• 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.

Martin Crowe vs Virender Sehwag

Who was the better test batsman?

  • Total voters
    29
Immenso

Immenso

International Vice-Captain
ashley bach said:
Crowe faced some serious attacks when he was young, starting off at the age of 19 against an attack headed by Lillee.
His 188 in the Caribbean was a master class against Marshall/Garner/Holding. and a memorable thing that sticks in my mind was the way he was able
to hook/pull Marshall when the bouncer was produced. For me he was better than his average of 45 suggests.
Click to expand...
I don't think this match or 1985 series was ever televised. So, were you there? Or is that sentence about 1987?
 
Last edited:
Coronis

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Kallis' SR I only bring up in comparison with players of similar records like Dravid, Border and Sanga.
Click to expand...
Such a valid point when Dravid and Border had lower SR’s than him.

Something people seem to forget about Smith too, he actually struck at about 60.

Just for the record (not saying anything here about its importance) batsmen with SR’s significantly higher than 60:

Sehwag 82
Gilchrist 82
Pant 72
Warner 71
de Kock 71
Viv 69
Trumper 67
Darwan 67
Dilshan 66
Jayasuriya 65
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Coronis said:
Such a valid point when Dravid and Border had lower SR’s than him.

Something people seem to forget about Smith too, he actually struck at about 60.

Just for the record (not saying anything here about its importance) batsmen with SR’s significantly higher than 60:

Sehwag 82
Gilchrist 82
Pant 72
Warner 71
de Kock 71
Viv 69
Trumper 67
Darwan 67
Dilshan 66
Jayasuriya 65
Click to expand...
Others with high s/rs (average 30 and above):

Harry "Bazball" Brook is currently averaging 80 and striking at 92!! Prithvi Shaw and Ben Duckett are both in the 80s.

Shahid Afridi - 87
Kapil - 81
CDG - 80
Clem Hill - 75
Kusal "played the greatest innings of all time" Perera - 72
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
Fuller Pilch said:
Others with high s/rs (average 30 and above):

Harry "Bazball" Brook is currently averaging 80 and striking at 92!! Prithvi Shaw and Ben Duckett are both in the 80s.

Shahid Afridi - 87
Kapil - 81
CDG - 80
Clem Hill - 75
Kusal "played the greatest innings of all time" Perera - 72
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Hill was ~60, not sure where you’re getting 75 from..

And yeah tried to keep it 40+ but added de Kock and Trumper
 
A

ashley bach

International Captain
Immenso said:
I don't think this match or 1985 series was ever televised. So, were you there? Or is that sentence about 1987?
Click to expand...
Wish I was there, getting to the Caribbean still high on the bucket list. That 87 series was memorable for the hooks off Marshall mainly for the reason
Crowe was able to get over the ball so well, and in hammering it he was able to keep the ball on the carpet. Not saying he played the shot in abundance
but when he did it was all class.
 
0

_00_deathscar

International Regular
subshakerz said:
It matters if that approach costs him runs in swinging conditions.
Click to expand...
There’s no basis that it cost him runs though
Even when he averaged 20/30 in his early/late career he was striking at 80. His SR barely moved all that much.
With players like that, it’s just how they play and how they’re best. Trying to change that is usually worse, because they get all confused how to play and you risk losing a top player. If he was striking at 60, sure, but someone who strikes at 80 is gold dust. You take the hood with the bad then.
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
_00_deathscar said:
There’s no basis that it cost him runs though
Even when he averaged 20/30 in his early/late career he was striking at 80. His SR barely moved all that much.
With players like that, it’s just how they play and how they’re best. Trying to change that is usually worse, because they get all confused how to play and you risk losing a top player. If he was striking at 60, sure, but someone who strikes at 80 is gold dust. You take the hood with the bad then.
Click to expand...
He has plenty of knocks when he scored at slower rates though so I dont accept that curbing his instincts was beyond him. Its not like he was Afridi or something. He chose to play like a madman most of the time when the ball was looping and it cost him. That and his lack of foot movement.

If he just reduced his SR to maybe 55-60 when it swung in the first session of a game, he could have survived and then gone aggressive.
 
S

subshakerz

International Coach
trundler said:
You'd have to reach a century back to find a guy comparable to Sehwag. The man turned certain draws into wins on his own.
Click to expand...
I give him credit for being the first to really turn on the scoring rate from the get go on flat pitches. But that particular aspect isn't unique anymore. Warner followed the same playbook in the 2010s. England's entire lineup is doing it now.
 
anil1405

anil1405

International Captain
subshakerz said:
He has plenty of knocks when he scored at slower rates though so I dont accept that curbing his instincts was beyond him. Its not like he was Afridi or something. He chose to play like a madman most of the time when the ball was looping and it cost him. That and his lack of foot movement.

If he just reduced his SR to maybe 55-60 when it swung in the first session of a game, he could have survived and then gone aggressive.
Click to expand...
If everyone played the way you wanted them to, we'd be living in an imaginary world.
 
srbhkshk

srbhkshk

International Captain
Well,

99.9% of all cricket teams would absolutely love to have Sehwag batting for them.
99.9% of all cricket teams have never had anyone close to Sehwag batting for them.

Just by simple Demand / Supply ratio he is the greatest batsman of all time behind Bradman, and since Bradman is fake made up history Sehwag is the greatest batsman of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top