Viv Richards vs. Dennis Lillee

[kabira]

Sachin says that he was no better than Bradman, well he even says he is no better than Lara or other cricketers.. Sachin is most humble cricketer. Cricketer generally do not like comparisons..Its us who are doing the comparisons.. One fact you guys forget when comparing both. In those days, Bradman had chance to play even lower amateur team before actual test matches..If he was out of form, it gives him chance to work on his weakness and get his confidence back. Those days each test match was followed by one or two tour games...Staying in form was easier for talented cricketer like Bradman.. Now compare it with Modern day cricketers..Lot of ODIs games, no break, hardly any tour game..if you are out of form, only way to come back is when you are booted out of the team..e.g. Dravid or Ganguly or even M. Clarke.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

what has Sachins performance got to do with the discussion on DGB that too using ODI stats ?

Even if you see test matches, Sachin's performances : In NZ Test avg = 41 In South Africa Test avg = 39 In Pakistan Test avg = 40 In Zimbabwe, Test avg = 40 In WI test avg = 47 So there is nothing here to suggest sachin was by any means a success in these countries, even in tests. These are very ordinary figures for Sachin's record in tests in 5 test playing countries, and we can hardly call him world's best by any stretch of imagination

[Gambit]

So why was this ordinary mediocre batsman second or third in your all time list Hari? Why pick such mediocrity? :D

[kabira]

Haribhai, whats Sachin's average in England?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

So why was this ordinary mediocre batsman second or third in your all time list Hari? Why pick such mediocrity? :D

Sachin was a reluctant inclusion in my all time list of 5 top cricketers, behind Bradman and Richards, and that was because I deferred to Sir Donald Bradman's opinion over my own :D

[Guest HariSampath]

Sachin averaged 54 in Australia in tests, and 62 in England, in tests. Well if you think those are what matters according to me ...... Bradman averaged 102 in England in Tests, and 98 in Australia LOL

[Bongosamaj]

Sachin says that he was no better than Bradman, well he even says he is no better than Lara or other cricketers..

FYI, Sachin has been asked about Lara and their 'rivalry' in the media many times. He's also been asked on his opinions on how he compares with Viv or Sunny...and everytime, Sachin has said that they are all great batsmen, great pleasure to watch, great pleasure to play with them, etc etc. ONLY in the case of Bradman has Sachin CATEGORICALLY said that Bradman was way way better and he is just honoured to even entertain a comparison so lop-sided. That is clear indication of where Sachin HIMSELF sees Bradman and as far as i am concerned, when Sachin HIMSELF concedes that he isnt in the same bracket as Bradman, rest is all irrelevant. Unless ofcourse, you want to claim that you know more about Sachin's game than Sachin.

In those days, Bradman had chance to play even lower amateur team before actual test matches..If he was out of form, it gives him chance to work on his weakness and get his confidence back. Those days each test match was followed by one or two tour games...Staying in form was easier for talented cricketer like Bradman..

Thats your opinion. In my opinion, it was harder, since they played Tests so rarely amidst all the FC games and club-cricket games. These days the regulars play 30-40 international games every year and 2-3 domestic games at most. Much easier to remain in touch than change gears and suddenly face opposition far better in quality as it was when you play 30-40 matches against club cricketers and then 4-5 tests against the best of the best.

[Gambit]

Sachin was a reluctant inclusion in my all time list of 5 top cricketers' date=' behind Bradman and Richards, and that was because I deferred to Sir Donald Bradman's opinion over my own :D[/quote'] Aussies would be proud to see an Indian defend one of theirs so vehemently. :D BTW did you know DGB had poor eyesight? He was probably wrong about this mediocre SRT. :)

[Guest HariSampath]

Bradman's record was "extremely poor" against Windies, he "failed" because his average was a terrible 74 , Lol.... His worst was way beyond Sachin's best

[Guest HariSampath]

Aussies would be proud to see an Indian defend one of theirs so vehemently. :D BTW did you know DGB had poor eyesight? He was probably wrong about this mediocre SRT. :)

Yes Bradman had slightly short sight, that was discovered after some institution wanted to check it up in the light of his superhuman batting achievements. This was very much in the second half of his career

[kabira]

>Will say ? Are you a mind-reader now ? bongosamaj, first learn to read properly, dont go to CC.com to post this stuff or google for something..first learn to read and then comment.. I never said will?

[Bongosamaj]

BTW did you know DGB had poor eyesight?

Perhaps...but it hardly matters if you know how to compensate for it. Clive Lloyd faced down many a great bowler wearing horn-rimmed glasses and being almost completely blind without his glasses....and yet, for the latter part of his career, he out-did the far more 'quick-eyed' Viv, Greenidge, Haynes, Kalli, etc.

[Gambit]

Yes Bradman had slightly short sight' date=' that was discovered after some institution wanted to check it up in the light of his superhuman batting achievements. This was very much in the second half of his career[/quote'] IIRC during the war he wanted to sign up for the army and during a routine test, he was told that he had poor eyesight.

[kabira]

>Sachin averaged 54 in Australia in tests, and 62 in England, in tests. >Well if you think those are what matters according to me ...... >Bradman averaged 102 in England in Tests, and 98 in Australia LOL good, we are getting somewhere...lets assume sachin never played SA, will you assume that his average will be similar to that of australia?

[Guest HariSampath]

>Will say ? Are you a mind-reader now ? bongosamaj, first learn to read properly, dont go to CC.com to post this stuff or google for something..first learn to read and then comment.. I never said will?

What is CC ??

[kabira]

>yet, for the latter part of his career, he out-did the far more 'quick-eyed' Viv, Greenidge, Haynes, Kalli, etc. well dint Lloyd wear glasses, so he was using some sort of equipment...which made him quick-eyed..

[Bongosamaj]

>Will say ? Are you a mind-reader now ? bongosamaj, first learn to read properly, dont go to CC.com to post this stuff or google for something..first learn to read and then comment.. I never said will?

Edited, Kabira. FACT remains, Sachin has said the same 'great player, priviledge to watch/play with them, etc etc' when he is asked a comparative question against anybody, EXCEPT Bradman, where Sachin CATEGORICALLY said that he is nowhere close to being as good as Bradman. He has NEVER said that for anyone else, except in Bradman's case, so by Sachin's OWN words, Bradman > Sachin and i don't think any of your opinions count for much when it contradicts Sachin's own assessment about his batting.

[Bongosamaj]

>yet, for the latter part of his career, he out-did the far more 'quick-eyed' Viv, Greenidge, Haynes, Kalli, etc. well dint Lloyd wear glasses, so he was using some sort of equipment...which made him quick-eyed..

So ? Point is, you don't need 20/20 vision to play cricket or be an excellent batsman. Bradman's eyesight wast top-notch, but it was still better than most of us. Lloyd's was so poor that he HAD to use glasses. Not having the best eyesight doesn't mean squat, especially when you can compensate for it like Bradman did.