Viv Richards vs. Dennis Lillee

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[kabira]

Bradman played in amateur era....man amongst boys.. Look at what Sachin did when he played with amateurs...averaging 100+..better than 99.94 :hysterical:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

Bradman played in amateur era....man amongst boys.. Look at what Sachin did when he played with amateurs...averaging 100+..better than 99.94 :hysterical:

Sachin has never clicked when the going is tough, in fact over 18 years he has never clicked in Australia when playing ODIs and won games there. this proves Sachin is not the so called "great" as he is media hyped to be, a very good , fantastic batsman with a much better record than abilities

[Guest HariSampath]

Touche kabs :thumbs_up:

Go on, and answer my question...... I have proved you conclusively wrong on the first point, in the Bradman debate, see the thread..... accepted or not ? if not answer me on that thread http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=46686&highlight=Bradman&page=2

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Rajiv]

I am not too sure about these comparisons, perhaps some advanced animation can determine the result ( a concept in that movie: Rocky Balboa 2006 ) I can safely agree to the fact that aussies would have beaten them in fielding atleast ( considering there weren't many slides in the past ) On the other hand, there was more to this 80's Windies Team and that was fear. They won half the battle with their personalities and you had to deal with their dangerous PACERS and ferocious HITTERS whereas Australia is all pure skill IMO, let some things be unanswered in cricket so it's always a topic to discuss A match to see: Warne to Viv Richards, Gilly facing Maclom Marshall round the wicket

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

Lets do this methodically ... do you agree or not that the 8+6 points mentioned earlier are significant aspects that need to be considered to figure out a batsmans pedigree? Simple Yes/No please. We will then get to the points one by one.

I was the only one trying to be methodical on that thread, still am. I agreed to the 8 points. I dealt with the first. I proved you wrong, with facts and figures. You couldn't refute me and you chose to ignore this. Now say, FIRST point of your 1st 8 points: It has been defeated. Yes or no ?

[Guest HariSampath]

I am not too sure about these comparisons, perhaps some advanced animation can determine the result ( a concept in that movie: Rocky Balboa 2006 ) I can safely agree to the fact that aussies would have beaten them in fielding atleast ( considering there weren't many slides in the past ) On the other hand, there was more to this 80's Windies Team and that was fear. They won half the battle with their personalities and you had to deal with their dangerous PACERS and ferocious HITTERS whereas Australia is all pure skill IMO, let some things be unanswered in cricket so it's always a topic to discuss A match to see: Warne to Viv Richards, Gilly facing Maclom Marshall round the wicket

Windies were lots more than raw power, pace and hitting... yes they were all that, but LOTS more. The disconcerting lift of Joel Garner from just good length, the pure technical skill of Michael Holding, the intelligence of Andy Roberts ( I am yet to see a fast bowler bowl 2 different paced bouncers at will), The relentless aggression of Malcolm Marshall, the prolific scoring of Greenidge, the devastation achieved by Richards in batting, the absolute control of Lloyd in changing the course of an innings....all these things to name a few, were additions on the sheer power batting and raw pace. yeah, we will always have subjective issues left unanswered in cricket so we can keep discussing them till the cows come home :D

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Shehezaada]

Sachin has never clicked when the going is tough' date=' in fact over 18 years he has never clicked in Australia when playing ODIs and won games there. this proves Sachin is not the so called "great" as he is media hyped to be, a very good , fantastic batsman with a much better record than abilities[/quote'] really? I recall a match winning 86 on one leg on our tour over there last time. And never clicked when the going is tough? Tendulkar's entire career is based on the bedrock of coming in when the going is tough. Chennai 136? Mumbai 55 on a total dustbowl? The man has played countless knocks under the most severe pressure. Where do you get off saying he has never clicked when the going is tough?

[Guest HariSampath]

you agreed to debate those ... but Iam asking something else .. are those points important when one is trying to evaluate a Batsmans pedigree Simple Yes or No ONLY please. Thanks.

Those 8 points were defined by you, and are all only Bradman specific. With reference to a Batsman's pedigree in general, those points are completely off the mark

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

really? I recall a match winning 86 on one leg on our tour over there last time. And never clicked when the going is tough? Tendulkar's entire career is based on the bedrock of coming in when the going is tough. Chennai 136? Mumbai 55 on a total dustbowl? The man has played countless knocks under the most severe pressure. Where do you get off saying he has never clicked when the going is tough?

