The better opener: Anwar vs. Sehwag (tests)

[subshakerz]

Just for fun, thought it would be interesting to compare arguably the best opener of the 90s, Saeed Anwar, with perhaps the best opener of the 2000s, Virender Sehwag. I feel that as terrific a player Sehwag is, Anwar certainly deserves to be bracketed in the same category in terms of class. I dont think Anwar would have any trouble averaging in the 50s in the 2000s given the quality of bowling he faced.

Points in favor of Anwar:

- Managed a higher average than almost any other opener in the 90s when pace attacks were at their finest and pitches were much more sporting

- Terrific record against McWarne

- As opener, performed better in seaming conditions of England, NZ and South Africa than Sehwag (who averages less than 30 in each)

Point in favor of Sehwag:

- Longevity, given that Anwar didnt play nearly as much cricket

- Arguably the most destructive test cricketer since Richards when in the mood with an incredible strikerate,

- Much better record in terms of run accumulation, with 2 triples and a few doubles under his belt.

Thoughts?

 

[smash84]

tough choice for me.

 

[ankitj]

Haha. This is tough. I'll sit back and watch till I join the side that majority tilts towards

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Anwar was just too good to watch.

 

[sledger]

Anwar, far more easy on the eye.

 

[ganeshran]

Anwar in England, Too close to call in SA. Sehwag everywhere else.

 

[Himannv]

Sehwag by a marginal margin.

 

[Howe_zat]

Anwar being the best opener of the 90s seems a dubious claim to begin with.

 

[smash84]

tbf to subz he did say "arguably"

that is the license to put forward just about anything you want to say

But tbh Anwar was a very very good batsman and there certainly isn't daylight between him and Sehwag

 

[ret]

Voted Sehwag .... forget the stats, having watched both of them play, I would say Sehwag is a special player much like Sir Viv Richards

 

[Top_Cat]

Anwar being the best opener of the 90s seems a dubious claim to begin with.

Agree with that.

Sehwag. Anwar was awesome, great to watch and one of the best of his time but Sehwag has a stronger case for being picked in any all-time great team.

 

[Burgey]

Saw a lot less of Anwar, so I figure using some people's logic that means I can't believe his record or stories about him, so it has to be Sehwag.

 

[subshakerz]

Anwar in England, Too close to call in SA. Sehwag everywhere else.

What about NZ?

And in SA, Anwar as opener did quite a bit more against better attacks than Sehwag.

I find it strange that someone like Mohd. Yousuf is considered the text book flat track bully, while Sehwag with a much worse record in swinging or seaming conditions is considered an easy all-time great. I understand his terrific strikerate and ability to score big tons, but surely his repeated failures in the above mentioned conditions should cuts some points, no? I mean, how can an opener be considered so great if he only survives the new ball when the pitch allows for it?

There really are two Sehwags, Sehwag the marauder who can decimate his opposition so long as the pitch doesnt have spice, and Sehwag the bunny who becomes the plaything for bowlers like Steyn and Anderson as we saw this past year when the going gets tough. If you dont believe me, recall the 2008 series against SA in India, Sehwag plundered the fastest ever triple century on a dead track in the first test, yet looked completely out of his depth in the next two tests on testy pitches. Its not just that he scores less runs, its that his technique which serves him so well on less responsive pitches cant adjust and balance for the swing and movement.

At least Anwar had the ability to occasionally challenge the pacers when conditions werent in his favor. Cant say the same for Sehwag (not considering spinning conditions, they were both excellent in that regard).

 

[J_C]

Sehwag. For not having a tailender like record against two of the best attacks of his time ala Anwar. Just sayin.

 

[Top_Cat]

At least Anwar had the ability to occasionally challenge the pacers when conditions werent in his favor. Cant say the same for Sehwag (not considering spinning conditions, they were both excellent in that regard).

haha, he did exactly that in his first Test!

 

[subshakerz]

haha, he did exactly that in his first Test!

Not as opener, and not since then.

 

[miscer]

What about NZ?

And in SA, Anwar as opener did quite a bit more against better attacks than Sehwag.

