those positions. xx