Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 67

Thread: More devastating...Richards or Gilchrist??

  1. #31
    Cricket Web Staff Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Eclipse
    Gilly doesn't open who know's how he would go if he did.. my guess is he wouldn't change his approch one bit.. just look how he always plays the second new ball, or the fact he reguarly come's in under pressure and responmds with attack! most of his good scores have been when the team is under pressure..



    Maybe, he doesn't hit nearly as many sixes per innings on average as Gilly does though..
    There's a HUGE difference between playing the second new ball and the first - the strike bowlers have already got 20 overs or so under their belts and the batting side are on top. In the case of Gilchrist, if he's playing against the second new ball, then in all likelihood the Aussies are 300+ for 5 or 6, so he's under no pressure at all in those circumstances.

    I take your point about when he does come in under pressure, though.
    Nigel Clough's Black and White Army, beating Forest away with 10 men

  2. #32
    International Debutant Eclipse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Nere a Spoon
    Posts
    2,909
    Quote Originally Posted by luckyeddie
    There's a HUGE difference between playing the second new ball and the first - the strike bowlers have already got 20 overs or so under their belts and the batting side are on top. In the case of Gilchrist, if he's playing against the second new ball, then in all likelihood the Aussies are 300+ for 5 or 6, so he's under no pressure at all in those circumstances.

    I take your point about when he does come in under pressure, though.
    all true...

    but i just don't think gilly would change his approch, but again who knows because he has never tried it at Test level..

  3. #33
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    By your reasoning Hayden would fall into the same group - he averages in the mid 50s opening the batting and scores at a greater rate than Richards did. However, he is unquestionably not as devastating as Gilchrist is, even when he was making more runs.
    Like i said, Richards wins handsomely given the average scoring rate of his era and the bowlers he had to face...Gilly/Sehwag/Hayden is a much more direct comparison since they are largely from the same era... give or take a few years... and Sehwag outguns Hayden by a fair clip plus Haydos doesnt have the misery of facing his own bowlers..never forget that.

    Yes, but as others have pointed out Sehwag is still early in his career. Between October 2003 and April 2004 Gilchrist's average dropped by 9 runs. Before that he had maintained an average in excess of 60 for 18 months between the tour of South Africa and the home series against Zimbabwe. After his unbeaten century in the match where Hayden broke Lara's record he averaged 61.08 before heading into his drought during the India series, and his career peak was 61.48, the best since Bradman. Now he averages a touch under 55 and it's going up again from a low point of 52.88 prior to the century against Sri Lanka that ended his drought. This is why it's worth looking at how many matches Sehwag has played and seeing if his average is still in the 55 range in 5 years time.
    utterly irrelevant how one's career projectile works out. Its at the end/overall that matters. And i dont think Hayden's/Gilly's career peak of 61.4 average is the best since Bradman...Lara and Richards have averaged more than Hayden/Gilly's at various points in their careers.
    This up/down of average is irrelevant for its momentary...for all we know, Gilly can average 70 for the next 30 matches or 35 for the next 30...


    but i just don't think gilly would change his approch, but again who knows because he has never tried it at Test level..
    Approach is irrelevant without success.... If approach was the only criteria then Richards/Gilly etc. are all left in the dust by one Shahid Afridi.Since gilly hasnt batted regularly when bowlers are very fresh, you cant make that assumption.

  4. #34
    International Debutant Eclipse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Nere a Spoon
    Posts
    2,909
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    Approach is irrelevant without success.... If approach was the only criteria then Richards/Gilly etc. are all left in the dust by one Shahid Afridi.Since gilly hasnt batted regularly when bowlers are very fresh, you cant make that assumption.
    who really cares, just because he doesn't open the innings doesn't make his runs less valueble..

    what he does i doubt anyone else could do, maybe he wouldn't be that good as an opener but who is to say Shewag would be anygood batting at number 7..


  5. #35
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    utterly irrelevant how one's career projectile works out. Its at the end/overall that matters. And i dont think Hayden's career peak of 61.4 average is the best since Bradman...Lara and Richards have averaged more than Hayden at various points in their careers.
    This up/down of average is irrelevant for its momentary...for all we know, Gilly can average 70 for the next 30 matches or 35 for the next 30...
    I'm talking about Gilchrist not Hayden by the way, but you are missing my point, which is that Sehwag's current good average may well be temporary too. If we were having this discussion about Gilchrist two years ago, he was averaging in the 60s and at that time, his average was the best since Bradman (I'm aware that other batsmen have peaked in the 60s too - Hobbs spent most of his career averaging 60-65+, as did Sutcliffe and Sobers). Therefore Sehwag wouldn't be particularly close. At the moment Gilchrist's average has dropped and Sehwag's is high, but we won't know for a few years yet if Sehwag will do what Gilchrist and Richards did, which is to back up aggressive, devastating strokeplay with consistency over a long period. The fact that Gilchrist sits in a group of just 17 players in test history with a constant 40+ average is testament to exactly how consistent he is. The "up/down of average" is relevant, because it goes to the level of consistency Gilchrist has shown, which is why I am saying that we have to see what Sehwag averages in 5 years time before he can be compared to Richards or Gilchrist in terms of being devastating.

  6. #36
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    who really cares, just because he doesn't open the innings doesn't make his runs less valueble..
    No but it makes his job a LOT easier.

