Asia's top 10 Test batsmen ever

[SL_Fan]

 

[anikrc1]

SL had an army of part timers operating till the late 90s before Murali and Vass became a force. NZ too were considerably worse than Zim with the ball in the 90s and Eng wasn’t too flash either for the most part [Team stats]. Sachin feasted on all four. That average actually plummets down to around the 50 mark against the top attacks. Still great obviously but not something earth shattering.

When it comes to comparing players on a level playing field I don't think there's a more objective, thorough and accessible measurement out there than player ratings. It takes into account a whole heap of factors including bowling quality, opposition, pitch conditions etc which basic averages obviously do not.

Sachin neither reached the 900 ratings point mark nor sustained such high levels for lengthy periods throughout his entire 24 year Test career. He should have killed it the way a certain “South African” is portraying things lol. In fact his rating was actually under the 750 mark for around 40% of his career.

Sachin

Rating of 850ish on average for around 6 years all up (25% of career)
Spent around 10 years under 750 (40% of career) and the rest on average 800ish for around 8 years (35% of career)

Compare that with Lara and Sanga for instance

Lara

Rating of 850ish on average for around 8 years all up (50% of career)
Spent around 4 years under 750 (25% of career) and the rest on average 800ish for around 4 years (25% of career).

Sanga

Rating of 850ish on average for around 9 years straight (60% of career)
Spent around 4 years under 750 (25% of career) and the rest on average 800ish for around 2 years (15% of career)

Ratings doesn't take into account away factor. The best two attacks during sachin and lara's career were australia and south africa. Both averaged 46 in s.a. but lara averaged 41 in aus while sachin averaged 55+. Lara doesn't have any century against peak donald or steyn in s.a. sachin has 2 against each.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I hear your point.

Firstly, career ratings average is one of the good indicators but it isn't be all end all of who stands where. Forget Sachin, but many other players rankings in it are badly our of place.

My second point, specifically for Sachin, his overall rating got a huge hit because of injuries, remaining out of top level cricket for a while couple of times.

In 2003 I guess his test average was lower than Muralitharan, obviously it had a bearing on his rating average.

Also he started as 16 year old, it took few years before he even broke into 50 average club in early 1990s.

This is a career of 24 years starting at 16, retiring at 40, injuries in between

This why statistics without context aren't everything.

 

[anikrc1]

Ratings doesn't take into account away factor. The best two attacks during sachin and lara's career were australia and south africa. Both averaged 46 in s.a. but lara averaged 41 in aus while sachin averaged 55+. Lara doesn't have any century against peak donald or steyn in s.a. sachin has 2 against each.

As far as sangakara is considered he has a total of 2 away centuries in s.a and australia combined. Sachin had more before turning 20.

 

[Bhaijaan]

What's Sangakkara's overall record against Big 3+ South Africa, especially away.

Good player, but his average is known to all to be boosted heavily by cashing in Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. Sri Lanka. If I'm not mistaken 20-25% of Sangakkara's test output is against minnows.

 

[MP2011]

I’d love to know an objective reason that puts any person other than Bradman and Hobbs above Smith

So Smith at no.3 in your all time batsmen ratings? How about you get objective first?

Smith is not even in top-10 currently let alone top-3, just like Kohli. He is only half way through his career and there are plenty of factors to be factored in before he is deemed as high you hold him.

 

[Mobashir]

^ Inzy and Sehwag have poor SENA records. Top 10 players should be able to play everywhere.

It's not about records. Inzi has played some incredibly important innings in SENA and against WI good attack.

Those innings value much more than a SENA double hundred on a flat pitch in a dull draw.

 

[MP2011]

On the whole, I consider him tier 1. However, I would understand why one may want to put him in tier 2.

Fair enough. However for me, anyone who can't even average 30 against best team of his era, can't be a tier 1 batsman.

 

[MP2011]

40ish ??

How about 70ish?

1 jan 1993 and 27 Feb 2002 - 70 Test - Avg 65+

lol, they'll discover another criteria to put him down.

