• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Laxman vs Sehwag vs Pujara

Who is the better test batsman?


  • Total voters
    30

Majestic

U19 Captain
Pujara is the worst of the three.

Sehwag = Laxman > Pujara

Outside Asia, Laxman is the best.
Inside Asia, Sehwag is the best.

Sehwag's style is extremely entertaining and dismantling for opposition while Laxman was terrific under pressure situation and performed vs the best. Pujara was excellent vs spin but against pace, he didn't had a lot of shots and mostly blocked for a couple of hours till the ball gets old and spin comes to play so he could attack.
 

ma1978

International Debutant
This is nonsense

Sehwag and Laxman are close but Sehwag is more impactful. He is the GOAT in Asia which is where India plays 60% of its games.

Pujara doesn’t feature in this discussion.
 

BazBall21

International Captain
Sehwag was a lot more valuable in Asia and India plays a lot more in Asia than out of Asia
I don't think he was a lot more valuable in Asia. And besides, I'm only interested in knowing who the better batsman is. Not who will prosper the most in a single continent.
 

Majestic

U19 Captain
I don't think he was a lot more valuable in Asia. And besides, I'm only interested in knowing who the better batsman is. Not who will prosper the most in a single continent.
43 averaging Pujara vs 50 averaging Sehwag?

Sehwag is opener, Pujara bats at 3.
 

ma1978

International Debutant
I don't think he was a lot more valuable in Asia. And besides, I'm only interested in knowing who the better batsman is. Not who will prosper the most in a single continent.
He was a LOT more valuable in Asia and given India plays 60% of its matches in Asia, he’s the better batsman. Being better is not some abstract thing, context matters and the context for Indian batsmen is they play a lot of cricket in Asia.

He averages two points more than Pujara in Asia and seven more than Laxman, but the SR difference is hugely valuable
 

Top