Laxman or Azhar?

[Pratters]

I know Laxman has a huge following and I am one of them. But it is my opinion that no one could flick the ball off his wrists as Azhar could. His placements were simply stunning.

Forget the match fixing and compare the two players. Whom would you rate higher 5 years down the line? Laxman has still a lot left to achieve in his career but will he be rated alongside Azhar?

Azhar's average is 45, not great but not unimpressive either. Laxman has had an inconsistent career which is finally achieving potential after he was dropped in the World Cup 2003.

The two are pretty similar in a lot of the strokes they play. But Laxman has a wider range of shots which doesnt mean much when you see Azhar playing for India so well for so long.

Who do you think will be rated higher 5 years down the line?

 

[Craig]

Probably Laxman.

He's done so well against Australia, and no matter who they put out, they are still the best in the world, and that will always count in his favour IMO.

Never saw much of Azhar, so I feel I'm best to comment on VVS.

 

[Jono]

After all these years, Laxman finally has confidence in himself. This is the key and his untapped potential has now been 'tapped', so the sky is the limit as far I am concerned. He's proven himself to be valuable in both forms of the game, as you don't need to be a Gilchrist or Sehwag to be a great ODI player, he has his own style which consistently works. I think he can surpass Azhar, I'm not sure if he will. If Indian cricket continues to rise like it has in the past year or so, I think he has a very good chance.

I loved Azhar but I'm a much bigger fan of VVS, there's just something about him that you have to like.

 

[Pratters]

You cant but help like VVS but I dont think he is or ever will b as good as Azhar. Laxman has himself said he modelled himself on Azhar early in his career. I doubt Laxman can ever surpass the master of flick, Azza himself.

 

[masterblaster]

After all these years, Laxman finally has confidence in himself. This is the key and his untapped potential has now been 'tapped', so the sky is the limit as far I am concerned. He's proven himself to be valuable in both forms of the game, as you don't need to be a Gilchrist or Sehwag to be a great ODI player, he has his own style which consistently works. I think he can surpass Azhar, I'm not sure if he will. If Indian cricket continues to rise like it has in the past year or so, I think he has a very good chance.

I loved Azhar but I'm a much bigger fan of VVS, there's just something about him that you have to like.

I 100% agree with you there mate. Yeah VVS Laxman has got the best results against the best bowling attacks in the world. Whether it be McGrath, Lee, Warne, Gillespie in Australia or in India, or Lee, Gillespie, Bichel, Williams, Bracken, MacGill in Australia.

Laxman is one of the most attractive strokemakers in the world today, and is no doubt one of the nicest guys you will ever meet in world cricket.

For me, he's my favourite player in the Indian team at the moment, and I hope he accomplishes more and more in his career.
I was a huge fan of Azhar too, and his scandal(s) left me quiet saddened.

At the moment its Azhar for me, only by the slightest of margins, although that could change very soon.

 

[SquidAU]

Although I did see much of Azhar (and what I did see was far too long ago to remember), it is sad that he will prolly be remembered by the cricketing public as a cheater, not a graceful batsman (cept for us cricket fanatics here on Cricket Web).

 

[Richard]

Laxman has had an inconsistent career which is finally achieving potential after he was dropped in the World Cup 2003.

Laxman was achieving his potential in Tests long before WC2003.
From the ODI POV he's finally achieved his potential in the 2 tournos he's played since, but before the Australia tour he was averaging 60 in Tests from the 281 game onwards.
Laxman's career has been blighted by being forced to open; since that stopped once and for all he's been very, very consistent in Tests.
I never watched Azharrudin much but for sure he was a good player.

 

[Sanz]

I guess not many of you have seen Azhar bat before the match fixing days. He was an artist, pure artist. I will pick Azhar over VVS any day.

 

[Pratters]

Re: Re: Laxman or Azhar?

Laxman was achieving his potential in Tests long before WC2003.
From the ODI POV he's finally achieved his potential in the 2 tournos he's played since, but before the Australia tour he was averaging 60 in Tests from the 284 game onwards.

Laxman had a bad run from 1996 when he started playing test cricket. No one doubted his potential. Post 284, he was making some of the best 30s, 40s and 50s you would ever see but was not making big scores, throwing his wicket away. So was not realising potential.

Post WC 2003, he has finally started achieving some of which he promised earlier on.

Still he is not in the Azza class IMO

 

[Langeveldt]

Azhar wins it by a mile.. far superior...

And that is saying something, because Laxman is outstanding too....

 

[Anil]

Azhar was the more talented player besides being a much better fielder and catcher.

 

[masterblaster]

Azhar has one thing going for him over Laxman, and that's his ability to hit sixes as well as those beautifully artistic flicks and drives.

Laxman is just all timing, not much power hitting. Azhar's batting was much more well rounded, and I do remember him hitting some massive, massive sixes in ODI's and even Tests.

Laxman however depends more on timing the ball along the ground and placement rather than power.

Azhar had both, power hitting and elegance.

 

[ReallyCrazy]

I have to go with azhar. have seen him play a few very elegant innings. The first which comes to mind is his innings of 180-odd (I think) against England in 93-94. It was the around the time I was getting interested in cricket. However, towards the end he tapered off.

 

[Cactus]

i agree that laxman has great shots and great talent, no one can deny him of that. But i too have to go wth Azhar....very classy!

 

[iamdavid]

I'd have to go for Azzhar to at this point in time , certainly if Laxman keeps going at this rate he'll be up there with anyone in 5 years time , but ATM Azzhar is still the Hyderabadi Stylist

 

[Richard]

Re: Re: Re: Laxman or Azhar?

Laxman had a bad run from 1996 when he started playing test cricket. No one doubted his potential. Post 284, he was making some of the best 30s, 40s and 50s you would ever see but was not making big scores, throwing his wicket away. So was not realising potential.

Post WC 2003, he has finally started achieving some of which he promised earlier on.

VVS Laxman, from 11-03-2001 onwards
You have a point, but still - average speaks for itself. If you're getting 20s and 30s all the time, you don't need as many really big scores to get a decent average.
IMO he was a changed Test player from the 281 onwards.

 

[Richard]

Consensus suggests Azharrudin - his average is very impressive given the bowlers he had to face.
Laxman's period of averaging over 63 has coincided almost exactly with the lessining of the standards of bowling Worldwide. Guess I just automatically forgive him because he makes it look so good!

 

[masterblaster]

Consensus suggests Azharrudin - his average is very impressive given the bowlers he had to face.
Laxman's period of averaging over 63 has coincided almost exactly with the lessining of the standards of bowling Worldwide. Guess I just automatically forgive him because he makes it look so good!

I dont think that the standards of bowling that Laxman has been facing has 'lessned'.

He just makes facing McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Bichel, Warne, MacGill, Williams and Bracken look oh so easy.

It speaks volumes of him as a batsman, and not really of the declining rate of bowling. Because Gillespie, MacGill, Warne and McGrath look menacing as always.

 

[Pratters]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Laxman or Azhar?

You have a point, but still - average speaks for itself. If you're getting 20s and 30s all the time, you don't need as many really big scores to get a decent average.
IMO he was a changed Test player from the 281 onwards. [/B]

If you make 50s n 60s n then throw your wicket, you dont realise potential. Laxman did get dropped even after his 281 in the World Cup 2003. So he didnt exactly realise potential till post World Cup 2003 IMO.

 

[Richard]

Come on, you can't blur the two game-forms!
He never looked like getting dropped from the Test-side 281-onwards - just leave one-day considerations out of it, will you?
In one-dayers, as I've already said, I totally agree that he has only started to realise his potential from the TVS Cup onwards.