The second greatest number 3 of all time

[Red]

Full expect Chappeli to sign up and vote for himself. Good bait by Red Hill.

Haha.
I rate Chappeli the batsman. Highly. Brilliant cricketer whose overall average doesn't do justice to how good he was.

 

[Red]

Then I am going to do the unthinkable on cricket chat and retract my view. All of my impressions of Viv were when I was a young lad and not at least until circa 1980 at the earliest. At that stage he had become somewhat belligerent. He was stunning in his belligerence mind you and could completely dominate an attack like no man has ever since or possibly ever will. Part of that dominance was his persona. It wasn't just that he was hitting fours. It was the swagger and the fact he was chewing gum out there. He was a very macho man. And he played like one. There is no other word than domineering.

Still a problem exists when categorising him as the best number 3 ever, if he only played like a terrific number 3 during say 40% of his career is that enough time.

This thread has been quite eye opening with regards to my views on Viv.

Should go check out more footage and writing on him.

Psychologically, Viv HAD to dominate bowlers. I think there was a reaction against racial oppression tied up in this. Viv had a massive series in 1976 after Greig made his ill-informed "grovel" quote about the WIs. He averaged 120 in that series. Viv, being an eye player, probably went on a little too long, he was still serviceable, but not the force he once was. Like Ponting in that respect perhaps.

 

[Burgey]

Viv of those I've seen, but I'd probably plumb for Hammond from an all time pov.

 

[AldoRaine18]

I'll have Viv in the team over anyone else in that list, as simple as that.

 

[Migara]

Richards occupied the No.3 spot from 1976 to 1986. Only from the end of 1986 onwards did he bat regularly lower down the order. Larry Gomes did bat at No.3 on 19 occasions from 1976 to 1987, but for the most part he was at No.4 or 5.

Richards record at No.3 is;
Tests = 45
Runs = 3508
Average = 61.54
100s = 12
50s = 14
HS = 291


Tbh though I'm surprised at how relatively few tests Richards batted at No.3 as my teenage cricketing memories seem to consist mainly of Richards carrying the assault to Snow, Lillee, or Willis and co. - and seemingly coming off first best most of the time.

Sanga, averages 61.2 at #3, 37 100S, 50 50s, HS - 319.

If the gloves were taken away, then average rises to ridiculous 68.05. That is some pretty tough competition for the King.

 

[Furball]

My gut instinct was to say "Viv" to myself upon reading the thread title.

Statistically that seems to be borne out as well. Hammond's conversion record is pretty bloody good.

 

[AldoRaine18]

Sanga, averages 61.2 at #3, 37 100S, 50 50s, HS - 319.

If the gloves were taken away, then average rises to ridiculous 68.05. That is some pretty tough competition for the King.

Difficult to rate batting averages of Sri Lankans given their home grounds.

 

[smash84]

Difficult to rate batting averages of Sri Lankans given their home grounds.

yeah, and Murali gets no extra points for getting wickets on those same wickets right?

 

[The Battlers Prince]

Not as much credit as what Vaas should anyway

 

[OverratedSanity]

yeah, and Murali gets no extra points for getting wickets on those same wickets right?

You making this post is almost as predictable and tiring as the SL has roads post that precedes it.

 

[Flem274*]

Ponting. I've never been more afraid of a batsman in my life.

 

[cnerd123]

You making this post is almost as predictable and tiring as the SL has roads post that precedes it.

I find the "Sanga without gloves" argument a lot more tiring tbh.

 

[Zinzan]

Difficult to rate batting averages of Sri Lankans given their home grounds.

Why Sri Lanka specifically as opposed to all of the subcontinent?