• 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.

Viv Richards vs Steve Smith

Who is better post-peak?


  • Total voters
    22

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Comeon Now!!! Even I won't stoop so low. 00s were flat, but I think it's sometime overstated a bit as well when people act no runs there counts. In that timeframe SRT has an absolutely top tier Saffa tour against peak Steyn, in sporting wickets. 60s WI were flatter.
I think he is too vested in his argument at this point.
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Comeon Now!!! Even I won't stoop so low. 00s were flat, but I think it's sometime overstated a bit as well when people act no runs there counts. In that timeframe SRT has an absolutely top tier Saffa tour against peak Steyn, in sporting wickets. 60s WI were flatter.
Nah

with the type of pitches Australia put out between turn of the millenium and the sandpaper gate, they should've had their test status revoked
 

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Nah

with the type of pitches Australia put out between turn of the millenium and the sandpaper gate, they should've had their test status revoked
Were only in Australia, and 2000s wasn't generally that bad. WI largely was so in the 50s and 60s.
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Were only in Australia, and 2000s wasn't generally that bad. WI largely was so in the 50s and 60s.
2000s and 2010s were more or less the same with 2010s just having a weaker lineup so they needed to pull an Imran and "make something of the dead wickets" and use sandpaper
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The point was always minimal superiority post peak which I stand by
I accept that overall (2002 to 2013) but I think he was a fair distance ahead of Viv in his second peak (2007 to 2011) than any point of Viv post peak.

Which, back to the original point, I credit to his adaptability and technical mastery that, along with longevity, gives him an edge over Viv.
 

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
2000s and 2010s were more or less the same with 2010s just having a weaker lineup so they needed to pull an Imran and "make something of the dead wickets" and use sandpaper
Nah. 2000s Australia I don't feel was as flat as early 2010s, except some series like BGT 2003. That honestly would make Glenn undisputed GOAT and Warne no 2. Though wasn't present so can't really comment.
 

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Nah. 2000s Australia I don't feel was as flat as early 2010s, except some series like BGT 2003. That honestly would make Glenn undisputed GOAT and Warne no 2. Though wasn't present so can't really comment.
I don't mind Glenn and Warne being GOATs
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nah. 2000s Australia I don't feel was as flat as early 2010s, except some series like BGT 2003. That honestly would make Glenn undisputed GOAT and Warne no 2. Though wasn't present so can't really comment.
Warne averages nearly 30 at home in the 2000s.
 

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Glenn arguably already is but honestly that would place him a fair deal ahead of Maco
It's an overdone point. The pitches in Australia in 2000s were flat with minimal movement and pace but still a fair deal of bounce so not totally averse to McGraths style of bowling.
 

Top