    I'm talking about Gilchrist not Hayden by the way, but you are missing my point, which is that Sehwag's current good average may well be temporary too. If we were having this discussion about Gilchrist two years ago, he was averaging in the 60s and at that time, his average was the best since Bradman (I'm aware that other batsmen have peaked in the 60s too
    Again, irrelevant. Most accurate comparision for current players is to compare upto-date record and for past players is to compare the whole thing...for the cumulative record takes into account any ups and downs and balances em out. Or else, going by your assertion, we cannot say that McGrath is a better bowler than Irfan Pathan NOW because who knows-McGrath may average 40 with the ball for the next 3 years and end with a 23-24 ave and 550 wickets and Irfan could average 19 with the ball for the next 15 years and end with 550-600 wickets @ 21..right ?

    What gilly was two years ago or what sehwag will be two years ago is irrelevant. What is relevant is how good he is cumulatively TODAY and how good Sehwag is cumulatively TODAY.

  7. #37
    Hall of Fame Member social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    16,987
    [QUOTE=C_C]

    Eclipse-unless Gilly plays in the same vein for the next 3-4 years, i would say that Sehwag is the likeliest candidate of holding the most sixes's record...he is considerably younger and hits sixes at the rate of a six per match...


    QUOTE]

    6 per match?

  8. #38
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    A six per match..ie 1 six/match

  9. #39
    Cricket Web Staff Member luckyeddie's Avatar
    Target Champion! Stuarts Xtreme Skateboarding Champion!
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Derby, England
    Posts
    17,755
    How many glaziers rely on him as their main source of income?

    Tino Best he is not.

  10. #40
    Hall of Fame Member social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    16,987
    ok sorry

    Richards = all time great

    Gilchrist = all time great

    Sehwag = on path to becoming all time great i.e. give him time

  11. #41
    International Debutant Eclipse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Nere a Spoon
    Posts
    2,909
    Quote Originally Posted by social

    Sehwag = on path to becoming all time great i.e. give him time
    i don't think so. it's to early to say that.

  12. #42
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Thane India
    Posts
    19,346
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedKing
    . it's like Afridi was amazing consistency
    No. Its not Afridi with amazing consistency. It is Afridi with all the strokes in the game (not just the front foot drive of anything between good length to half volley) PLUS amazing consistency.

    Speaking of Gilchrist and Afridi in the same breath is blasphemy.

  13. #43
    State 12th Man
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    India
    Posts
    752
    Yeah, especially since I much prefer watching Afridi.
    No, I don't think they can be compared. Gilchrist has the ability to hit balls that most people can't. But, unlike Afridi, he's not looking to hit everything for four or six. He just has a very good eye for boundary opportunities. Whereas Afridi is pretty much a brute-force player, with a good eye and good timing. Personally, I don't like Gilchrist's batting style, but it's good to see him destroy teams I don't support.

  14. #44
    Hall of Fame Member social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    16,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Eclipse
    i don't think so. it's to early to say that.
    Extrapolate Sehwag's current record to 75 tests and you have an all-time great.

    Guaranteed - no

    Potential - yes

  15. #45
    Hall of Fame Member FaaipDeOiad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    19,957
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    Again, irrelevant. Most accurate comparision for current players is to compare upto-date record and for past players is to compare the whole thing...for the cumulative record takes into account any ups and downs and balances em out. Or else, going by your assertion, we cannot say that McGrath is a better bowler than Irfan Pathan NOW because who knows-McGrath may average 40 with the ball for the next 3 years and end with a 23-24 ave and 550 wickets and Irfan could average 19 with the ball for the next 15 years and end with 550-600 wickets @ 21..right ?

    What gilly was two years ago or what sehwag will be two years ago is irrelevant. What is relevant is how good he is cumulatively TODAY and how good Sehwag is cumulatively TODAY.
    Err, no. What you are saying would be valid if Sehwag had a record that had undergone a few years at the top, but he doesn't, which is exactly my point. Gilchrist two years ago had been in test cricket for roughly four years and played around 50 tests and had a superlative record. Sehwag two years ago had only played around a dozen tests and was averaging about 40. After that, Sehwag has had a very good START to his international career, and he's certainly proven as an international talent, but to call him potentially the most devastating batsman of all time based on a short good period is ludicrous. Even ignoring direct comparison of their value as players, he simply cannot compare to Gilchrist because Gilchrist has been doing it for years now and come out of the inevitable period of lesser form that every player faces at some point and continued after it. Sehwag was averaging 40 fifteen months ago, and has since had a very good run of form and improved his average dramatically. Fifteen months however does NOT put you in contention for any sort of "all time" title, and to claim that it does is rather biased and out of character for you. Gilchrist started his career well but more importantly has maintained his amazing record for a long period of time, and as I said if Sehwag is still averaging in the 55 range in a few years time with a strike rate similar to what he has now I will be surprised, as pretty much every player in test history with a Richards/Gilchrist temprament EXCEPT for Richards and Gilchrist has gone through big patches of poor form because of the risky style of game they play. The thing that seperates Richards and Gilchrist from the pack is the fact that they manage to play in the devastating fashion that they do without throwing their wicket away regularly or slipping into long patches of poor form.

    Richards for me was unquestionably the better batter (as good as Gilchrist is), but Gilchrist is the most devastating batsman to ever play the game. Sehwag based on 15 months of good form isn't even in the same league.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Great ODI batsmen
    By Hit4Six in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 171
    Last Post: 02-01-2007, 07:08 AM
  2. A Pirates Life for Me
    By superkingdave in forum CW Cricket Media Coverage
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 10-12-2004, 05:09 PM
  3. A.C. Gilchrist - Superhero?
    By Western Warrior in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04-11-2004, 02:08 AM
  4. Gilchrist: Why I walked
    By Eclipse in forum World Cup 2003
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 25-03-2003, 11:20 AM
  5. Gilchrist out of Perth One Dayer
    By Blewy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 17-12-2002, 04:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •