Jaiswal Vs Brook Vs Mendis Vs Rachin Vs green Vs webster vs Konstas Vs Jacob Bethel

[capt_Luffy]

too much ATG work away from home. Viv for me.

If going Series by Series I agree, if taking longevity into account I don't; as Viv's some of the best works came in a short 6 year window, and he only was productive in Tests for 3 of those years

 

[Johan]

If going Series by Series I agree, if taking longevity into account I don't; as Viv's some of the best works came in a short 6 year window, and he only was productive in Tests for 3 of those years

Viv was productive away from home even in the later stages of his career such as 1986 Pakistan (in context ofc), 1988 Australia, 87-88 India and 1991 England. His final decline is almost entirely a home centred phenomenon.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Viv was productive away from home even in the later stages of his career such as 1986 Pakistan (in context ofc), 1988 Australia, 87-88 India and 1991 England. His final decline is almost entirely a home centred phenomenon.

Yeah, but I think Sachin was more consistent away also overall, while Viv no doubt had the higher peak and hence, series.

 

[Johan]

Yeah, but I think Sachin was more consistent away also overall, while Viv no doubt had the higher peak and hence, series.

I think Viv was better in the three countries they both toured (Australia, England, Pakistan) and better in India than Sachin in Windies, this is with entire careers taken into account, and WSC a little bit.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think Viv was better in the three countries they both toured (Australia, England, Pakistan) and better in India than Sachin in Windies, this is with entire careers taken into account, and WSC a little bit.

I think SRT was better in Australia and WI (Australia for more consistency and as I don't count WSC, WI for playing better attacks), both very slightly. Viv takes it in England and Pakistan, Sachin pushes for a come back with especially South Africa and while worse than these, SL and NZ. It's very close away imo.

 

[Johan]

I think SRT was better in Australia and WI (Australia for more consistency and as I don't count WSC, WI for playing better attacks), both very slightly. Viv takes it in England and Pakistan, Sachin pushes for a come back with especially South Africa and while worse than these, SL and NZ. It's very close away imo.

I'd take Viv in Australia, the main challenge of Australia is fast bouncy wicket with good zip for off-pitch devitation and Viv was just more successful in those contexts, also think Sachin got some very generous wickets in 2003 and 2007. He was very good in South Africa and good in New Zealand but not something I can't see Viv doing in all honesty.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I'd take Viv in Australia, the main challenge of Australia is fast bouncy wicket with good zip for off-pitch devitation and Viv was just more successful in those contexts, also think Sachin got some very generous wickets in 2003 and 2007. He was very good in South Africa and good in New Zealand but not something I can't see Viv doing in all honesty.

Viv being able to do and him doing are like 2 completely different things, don't you think? And I would value runs in Australia overall, not go skill by skill for this exercise, as I think it's how they performed in those places in Tests, not who had the better suited skillset. Viv also got some pretty hapless attacks, even more so than Sachin; after 81.

 

[Johan]

Viv being able to do and him doing are like 2 completely different things, don't you think? And I would value runs in Australia overall, not go skill by skill for this exercise, as I think it's how they performed in those places in Tests, not who had the better suited skillset. Viv also got some pretty hapless attacks, even more so than Sachin; after 81.

it's less about skill and moreso also reflected in numbers, one trade off I'm willing to make is that Sachin is ahead in Sydney and Viv is ahead on the faster Australian wickets, don't think I can give more than that. Yeah, but atleast the wickets still had life, and Viv had to face Lillee in Australia way more than Sachin had to face McGrath or Warne. Which balances it out. also, WSC should count for something considering Viv made runs on fast Australian wickets against Lillee and Pascoe in it.

 

[capt_Luffy]

it's less about skill and moreso also reflected in numbers, one trade off I'm willing to make is that Sachin is ahead in Sydney and Viv is ahead on the faster Australian wickets, don't think I can give more than that. Yeah, but atleast the wickets still had life, and Viv had to face Lillee in Australia way more than Sachin had to face McGrath or Warne. Which balances it out. also, WSC should count for something considering Viv made runs on fast Australian wickets against Lillee and Pascoe in it.

It's for me better Test tourist. And I would concede Viv better than Sachin for the above reasons had they averaged around the same, but Sachin does 10 more

 

[subshakerz]

it's less about skill and moreso also reflected in numbers, one trade off I'm willing to make is that Sachin is ahead in Sydney and Viv is ahead on the faster Australian wickets, don't think I can give more than that. Yeah, but atleast the wickets still had life, and Viv had to face Lillee in Australia way more than Sachin had to face McGrath or Warne. Which balances it out. also, WSC should count for something considering Viv made runs on fast Australian wickets against Lillee and Pascoe in it.

Viv is definitely ahead in Aus, Eng. But Tendulkar was simply good to excellent everywhere he went in eight countries and that's more impressive.

 

[Johan]

It's for me better Test tourist. And I would concede Viv better than Sachin for the above reasons had they averaged around the same, but Sachin does 10 more

5 more, and the Run-per-inning gap is 2. Plus, we both know and agree Cricket extends beyond just the Test Cricket mark, Cricket really should be judged on the standard of games rather than anything else really.

 

[subshakerz]

Rare occasion of me agreeing with PC.

I mean for me it's not a first level criteria either.

 

[Johan]

Viv is definitely ahead in Aus, Eng. But Tendulkar was simply good to excellent everywhere he went in eight countries and that's more impressive.

Viv was really good in India, Godly in Pakistan, arguably best since Hutton in Australia and best since Bradman in England so overall he just reaches higher highs I can't ignore, It's like Joe Root vs Sunil Gavaskar away for me, one has more work in a wider range of countries but one just has a bigger body of work away.

 

[subshakerz]

Viv was really good in India, Godly in Pakistan, arguably best since Hutton in Australia and best since Bradman in England so overall he just reaches higher highs I can't ignore, It's like Joe Root vs Sunil Gavaskar away for me, one has more work in a wider range of countries but one just has a bigger body of work away.

Tendulkar was remarkably consistent even if he didn't have those top end series he had plenty of very impressive ones.

- 1st tour as teen to Aus with two tons in 92
- Very good tour against ATG Aus attack in 99
- Great tour against formidable Aus attack in 2007
- Near ATG tour in SA in 2011

It's not a huge gulf between him and Viv in Aus.

Only in England is Viv well ahead of Tendulkar. But Tendulkar delivered in more places and against more attacks.

I rate ATG series as one criteria but it's more important for you. Consistency matters more.

 

[capt_Luffy]

5 more, and the Run-per-inning gap is 2. Plus, we both know and agree Cricket extends beyond just the Test Cricket mark, Cricket really should be judged on the standard of games rather than anything else really.

Well, I don't think overall Viv faced better attacks than Sachin did. He played Lillee more often than SRT did McGrath and Warne, but I also think the other attacks Sachin faced were slightly better and also it's 1 ATG to 2. I am not going strictly by average here, but think opposition and conditions were close enough for 5 runs more in average to triumph.

 

[Coronis]

I mean for me it's not a first level criteria either.

I mean for me its gonna be the last resort.

 

[Johan]

Tendulkar was remarkably consistent even if he didn't have those top end series he had plenty of very impressive ones.

- 1st tour as teen to Aus with two tons in 92
- Very good tour against ATG Aus attack in 99
- Great tour against formidable Aus attack in 2007
- Near ATG tour in SA in 2011

It's not a huge gulf between him and Viv in Aus.

Only in England is Viv well ahead of Tendulkar. But Tendulkar delivered in more places and against more attacks.

I rate ATG series as one criteria but it's more important for you. Consistency matters more.

Nobody claimed the gap between Viv and Sachin in Australia is huge or anything whatsoever, my claim was

- Viv is better in Australia, which you agree with.
- Viv is better in India than Sachin in the West Indies, which you also agree with.
- Viv is well ahead in England, which you also agree with.
- Viv is well ahead in Pakistan, which is just a fact.

His tours of New Zealand and South Africa are impressive and deserve credit, but they're not necessarily something that I cannot see Viv replicate, 49 in NZ amd 46 in SA is impressive don't get me wrong but it's not like a smoking gun, especially given Viv's lack of chances in NZ and SA. I really think when comparing the away record of two cricketers from two different generations, the countries that overlap should be the first criteria for fairness sake.

now ofcourse, if one has ATG work outside the overlapping countries that's a big factor, but I don't really think Sachin achieved something in SA/NZ to overcome Viv's superiority in the overlapping nations

 

[Johan]

Well, I don't think overall Viv faced better attacks than Sachin did. He played Lillee more often than SRT did McGrath and Warne, but I also think the other attacks Sachin faced were slightly better and also it's 1 ATG to 2. I am not going strictly by average here, but think opposition and conditions were close enough for 5 runs more in average to triumph.

Yeah well I also think the conditions Sachin faced in 2003 and 2007 were significantly flatter even if the attacks were slightly better. Yeah, but playing Lillian Thompson and Lillee way more is a point, Sachin only faced Warne 9 times, 3 of those instances when Warne was a debutant, McGrath 6, Viv played Lillian Thomson 14 times and averaged 48 without a NO, played Lillee 19 out of 39 knocks in Australia and averaged 48.73 with 0 NOs and yada yada, Viv definitely achieved more in Australia against the great aussie pacer of that era than Sachin did in Australia against the great aussie pacer of his era.

 

[subshakerz]

His tours of New Zealand and South Africa are impressive and deserve credit, but they're not necessarily something that I cannot see Viv replicate, 49 in NZ amd 46 in SA is impressive don't get me wrong but it's not like a smoking gun, especially given Viv's lack of chances in NZ and SA.

I think this is the heart of the difference.

I am not willing to just assume Viv would do well in one country that has its own unique challenges based on doing well in different countries with different challenges.

Could Viv have replicated Tendulkars performances there? Sure. Could he also have managed to underperform like he did in his solo series in NZ? Also yes.

What we do know is Tendulkar did do well in reality in those places and he deserves the edge for actual performance.

As it stands him edging out Tendulkar in the countries they share can't overcome Tendulkar performing in twice as many places.

 

[Johan]

I think this is the heart of the difference.

I am not willing to just assume Viv would do well in one country that has its own unique challenges based on doing well in different countries with different challenges.

Could Viv have replicated Tendulkars performances there? Sure. Could he also have managed to underperform like he did in his solo series in NZ? Also yes.

What we do know is Tendulkar did do well in reality in those places and he deserves the edge for actual performance.

Yeah I disagree.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence for me, if someone is successful in England then New Zealand would mostly be a cake walk. Regardless, Sachin was solid in those countries and deserves credit for that but I'm not gonna assume Viv would tank, and Viv having a clear advantage in the countries that overlap should be a bigger point than the possibility (a lower end one imo) that Viv would fail in countries he didn't get a shot in.

once again, similar to Root vs Gavaskar analogy I made, one played in more places but are you really gonna be consistent and claim the prior is better on that basis?