Well, they did.

 

[therealAB]

I hear your point.

Firstly, career ratings average is one of the good indicators but it isn't be all end all of who stands where. Forget Sachin, but many other players rankings in it are badly our of place.

My second point, specifically for Sachin, his overall rating got a huge hit because of injuries, remaining out of top level cricket for a while couple of times.

In 2003 I guess his test average was lower than Muralitharan, obviously it had a bearing on his rating average.

Also he started as 16 year old, it took few years before he even broke into 50 average club in early 1990s.

This is a career of 24 years starting at 16, retiring at 40, injuries in between

This why statistics without context aren't everything.

I actually agree with this to a degree, all players have mitigating circumstances but Sachin has more than others. The thing is that Tendulkar playing 200 tests reduced the weighting of these times, unlike Smith/Sobers who started as spinners and didn’t/haven’t had as much time to compensate for it.

I think that the peak ICC ranking is fairly accurate, but it shouldn’t be used as the only indicator of quality. Tendulkar didn’t have period of extreme high performance but he was good for a century every series no matter the conditions of opposition. I select him at 5 in my all time team because of this.

He is basically the opposite of Lara in these terms

 

[Sidilicious]

Fair enough. However for me, anyone who can't even average 30 against best team of his era, can't be a tier 1 batsman.

Yeah, thats why I consider him inferior to Gavaskar and Tendulkar. IIRC, Sanga and Dravid too have poor records in at least 1 SENAW countries. As long as they have good SENAW records overall, I am willing to excuse failure in 1 country. Any more than 1, and they should be demoted from tier 1 and tier 2.

 

[therealAB]

lol, they'll discover another criteria to put him down.

Well, they did.

I did just show how this peak is good but not anything special compared to that of Sobers, Smith etc when Minnows are taken out as any good analysis should. This is backed up by the icc rankings

What is your comment on this?

 

[anikrc1]

What's Sangakkara's overall record against Big 3+ South Africa, especially away.

Good player, but his average is known to all to be boosted heavily by cashing in Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. Sri Lanka. If I'm not mistaken 20-25% of Sangakkara's test output is against minnows.

60 against aus, 41 against eng, 34 against s.a and 38 against ind. over all 5 centuries in 30 tests.

 

[Rajdeep]

1. KOHLI
2. SANGAKKARA
3. TENDULKAR
4. GAVASKAR
5. DRAVID
6. YOUNIS KHAN
7. JAYAWARDENE
8. INZAMAM
9. LAXMAN
10. M YOUSUF

Javed Miandad's record was bloated by home umpires not giving him out LBW.

Very surprising to read that you rate Kohli so highly but I dont think he is even top 5 test batsman for Asia.

This will be my list:

Tendulkar
Gavaskar
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Kohli
Sehwag
Laxman
Inzimam
Jayawardene

 

[SL_Fan]

Ratings doesn't take into account away factor. The best two attacks during sachin and lara's career were australia and south africa. Both averaged 46 in s.a. but lara averaged 41 in aus while sachin averaged 55+. Lara doesn't have any century against peak donald or steyn in s.a. sachin has 2 against each.

That’s true I would presume it is to keep a level playing field for all because not everyone gets those same opportunities. Sachin is definitely the better away/all-conditions Test bat no arguments there so should get extra kudos for that. Plus when it comes to longevity in the game obviously no one else comes close. So overall he does make up for it and then some which is why he is rightly rated ahead of guys like Ponting, Sanga, Kallis, Dravid etc by most. However overall the gap is not as substantial as some try to make it out to be.

 

[Bhaijaan]

60 against aus, 41 against eng, 34 against s.a and 38 against ind. over all 5 centuries in 30 tests.

Definitely not a bad record but clearly nothing ground breaking about it. It is rather mediocre

I do understand Sri Lanka doesn't get the benefit of playing frequent and 3 test + but it is how it is.

 

[SL_Fan]

I hear your point.