The facts are that over the entire playing career of Sachin, India has won only 2 ODIs against Australia there. Chennai test 136 was a classy innings, but Sachin slogged with 16 to win and we lost. Similarily there are umpteen times when Sachin has failed to click in key games when going is tough. eg Aus in WC 99, Aus WC finals 03 and so on

[Guest HariSampath]

Again is that a YES OR NO to my question from post # 131. Dont provide any explanation ... just Y/N please it shouldnt be that hard.

Here are your 8 points 1. Playing IN India 2. Playing in Pak,SL,WI ? 3. Playing against a quartet ala Holding,MM,Big Bird,Andy Fiery Roberts ? 4. Playing against qualities Leggies ? 5. Playing against super fast bowlers (Shoaib,Donald,Blee etc) 6. Playing at a Wankhedesque dust bowls where the first innings Batting Avg is lesser than a Perths 4th inngs avg ? 7. Playing reverse swing ? 8. Playing against really mean bowlers with sub 23 avg ? Why aren't there really significant points like : 1. Playing in the swinging and seaming conditions of England 2. Playing on the fast bouncy tracks of Australia. 3. Playing on uncovered pitches 4. Scoring runs at an extraordinarly level of consistency , getting huge scores almost in every test match played. 5. Ability to turn a test match around in one session of batting 6. Ability to turn entire series around and win from a practically lost position, purely by batting. 7. Ability against all types of spinners, off spinners, left arm orthodox etc. 8. Ability to score runs at the rate of 100 per session, helping the team to set up test victories What about these points ?? Yes or No ?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Chandan]

The facts are that over the entire playing career of Sachin' date=' India has won only 2 ODIs against Australia there. Chennai test 136 was a classy innings, but Sachin slogged with 16 to win and we lost. Similarily there are umpteen times when Sachin has failed to click in key games when going is tough. eg Aus in WC 99, Aus [b']WC finals 03 and so on

Hey Sampath, Are you talking about Australia only? So let us start from '98 Sharjah, '98 Dhaka ICC KO, '00 Nairobi, ICC KO,--who had played the crucial knocks there? And do you realise that the going gets tough only when Sachin gets out? How many times in his life has Sachin come to crease (in tests) when the score is 20/2? Problem is, people expect Sachin to start as well as finish the game all on his own, forgetting that there are 10 more players in the team!

[Guest HariSampath]

You made a statement that Bradman did everything and beyond and hence I made those 8 points which he did not ... Now can you tell me whether those aspects are significant .... Simple Yes / NO

I made the statement that Bradman did everything humanly possible....i.e scoring runs in a huge scale wherever and whenever and against whoever he played It was YOU who raised those 8 points supposedly against it. And I started to counter the points systematically one by one...( I don't have to agree on the validity of the points , but I can debate them ) . By the time I had finished off the 1st point, you couldn't defend your issue #1 and offered no counter too and indulged in evasive tactics, so debate closed then. Here was what I had said to the first point plus rules of engagement: ------------------------------------------------------- Ok, these are the 8 points that are the Issues ( Aussie 8 ball over of that era). If there are any points that I feel I have established beyond doubt by available fact, direct cricketing logic inference, and sound common sense to project certain situations, I will consider that point settled and move on, although you don't have to agree, but if you cannot refute the point, then obviously I would have won the point. Let others be umpires. Issue A playing IN India: It is a well known fact that Bradman never toured India and the question here is how we would have fared. The reasons why Bradman did not tour India was that Australia never played any test series between 1938 and 1947 due to the war. The first tour of any Aussie side to India was the Aussie services XI led by the victorian midget Lindsay Hasset in 1945/46 and Bradman could not come because he was not on the Australian services team, having been discharged from the war duty ( the Aus won its "test" in Chennai alone a game my dad used to speak about and Hasset got 100 I believe) So we are left with just seeing how Bradman fared in a later season against India in Australia, and project how he might have fared here. The stats for that test series in Aus are 5 tests 715 runs 201 highest Avg 178.75 Centuries 4 Fifties 1 The attack included the best Indian bowling of that era like Lala Amarnath and Vinoo Mankad What I mean is Bradman would have fared equally well in India, if not far better. I can also go on to say, he probably missed out on scoring another 4-5 hundreds, had he come on a test series here. Any arguments ? In fact if he had played in those missing 10 years, say some 20 tests against India, he would certainly have got a minimum of 10 centuries including maybe 2-3 double, triple tons ____________________________________________ From that point, you went on to argue in a convoluted manner that Bradman may not have scored a 300 on his first tour of India , and that alone proved your 1st point. Sorry, very weak and silly argument.....and that too had been refuted with no counter from you, so debate stopped... see thread. If you want to take it up, do it by answering me on that thread,

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --