Vivian Richards vs Sachin Tendulkar

[Jono]

I will start off by commending Richard for starting a versus thread that actually has some merit and is worth debating and for picking an irrelevant third option that entices no one.

Truly remarkable (and by quoting this I'm guessing someone will vote the irrelevant third option on purpose now).

But it just goes to show how amazingly brilliant both batsmen were, that so much serious discussion has resulted from the comparison, with everyone voting one way or the other and not screwing around.

 

[vic_orthdox]

People seem to have this idea that because Richard's was more unorthodox, it means that it is more difficult to bat like him. For me, batting like Tendulkar would just about be the most difficult thing that there is.

I think it's more that if someone goes to you, "Hey, come watch this guy bat, he's one of the best ever", you'd probably expect him to bat like Sachin; eliminating risks where appropriate, glorious straight bat, etc.

You wouldn't expect to roll along and see this person bat like Richards.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I think it's more that if someone goes to you, "Hey, come watch this guy bat, he's one of the best ever", you'd probably expect him to bat like Sachin; eliminating risks where appropriate, glorious straight bat, etc.

You wouldn't expect to roll along and see this person bat like Richards.

Yeah pretty much. Tendulkar has the a technique that is as close to perfect as I believe can be (physically) and whilst he manages that, and scoring bucketloads of runs against all the best attacks.

 

[funnygirl]

Yeah pretty much. Tendulkar has the a technique that is as close to perfect as I believe can be (physically) and whilst he manages that, and scoring bucketloads of runs against all the best attacks.

Not really .Struggled against guys like Allan donald ,Ambrose ,never faced Ws at their prime in tests . He has a pretty good average against Aussie line up minus Mcgrath .

 

[Jono]

Never faced the Ws in their prime? He faced them when Tendulkar was 16 and they were at the top of their game!

Unless you were being sarcastic which I gather from the you were.

Still not even the biggest Tendulkar hater could accuse sachin of not facing the Ws at their best.

 

[funnygirl]

Never faced the Ws in their prime? He faced them when Tendulkar was 16 and they were at the top of their game!

Unless you were being sarcastic which I gather from the you were.

Still not even the biggest Tendulkar hater could accuse sachin of not facing the Ws at their best.

Correct me if i am wrong Ws peak time was 1990-1996.

In that series ,Waqar was a debutant and Wasim was picking his game up,still he was at his best after 1990 Australian series .For Waqar 1990 NZ series ,he picked up his peak .

However i would appreciate a Sixteen year olds guts to face that attack at their home . .

 

[funnygirl]

Nahh, a lot earlier than that IMO.

Wasim was very injury prone prior to 1990 ,had two operations and Waqar had a slow start like 4 wickets in 4 tests ,both of them were fit and at their best ,during 1990-1996 from what i saw.

PS : I am not a Tendulkar hater , a huge fan ,but not a blind fan .

 

[duffer]

Having seen tapes of Viv's great knocks I can say he was an incredible force as a batsman but watching Sachin bat is as close to perfection as you'll ever find. Especially the Sachin of the 90's, which was wow.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Wasim was very injury prone prior to 1990 ,had two operations and Waqar had a slow start like 4 wickets in 4 tests ,both of them were fit and at their best ,during 1990-1996 from what i saw.

PS : I am not a Tendulkar hater , a huge fan ,but not a blind fan .

My bad, I though you wrote WI, not W

 

[funnygirl]

Both of these greats are inimitable ,u cannot find another Viv and another Tendulkar .In terms of pure destruction Viv just tops Tendulkar ,thats it,.

 

[Anil]

I think it's more that if someone goes to you, "Hey, come watch this guy bat, he's one of the best ever", you'd probably expect him to bat like Sachin; eliminating risks where appropriate, glorious straight bat, etc.

You wouldn't expect to roll along and see this person bat like Richards.

i would...and the sachin of the risk elimination phase didn't come until much later(well into the 2000s)...and another thing, richards had one of the most solid techniques against both spin and pace of his time, he was not a slogger, he scored using proper cricketing shots...so the difference between these two genuises is not as stark as a lot of people suggest...

 

[Engle]

I think it's more that if someone goes to you, "Hey, come watch this guy bat, he's one of the best ever", you'd probably expect him to bat like Sachin; eliminating risks where appropriate, glorious straight bat, etc.

You wouldn't expect to roll along and see this person bat like Richards.

My expectations would be exceeded (as would my delight) if instead of seeing a Tendulkar bat, I get to see a Richards bat.

 

[haroon510]

this was a hard one but voted for Sir Richard.. based on the fact that he faced much better bowlers than sachin and he not only play those bowlers well but destroy them.. bash them around the park.. he would pick the absolute best bowler and bash him around the park..

Sachin's strugle against Mcgrath was another reason why i voted for Sir Richards..

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha, yeah, picked Boycs very strategically knowing that with him potential votes were unlikely to be wasted the way they would've been if I'd gone for, say, Adam Gilchrist.

I was really, really tempted to vote for Boycott. My stance on Tendulkar v Richards was strong enough to stop me though.

 

[silentstriker]

I was really, really tempted to vote for Boycott. My stance on Tendulkar v Richards was strong enough to stop me though.

If someone were to bat for my life, and the criteria was to bat as long as possible, I don't think I'd pick anyone else (bar Bradman) except Boycott. He'd be 7*(1244) at the end, but the crazy bastard would be there.

 

[FRAZ]

If someone were to bat for my life, and the criteria was to bat as long as possible, I don't think I'd pick anyone else (bar Bradman) except Boycott. He'd be 7*(1244) at the end, but the crazy bastard would be there.

How about Hanif Mohammad ?

 

[silentstriker]

How about Hanif Mohammad ?

Not over Boycott, no.

 

[Engle]

If someone were to bat for my life, and the criteria was to bat as long as possible, I don't think I'd pick anyone else (bar Bradman) except Boycott. He'd be 7*(1244) at the end, but the crazy bastard would be there.

The inverse of that would be Richards

 

[grecian]

i would...and the sachin of the risk elimination phase didn't come until much later(well into the 2000s)...and another thing, richards had one of the most solid techniques against both spin and pace of his time, he was not a slogger, he scored using proper cricketing shots...so the difference between these two genuises is not as stark as a lot of people suggest...

This is a very good post. The way some are painting Sir Viv you'd think he was an Afridi. Its getting a bit silly. He faced some extremely good bowlers, on occasionally terrible pitches. He would not of done as well if he couldn't play proper cricket when needed. He had a perfectly good defensive tecnique, but you don't see that on highlight reels.He also played incredibly unorthodox shots brilliantly at times. This range was why many consider him one of the true greats.

It's a very close match with Sachin though, as he's also a great IMHO.

 

[JBH001]

Threads moved on a bit, and have to go back and read some of the recent pages of discussion. But yesterday, I did watch a few youtube vids of Viv batting, and man, that guy is a sight to behold. Some amazing shot making, very good technique, awesome eye, and I get what they mean by "the swagger". Viv at the crease just oozes the aura of some ancient emperor arrogantly surveying his fiefdom.

That said, I did not watch whole innings of his performances, just best highlights, which puts me (and SRT too) at a disadvantage when judging him vis a vis SRT. Neither am I going to go looking for tapes etc of complete innings batting by Viv as I simply dont have the time. Hence, assessing these two phenomenal batsmen is a little difficult. In the end, I am opting for what I know, and have seen, and have followed in my time thus far with cricket, and that is SRT. As I said earlier, no one, for me, embodies the sheer craft and skill and organisation (in terms of mental and physical technique) of batting better than SRT. At his best he is, imo, batting personified.