Firstly, career ratings average is one of the good indicators but it isn't be all end all of who stands where. Forget Sachin, but many other players rankings in it are badly our of place.

My second point, specifically for Sachin, his overall rating got a huge hit because of injuries, remaining out of top level cricket for a while couple of times.

In 2003 I guess his test average was lower than Muralitharan, obviously it had a bearing on his rating average.

Also he started as 16 year old, it took few years before he even broke into 50 average club in early 1990s.

This is a career of 24 years starting at 16, retiring at 40, injuries in between

This why statistics without context aren't everything.

Test Match Rankings

For a batsman, the factors are:

• Runs scored
  
• Ratings of the opposing bowling attack; the higher the combined ratings of the attack, the more value is given to the batsman’s innings (in proportion)
  
• The level of run-scoring in the match, and the team’s innings total; an innings of 100 runs in a match where all teams scored 500 is worth less than 100 runs in a match where all teams were bowled out for 200. And if a team scores 500 in the first innings and 200 in the second innings, a century in the second innings will get more credit than in the first innings (because the general level of run scoring was higher in the first innings)
  
• Out or not out (a not out innings receives a bonus)
  
• The result. Batsmen who score highly in victories receive a bonus. That bonus will be higher for highly rated opposition teams (i.e. win bonus against the current Australia team is higher than the bonus against Bangladesh.)
  
• The players’ ratings are calculated by combining their weighted performance in the latest match with their previous rating. This new ‘weighted average’ is then converted into points. Recent performances have more impact on a player’s rating than those earlier in his career, but all his performances are taken into account. A great player who has had a lean run of form will still have a respectable rating.
  
• Players who miss a Test match for their country, for whatever reason, lose one per cent of their points.
  

So nope missing a few games does not result in much of hit to the ratings. I think even Smith lost only like 30 something points from a 930 odd rating after missing a year due to the ban. It's no inning by inning analysis but as I said player ratings are the most objective, fair, robust and accessible performance metric out there currently.

 

[SL_Fan]

What's Sangakkara's overall record against Big 3+ South Africa, especially away.

Good player, but his average is known to all to be boosted heavily by cashing in Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. Sri Lanka. If I'm not mistaken 20-25% of Sangakkara's test output is against minnows.

Still tho he has the same number of tons as Sachin in wins in SENA am I right.

 

[Ab Fan]

Given the popularity of ODIs since 90s, most would agree to the fact that Sachin Tendulkar was comfortably the greatest Test +ODI bat of his generation and probably of all-time.

I think aside from longevity, his all-round balanced game home and away and across formats make him a truly strong case for not just the greatest Asian batsmen but the GOAT contender.

In tests alone, most would rate him at same level to Lara and higher than Ponting and Kallis, although there is not much of a difference still because they reached that level at a certain period of their career while in ODIs, he was probably the best of the lot followed by Ponting.

In modern era, there is Smith and Kohli but Kohli clearly is an inferior test bat to quite a few of them while Smith is easily the worst among the Fab four in LOIs.

 

[therealAB]

Given the popularity of ODIs since 90s, most would agree to the fact that Sachin Tendulkar was comfortably the greatest Test +ODI bat of his generation and probably of all-time.

I think aside from longevity, his all-round balanced game home and away and across formats make him a truly strong case for not just the greatest Asian batsmen but the GOAT contender.

In tests alone, most would rate him at same level to Lara and higher than Ponting and Kallis, although there is not much of a difference still because they reached that level at a certain period of their career while in ODIs, he was probably the best of the lot followed by Ponting.

In modern era, there is Smith and Kohli but Kohli clearly is an inferior test bat to quite a few of them while Smith is easily the worst among the Fab four in LOIs.

I agree with all of this
Tendulkar and Richards are quite clearly the greatest two all format bats of all time. Tendulkar is slightly but clearly better in test cricket, and the same is true for Richards in ODI cricket
Our discussion is re. test performances, where Tendulkar's superiority is not obvious

 

[Ab Fan]

I agree with all of this
Tendulkar and Richards are quite clearly the greatest two all format bats of all time. Tendulkar is slightly but clearly better in test cricket, and the same is true for Richards in ODI cricket
Our discussion is re. test performances, where Tendulkar's superiority is not obvious

Even in test cricket, there is a case for Tendulkar and Lara because of their performance in the toughest era of batting, in 90s. With longevity and balanced home/away record, Tendulkar probably has an edge even there but similarly a case can be made for Lara also.

The thread is about Asia's greatest bat and in that Gavaskar and Tendulkar obviously have edge because of their balanced home/away stats and the quality of bowling they faced.

 

[therealAB]

Even in test cricket, there is a case for Tendulkar and Lara because of their performance in the toughest era of batting, in 90s. With longevity and balanced home/away record, Tendulkar probably has an edge even there but similarly a case can be made for Lara also.

The thread is about Asia's greatest bat and in that Gavaskar and Tendulkar obviously have edge because of their balanced home/away stats and the quality of bowling they faced.

There is definitely a case for them, depending on what you value in a player
Just one thing about the era, our current era is probably stronger for bowling than the 90's as there is a much better spread - Ind, Eng and NZ are much much better

 

[therealAB]

Even in test cricket, there is a case for Tendulkar and Lara because of their performance in the toughest era of batting, in 90s. With longevity and balanced home/away record, Tendulkar probably has an edge even there but similarly a case can be made for Lara also.

The thread is about Asia's greatest bat and in that Gavaskar and Tendulkar obviously have edge because of their balanced home/away stats and the quality of bowling they faced.

There is definitely a case for them, depending on what you value in a player
Just one thing about the era, our current era is probably stronger for bowling than the 90's as there is a much better spread - Ind, Eng and NZ are much much better

 

[Bhaijaan]

Still tho he has the same number of tons as Sachin in wins in SENA am I right.

So now you change your criterias.

Typical.

Good for you if you even rate Sangakkara ahead of Bradman even by cherry picking statistics and interpreting as per your preconceived notions but most (probably 90%) fans, players and experts don't put him above Tendulkar, Lara or even Ponting, Kallis. That's from within his own era.

Sangakkara is a legitimate great of the game.

Never in his 15 year old career however was he hailed or looked at as the premier cricketer of his era. Tendulkar, Lara, Kallis, Warne, McGrath, Wasim, Murali and later even Kohli, ABD, Steyn overshadowed his stature.

 

[SL_Fan]

He doesn't need to be rated ahead. He's rated just fine and right up there by those who know what they're talking about. So you don't have to worry about any of that.

 

[InziFans]

1) Sunny bhai
2) Tendu
3) Sangers
4) Miandad
5) Dravid
6) Kohli
7) Younis
8) Viru
9) Mahela
10) MoYo

Tendulkar awfully overrated as usual. One of the least impactful ATG test players ever. As pointed out above, his consistently low ratings speak for themselves. Also disproportionately scored against trundlers. Still have to put him at #2 for obvious reasons. Miandad gets bonus points just for sticking it to Aussie bullies like Lillee and Merv Hughes. Kohli to drop out of top 10 if his dip in form persists.

 

[shamaan]

Gavasker
Tendulkar
Miadad
Sangkara
Younis
Dravid
Kohli
Inzamam
Mahela
Sehwag
Yousuf

 

[jnaveen1980]

Asharaful has good shot at this list

 

[Ab Fan]

Gavaskar
Tendulkar
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Kohli
Sehwag
Younis
Inzy
Laxman

 

[Unbiased-Fan]

1. Sachin Tendulkar
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Kumar Sangakkara
4. Rahul Dravid
5. Virat Kohli
6. Javed Miandad
7. Virender Sehwag
8. Younis Khan
9. Inzamam Ul Haq
10. Mahela Jayawardene

Unlucky to miss out :-
Mohammed Yousuf
VVS Laxman