Viv Richards vs. Dennis Lillee

[Guest HariSampath]

That wicket at Chennai was hardly a minefield. I have seen almost all the games at Chennai including that one. That innings was a very good high quality innings, but that was a test and not an ODI

[Chandan]

That wicket at Chennai was hardly a minefield. I have seen almost all the games at Chennai including that one. That innings was a very good high quality innings' date=' but that was a test and not an ODI[/quote'] And Lara's inning at Sabina Park and Barbados were also tests? If you've been talking about only ODIs, why did you mention those? And Chennai pitches have always been minefields especially on last 2 days. I'm surprised that you are saying otherwise having watched the matches live. In ODIs, I'm still asking you the stats of Viv scoring 150-160 runs chasing 300 not one but many times, because he is the greatest in your eyes. Please give me the stats.

[Guest HariSampath]

If you want to know what it is to play on spinning minefields against quality bowling here is one instance. Viv Richards, playing in his only 2nd test match against India in Delhi on a turning track against Prasanna , Bedi and Venkat ....on a track that was turning square. World's best spinners bowling at their peak of their careers, and coming in at 70-3, Richards scored a breathtaking 192 not out and Windies went on to win by an innings......That was the kind of match winning test innings I was referring to

[Guest HariSampath]

1987 Windies Vs India...again at the Kotla, Delhi. Very bad wicket. India 1st innings 75 all out. Windies 1st inngs 125 allout India score 300 plus and Windies chasing 276 to win with the ball popping and spitting, Maninder, Shastri and Arshad Ayub bowling, Richards coming in at 90-3 and played an innings of 109 notout to take Windies to a win... he was not even beaten once..... think about that. Match over in 4 days.

[Chandan]

Brilliant innings. But his bowlers took 20 wickets to set up the match, even on a turning track with no renowned spinners in the rank. Only if Sachin had such an attack too, many of his innings would have been match winning too. Now why did Richards come at the fall of 3 wickets? Did he bat at #5? Anyway, how many 150-160 did he score chasing 300 runs and against whom and where?

[Guest HariSampath]

Brilliant innings. But his bowlers took 20 wickets to set up the match, even on a turning track with no renowned spinners in the rank. Only if Sachin had such an attack too, many of his innings would have been match winning too. Now why did Richards come at the fall of 3 wickets? Did he bat at #5? Anyway, how many 150-160 did he score chasing 300 runs and against whom and where?

Setting up matches etc is all fine. I am also talking about the fact that when games come to be decided by ONE single batting performance, when all is done and finished with, Sachin has not delivered to the extent he has to in order to be considered as the "greatest batsman". Richards batted at 5 during his debut series, and also towards the latter stages of his career. The 300 criteria may not exactly work for applying fully to Richards, because in those days when he was playing there were NO field restrictions inner circles and everything. Richards even got 138 notout in a WC finals with 7 men on the boundary !! the 2nd all time best ODI innings by Wisden. Even the top ODI inngs of the 20th century was Richard's 189 notout , when he added more than 100 for the last wkt with Michael Holding for company, against England. A devastating inngs. Like this Richards had played so many matchwinning innings in ODIs and tests for Windies. Of the 11 hundreds and 42 fifties he made in ODIs, all 11 100s and 32 50s were games that Windies won. You have to remember that he was playing in the middle order and Windies had perhaps one of the best opening partnership pairs of Greenidge-Haynes, and Richards never used to get a chance to bat in the top half of the innings, and many times he never got to bat at all !!

[MundaPakistani]

wow- 109 off 111 balls in such a tough situation! Brilliant. Hari, Some of Sachin's good innings were nullified because he didn't get the support from the rest of the team(especially bowlers). Here is a prime example http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63713.html Second highest scorer(Sanjay) made mere 18 and he didn't have the likes of Walsh/Ambrose or Wasim/Waqar who would blow other teams away.

[MundaPakistani]

Setting up matches etc is all fine. I am also talking about the fact that when games come to be decided by ONE single batting performance, when all is done and finished with, Sachin has not delivered to the extent he has to in order to be considered as the "greatest batsman". Richards batted at 5 during his debut series, and also towards the latter stages of his career. The 300 criteria may not exactly work for applying fully to Richards, because in those days when he was playing there were NO field restrictions inner circles and everything. Richards even got 138 notout in a WC finals with 7 men on the boundary !! the 2nd all time best ODI innings by Wisden. Even the top ODI inngs of the 20th century was Richard's 189 notout , when he added more than 100 for the last wkt with Michael Holding for company, against England. A devastating inngs. Like this Richards had played so many matchwinning innings in ODIs and tests for Windies. Of the 11 hundreds and 42 fifties he made in ODIs, all 11 100s and 32 50s were games that Windies won. You have to remember that he was playing in the middle order and Windies had perhaps one of the best opening partnership pairs of Greenidge-Haynes, and Richards never used to get a chance to bat in the top half of the innings, and many times he never got to bat at all !!

With out a doubt the greatest ODI innings ever! I was happy that Saeed broke his record but at the same time i was also a touch sad because that innings deserved to stay at the top for many decades.

[Chandan]

Setting up matches etc is all fine. I am also talking about the fact that when games come to be decided by ONE single batting performance, when all is done and finished with, Sachin has not delivered to the extent he has to in order to be considered as the "greatest batsman". Richards batted at 5 during his debut series, and also towards the latter stages of his career.

It is still the same that I've been saying. Many of his innings would have been brilliant match winning knocks, had our bowlers taken 20 wickets.

The 300 criteria may not exactly work for applying fully to Richards, because in those days when he was playing there were NO field restrictions inner circles and everything. Richards even got 138 notout in a WC finals with 7 men on the boundary !! the 2nd all time best ODI innings by Wisden. Even the top ODI inngs of the 20th century was Richard's 189 notout , when he added more than 100 for the last wkt with Michael Holding for company, against England. A devastating inngs. Like this Richards had played so many matchwinning innings in ODIs and tests for Windies. Of the 11 hundreds and 42 fifties he made in ODIs, all 11 100s and 32 50s were games that Windies won. You have to remember that he was playing in the middle order and Windies had perhaps one of the best opening partnership pairs of Greenidge-Haynes, and Richards never used to get a chance to bat in the top half of the innings, and many times he never got to bat at all !!

So you're willing to accept that even your best batsman didn't score 150-160 chasing 300 runs even once, what to talk of many times?? Good!!! Likewise, Sachin has played many many match winning knocks over the years in ODIs and all have been extremely enjoyable as well as productive for India. I don't think I need to enlist his great ODI knocks. They are well known to every Indian cricket fan. More than that, he has pulled many of us back to cricket with his sparkling knocks since 98.

Richards even got 138 notout in a WC finals with 7 men on the boundary !! the 2nd all time best ODI innings by Wisden.

Didn't the same Wisden rate Sachin as the second best batsman of all times after Don?

[Lurker]

Test matches are won by bowlers' date= to a large extent, yes. But say what about a 3rd innings situation when the team is trailing by 100 runs in the 1st innigs, a batsman can get 200 and set the opposition a target of 300 in the 4th innings. Or chasing 300 in the last innings and tottering at 20-2, and Sachin getting 130 notout AND winning the game..... no he has not done this type of thing and the whole world knows it Something like laxman's innings of 281 after following on. Sachin has not played that kind of test innings for India to win

Hari, To elaborate your point yes Test matches are won by bowlers. Afterall to win a Test you have to dismiss the opposition twice. But no way can a team win matches if the batsmen don't do anything of note in the first place. As an example lets take Pakistan team of 90s. By most account it was one of the best of all times, and quite possibly the best of its time. Wasim-Waqar-Saqlain-Akhtar or Wasim-Waqar-Saqlain-Mushtaq were easily as potent, if not more, than what the Aussies would sport Mcgrath-Fleming-Warne-Reiffel. However thanks to cr@ppy batting by Pakistani batsmen Pakistan did not dominate the era as much as it possibly could have. When Pakistani batsmen did get their acts together Pakistan won, as it witnessed by Inzamam's average(78) and Saeed Anwar (67). The story was not very different for West Indies team who had an all-time fearsome pair - Ambrose & Walsh with very good backups in Ian Bishop, Tony Grey, Kenneth Benjamin etc. Ambrose, in my opinion, was better than Holding-Roberts-Garner-Croft and could hold his own against Marshall. Walsh was pretty formidable too and like a fine wine grew better with age. Still West Indies sucked thanks to their batsmen. Moral of the story - Bowlers win you Test matches but on the back of good batsmen. xxxx

[Lurker]

With out a doubt the greatest ODI innings ever! I was happy that Saeed broke his record but at the same time i was also a touch sad because that innings deserved to stay at the top for many decades.

Not better than Kapil's 175* I am afraid MP. But yes a very very solid innings. Remember reading it the next day in an Indian newspaper and going WTF!

[Guest HariSampath]

So you're willing to accept that even your best batsman didn't score 150-160 chasing 300 runs even once, what to talk of many times?? Good!!!

Thats was because no one ever set the Windies 300 plus targets LOL.... plus because as I had mentioned in detail, there were NO 30 yard lines and field restrictions. In those circumstances Richards had played many many outsanding matchwinning inngs. Also as I said he never even got to play in the top part of the inngs due to the fact one of the most successful opening partnership pair of Greenidge-Haynes playing

[Guest HariSampath]

With out a doubt the greatest ODI innings ever! I was happy that Saeed broke his record but at the same time i was also a touch sad because that innings deserved to stay at the top for many decades.

