Eclipse
International Debutant
i don't think so. it's to early to say that.social said:Sehwag = on path to becoming all time great i.e. give him time
i don't think so. it's to early to say that.social said:Sehwag = on path to becoming all time great i.e. give him time
No. Its not Afridi with amazing consistency. It is Afridi with all the strokes in the game (not just the front foot drive of anything between good length to half volley) PLUS amazing consistency.SpeedKing said:. it's like Afridi was amazing consistency
Extrapolate Sehwag's current record to 75 tests and you have an all-time great.Eclipse said:i don't think so. it's to early to say that.
Err, no. What you are saying would be valid if Sehwag had a record that had undergone a few years at the top, but he doesn't, which is exactly my point. Gilchrist two years ago had been in test cricket for roughly four years and played around 50 tests and had a superlative record. Sehwag two years ago had only played around a dozen tests and was averaging about 40. After that, Sehwag has had a very good START to his international career, and he's certainly proven as an international talent, but to call him potentially the most devastating batsman of all time based on a short good period is ludicrous. Even ignoring direct comparison of their value as players, he simply cannot compare to Gilchrist because Gilchrist has been doing it for years now and come out of the inevitable period of lesser form that every player faces at some point and continued after it. Sehwag was averaging 40 fifteen months ago, and has since had a very good run of form and improved his average dramatically. Fifteen months however does NOT put you in contention for any sort of "all time" title, and to claim that it does is rather biased and out of character for you. Gilchrist started his career well but more importantly has maintained his amazing record for a long period of time, and as I said if Sehwag is still averaging in the 55 range in a few years time with a strike rate similar to what he has now I will be surprised, as pretty much every player in test history with a Richards/Gilchrist temprament EXCEPT for Richards and Gilchrist has gone through big patches of poor form because of the risky style of game they play. The thing that seperates Richards and Gilchrist from the pack is the fact that they manage to play in the devastating fashion that they do without throwing their wicket away regularly or slipping into long patches of poor form.C_C said:Again, irrelevant. Most accurate comparision for current players is to compare upto-date record and for past players is to compare the whole thing...for the cumulative record takes into account any ups and downs and balances em out. Or else, going by your assertion, we cannot say that McGrath is a better bowler than Irfan Pathan NOW because who knows-McGrath may average 40 with the ball for the next 3 years and end with a 23-24 ave and 550 wickets and Irfan could average 19 with the ball for the next 15 years and end with 550-600 wickets @ 21..right ?
What gilly was two years ago or what sehwag will be two years ago is irrelevant. What is relevant is how good he is cumulatively TODAY and how good Sehwag is cumulatively TODAY.
Agreed, but he isn't an all-time great YET. Gilchrist is.social said:Extrapolate Sehwag's current record to 75 tests and you have an all-time great.
Guaranteed - no
Potential - yes
Didn't Sehwag start out batting down there and do well?Eclipse said:what he does i doubt anyone else could do, maybe he wouldn't be that good as an opener but who is to say Shewag would be anygood batting at number 7..
In the long run of course Tendulkar & Dravid are better.. I'm talking about right now.. simply because of the way they batmarc71178 said:2 of the best yes, but the 2 best?
For start there's an Indian better than both of them.
he may have batted at six not seven, you can prove me wrong if you want, i havn't looked this up.marc71178 said:Didn't Sehwag start out batting down there and do well?
It's not about matches played, it's about time. Sehwag has been in top form for 15 months now after a slow start to his career, Gilchrist has been performing consistently aside from one slump for six years. For me, the criteria for being devastating is obviously scoring plenty of runs at a significant rate, and doing it regularly enough and with enough consistency that it's not simply a fluke or a day where things went your way. If Sehwag keeps up his mid 50s average for a few more years he can be spoken about in the same breath as Gilchrist, but not on 15 months of good form.Deja moo said:Sehwags played 34 tests, Gillys played 66, Vivs played 121.
If Sehwag cant be compared to Gilly now since they're not at similar stages of their careers, I dont se how Gilly can be compared to Viv.
Scoring a century on debut on a Bloemfontein pitch that had a lot (and I mean a lot) in it for the quicks is certainly not a slow start.FaaipDeOiad said:It's not about matches played, it's about time. Sehwag has been in top form for 15 months now after a slow start to his career, Gilchrist has been performing consistently aside from one slump for six years. For me, the criteria for being devastating is obviously scoring plenty of runs at a significant rate, and doing it regularly enough and with enough consistency that it's not simply a fluke or a day where things went your way. If Sehwag keeps up his mid 50s average for a few more years he can be spoken about in the same breath as Gilchrist, but not on 15 months of good form.
I meant a slow start in comparison to his current record. 15 months ago Sehwag was averaging 40, and Gilchrist was averaging around 60, now their averages are closer together, but Sehwag has only had 15 months of top form.Deja moo said:Scoring a century on debut on a Bloemfontein pitch that had a lot (and I mean a lot) in it for the quicks is certainly not a slow start.
Virender Sehwag:
Matches(cumulative average)(100s,50s):
5 (51.50)(1,2)
10(53.30)(3,3)
15(40.95)(3,4)<-------Includes 2 tests vs NZ in NZ.
20(45.81)(5,5)
25(53.62)(7,6)
30(52.60)(8,8)
33(53.58)(9,9)
Wheres the slow start ? If anything, hes been very consistent.
I think there is a difference (I will back myself up on the Flintoff one, coz I was probably the only one to suggest that Flintoff has the ability at playing this game in the same way with the same results as the 'Big 4' as long as injuries or fitness dont hamper him too much))Jono said:Comparing Sehwag to Viv reminds me a lot of people comparing Flintoff to the fab 4 all-rounders. 12-18 months of playing brilliantly is great, but it doesn't warrant a direct comparison to some legends of the game, and especially doesn't warrant the idea that one (Flintoff, Sehwag etc.) is 'better' than the other. You may believe they will be, or have more talent etc. but you'd find it hard pressed convincing me that Sehwag is any where close to Viv's league yet.
I knew you would know I would reply to your postJono said:Lol Swervy I knew you'd reply to my post
Well we've sort of had this discussion before (although the Sehwag/Viv discussion spices it up a bit) and from the looks of it you've seen more cricket than I have. I personally feel Flintoff has more to prove (and I believe the Ashes will have a lot to do with that) before he is stated as being as good as the big 4, particularly Imran for me. But from your view (and that's what counts to each person, their view/interpretation of the cricket they see) you can see similarities between Flintoff and the other 4 (on overall talent) whilst Sehwag doesn't give you the same impression when compared to Viv. That's a fair statment.
I think Sehwag is his own player personally. Comparisons can be made with Gilly (on mode, not overall career) but I feel he's like no other, and am thus very reluctant to compare him to Gilly or even Viv. I think the similarities in terms of their attacking style will result in comparions made (if Sehwag continues his blistering form for 2-3 more years) but for me, he'll always be different to Viv. Sort of for the reasons you gave, but I also believe his frame of mind is quite different to that of Viv's.