I find it strange that someone like Mohd. Yousuf is considered the text book flat track bully, while Sehwag with a much worse record in swinging or seaming conditions is considered an easy all-time great. I understand his terrific strikerate and ability to score big tons, but surely his repeated failures in the above mentioned conditions should cuts some points, no? I mean, how can an opener be considered so great if he only survives the new ball when the pitch allows for it?

There really are two Sehwags, Sehwag the marauder who can decimate his opposition so long as the pitch doesnt have spice, and Sehwag the bunny who becomes the plaything for bowlers like Steyn and Anderson as we saw this past year when the going gets tough. If you dont believe me, recall the 2008 series against SA in India, Sehwag plundered the fastest ever triple century on a dead track in the first test, yet looked completely out of his depth in the next two tests on testy pitches. Its not just that he scores less runs, its that his technique which serves him so well on less responsive pitches cant adjust and balance for the swing and movement.

At least Anwar had the ability to occasionally challenge the pacers when conditions werent in his favor. Cant say the same for Sehwag (not considering spinning conditions, they were both excellent in that regard).

it is my opinion that a subcontinental batsman's rating as far as being a FTB goes is dependent almost entirely on his performance is Australia.

Just quickly viewing the records gives evidence to this:
-Mo Yo: ave 31 in aus = FTB
-samaraweera: ave 22 in aus = FTB
-Sehwag: ave 60 in aus = ATG but not that great against seam/swing
-Anwar: ave 47 in aus = One of the great openers of the 90s.
-Jayawardene: ave 34 in aus = FTB
-sangakkara: ave 64 in aus = ATG, superb against pace.

now if u check their averages combined in NZ, AUS, ENG and SAF it seems like a lot of batsmen on the list who are considered FTB's aren't that far down the list and players considered great players of pace aren't that great. But all that doesn't matter, Australia matters. Lets do that in fact.

-Sangakkara and Anwar are on top: 43

BUT WAIT

-The "FTB" Mo Yo is second: 42 with the most 100s out of anyone in the list 5. HOW??!
-Sehwag: 34
-Jayawardene: 32
-Samaraweera: 31

But anyway the fact remains none of these guys have had much success outside the subcontinent on wickets made for fast bowling. Since 1990 the best subcontinental batsman in these 4 countries has actually been Guatam Gambhir! (with tendulkar and then dravid just trailing by a bit).

(edit: large parts of the post are sarcasm so don't get mad).

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't think it makes that much of a difference. Point is he stood up on an iffy deck against a good attack and scored a ton in his first Test.

Anwar did his fair share of cashing in on flat decks too. It's far from being the definitive difference between the two.

 

[smash84]

it is my opinion that a subcontinental batsman's rating as far as being a FTB goes is dependent almost entirely on his performance is Australia.

Just quickly viewing the records gives evidence to this:
-Mo Yo: ave 31 in aus = FTB
-samaraweera: ave 22 in aus = FTB
-Sehwag: ave 60 in aus = ATG but not that great against seam/swing
-Anwar: ave 47 in aus = One of the great openers of the 90s.
-Jayawardene: ave 34 in aus = FTB
-sangakkara: ave 64 in aus = ATG, superb against pace.

now if u check their averages combined in NZ, AUS, ENG and SAF it seems like a lot of batsmen on the list who are considered FTB's aren't that far down the list and players considered great players of pace aren't that great. But all that doesn't matter, Australia matters. Lets do that in fact.

-Sangakkara and Anwar are on top: 43

BUT WAIT

-The "FTB" Mo Yo is second: 42 with the most 100s out of anyone in the list 5. HOW??!
-Sehwag: 34
-Jayawardene: 32
-Samaraweera: 31

But anyway the fact remains none of these guys have had much success outside the subcontinent on wickets made for fast bowling. Since 1990 the best subcontinental batsman in these 4 countries has actually been Guatam Gambhir! (with tendulkar and then dravid just trailing by a bit).

(edit: large parts of the post are sarcasm so don't get mad).

haha....that is a great Burgey impersonation

 

[Contra]

Not as opener, and not since then.

England 2002

Was during that tour where Ganguly promoted him to the top, real masterstroke that.