Ya fantastic knock by Anwar, I saw that inngs here in Chennai, and he took Kumble to the cleaners LOL... but even if he just about broke the record, he was not really anywhere near Viv when it came to batting

[Guest HariSampath]

Not better than Kapil's 175* I am afraid MP. But yes a very very solid innings. Remember reading it the next day in an Indian newspaper and going WTF!

Kapil Dev's 175 at Tunbridge Wells is the best ever ODI innings played by an Indian .Period .

[Guest HariSampath]

It is still the same that I've been saying. Many of his innings would have been brilliant match winning knocks, had our bowlers taken 20 wickets.

I agree, but I was referring to the umpteen times when the bowlers HAD taken 20 wkts in a test and Sachin hadn't won it when he had a golden opportunity to do so. Take for example the Chennai tests against Pakistan '99 and that Aus test match in Chennai in 2001. First occasion, Sachin played one of the best ever inngs I had seen at the Chepauk, scoring 136, but within 16 runs of a win, he played a totally irresponsible ugly slog to Saqlain , knowing fully well we were in danger if he got out, and thats what happened, we lost. A class batsman will never leave it to others, but will finish the job off as gavaskar repeatedly says about Sachin. In the second instance, with India chasing about 140 to win and Sachin coming at 75 for 2, again got out and we were in serious danger of losing the test series , till Sameer Gighe got us home pretty narrowly. These are the kinds of situations ( and there are plenty more) where a Viv or Lara, would take up the job, play to the finish and win the game and series.

Likewise, Sachin has played many many match winning knocks over the years in ODIs and all have been extremely enjoyable as well as productive for India. I don't think I need to enlist his great ODI knocks. They are well known to every Indian cricket fan. More than that, he has pulled many of us back to cricket with his sparkling knocks since 98.

Tendulkar has played so many matchwinning knocks in ODIs, I am well aware of them all. The key is he hasn't delivered to those levels of "greatness" which he could have performed at , in those opportunities he got in the course of 400 ODIs. Plus in critical situations, like a must win in the '99 wc , against Aus, chasing a tall score, he had that opportunity to win the game off his bat, but failed. There are scores of such instances. The critical failures far outweigh the successes in similar situations and lots of the winning innings were not in such difficult/critical situations in ODIs

Didn't the same Wisden rate Sachin as the second best batsman of all times after Don?[/

Yes they did. The same Wisden didn't rate even one of his innings in the top 100 knocks of the 20th century

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

No... Bradman would have scored heavily against India in India, because other players of his era had done so, and Bradman was twice as good If Everton weekes can get 4 conseq 100s against India in 1940s, why do you think Bradman also would not have got 4 100s ?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

huh the first stats included all decades.

That itself is wrong. For anyone to make a projection of what Bradman would or would not have done, you need to consider only the stats upto his playing time

1. Bradman didnt play in India .

I know, thats a reason YOU gave and you still haven't given one whit of a proof to show he would have not done well in India in that period

2. Hence you dont know how he would do there . You Lost the point right there. Whatever is being debated beyond that is just because Iam letting you do that in the spirit of exchanging ideas and good debate... But since you are obsessed with letting out war cries of "I defeated you" ... its about time I reminded you of where we stand.

How have I lost the point ? I have given enough and more evidence to show that there s more than a high probability of Bradman's big success in India had he played. But you haven't shown anythig to the contrary, ( you mentioned in that thread that it was solely because NO teams scored highly in those days and NO batsman scored heavily on his first trip here, BOTH were shown to be statistically wrong... what else have you ? )

3. Whats worse is using some other player(s) from some other country as reference to prove that Bradman would do well is just outright silly and laughable as this is not mathematics where you can say if a > b and b > c then a > c.

I think it is fair enough. If you have got any other better way tell me. After all you are quoting so called stats of OTHER batsmen only to show Bradman would not have scored heavily. Point closed

4. What is even more laughable is to extrapolate further and say he would do just as well (Actually better according to you) in the current Modern era -i.e 70s to current - and hence he is a alltime great.

Not just me, almost ALL the all time greats of today have said the same thing , from Sobers to Tendulkar :two_thumbs_up:

End of story. :two_thumbs_up:

Yes. Bradman is the greatest ever Batsman to have played cricket.

[Guest HariSampath]

If the likes of Mathew Hayden ' date=' Younis Khan, Chanderpaul, Jimmy Admas could do well in India shouldnt Ricky Ponting& BCL -who are far better batsmen than those 4 - do likewise ? See the flaw in your logic ?[/quote'] No flaw and the logic was yours first when you said NO visiting batsmen scored well first time and so Bradman wouldnt. see that thread