Is Mohinder Amarnath the most underrated batsman ever?

[cricketpatzer]

I don't think weak bowling attack of IND has anything to do with Gavaskers' scoring volume. Scoring rate wasn't his strength & none credits him for that.

You are missing the point. Gavaskar playing for a weak bowling team is being mentioned as he is being compared to others. Obviously if you play for a strong bowling team you don't have to face your teammates bowling, which gives you an advantage.

With due respect, he was extremely self-centered & <b>played every ball</b> for his own stats.

Wow, talk about being a hater!

Through out 70s & 80s IND played home Tests on absolute dead tracks to bail out draws & with spinners sometimes get the visitors off guard, some thing we are trying to master now. Besides, in mid 70s to mid 80s, often teams toured IND without their main bowlers - one can check how many Test against

Check the stats yourself. Or look at my other post in which I noted that Gavaskar scored his first 8 centuries away from home, before scoring one at home, and that he scored only 47% of his centuries at home.

It's not about the stats, that's everyone can see from CricInfo, but you should realize my point.

Your points are very poorly made. You make statements such as "you 'll see that he doesn't stand much even against the likes of his contemporary Gooch or Grineedge or Boycott" and then go silent when challenged.

Thanks for starting this discussion about Gavaskar. An examination of his record (opener playing for weak bowling team, scoring an incredible number of centuries away from home etc.) makes is very clear that he was indeed the best batsman since Bradman.

 

[IndianWillow]

I don't think weak bowling attack of IND has anything to do with Gavaskers' scoring volume. Scoring rate wasn't his strength & none credits him for that. With due respect, he was extremely self-centered & played every ball for his own stats. It was irony that the man starting with 36* in 60 overs ended with a 85 balls hundred. Scoring rate was often his self imposed selfishness to pile up mile stones & maintain average - I can point few ODIs, when Gavasker batted through out 50 overs & IND lost by big margin with lots of wickets at hand.

Through out 70s & 80s IND played home Tests on absolute dead tracks to bail out draws & with spinners sometimes get the visitors off guard, some thing we are trying to master now. Besides, in mid 70s to mid 80s, often teams toured IND without their main bowlers - one can check how many Test against Holding, Garner, Marshall, Roberts, Croft, Clarke...... Lillee, Thompson, Pascoe, Maxwalker, Hogg, Lawson, Mcdermott, Aldermann, Rackmann,........... Hadlee, Willis, Snow, Hendricks, Botham......Imran, Sarfraz............... Gavasker played & what was the record. And I say, don't even bother to exclude those Tests Gavasker played against young Marshall or Botham.

In can mention the period from 1977 to 1981 - Gavasker scored over 5,000 runs (or close to that), often against under strength teams on absolute belters - 5/6 Test series ended 1-0 or at best 2-0 with most Test not having the 4th innings. 500+ & 600+ was the standard proceedings in 1st 4 days. Often (4 times if I can recall correctly), IND played the 1st Test on rank turners & next 5 Test were there for Gavasker to pile up. In between, whenever IND toured outside, you can check the difference of "performance".

I don't need to explain to you at least what I am trying to say - just check the Series between 1977 to 1982 in IND (Or for that matter in WI or AUS for the Packer periods). It's not about the stats, that's everyone can see from CricInfo, but you should realize my point.

As I said already, Gavaskar's stats are somewhat inflated but you seem to think he is extremely overrated. I definitely disagree with this, and so will the majority! During Gavaskar's time, most batsmen scored slowly - the typical batting strike rate for test matches during the 70s and 80s was around 40 and Gavaskar had a batting strike rate of 44. Gavaskar wasn't a slow scorer by the standards of his day, so I don't know what you mean by "he was extremely self-centered & played every ball for his own stats" - unless you mean to say that every batsman of that day belonged to this category. In contrast, batsmen like Boycott had batting strike rate of 35, which was poor by those day standards. Gavaskar scored much faster than Boycott (about 30% faster), so it is pointless to club him along with Boycott. Fred Trueman rated Gavakar superior to Geoff Boycott and said, "Unlike Geoff, Sunil has the ability to move into a higher gear when he situation demands." This is also reflected in their stats.

Gavaskar was faster than batsmen like Dravid who had a similar strike rate when he was displaced from Gavaskar by about three decades in time. Gavaskar's strike rate equivalent for modern cricket would be 55 - hardly anyone would call this slow batting. Gavaskar was a boundary hitter, and he rarely wasted bad balls. Unlike Richards, he would not take on the good balls and very few batsmen did that in the 70s and 80s. India rarely had the bowling to win matches, so Gavaskar became a draw specialist - he played to ensure that India got a draw because they could not win many. If we discard all cheap runs made by batsmen, most batsmen would have their runs sliced into half or a third - Gavaskar was no exception. Gavaskar sacrificed his own game for the team's interests, but he was quite capable of scoring fast. It was not without good reason that Sunny was voted the twelfth best cricketer of the 20th century and except Richards, he was voted far ahead of every other contemporary batsman.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153387.html

 

[WrexEverything]

Criticizing a test match opener of the 80s for his strike rate is absurd. In fact, I very much prefer openers who can blunt the new ball and see off tough phases of play.

 

[MMHS]

As I said already, Gavaskar's stats are somewhat inflated but you seem to think he is extremely overrated. I definitely disagree with this, and so will the majority! During Gavaskar's time, most batsmen scored slowly - the typical batting strike rate for test matches during the 70s and 80s was around 40 and Gavaskar had a batting strike rate of 44. Gavaskar wasn't a slow scorer by the standards of his day, so I don't know what you mean by "he was extremely self-centered & played every ball for his own stats" - unless you mean to say that every batsman of that day belonged to this category. In contrast, batsmen like Boycott had batting strike rate of 35, which was poor by those day standards. Gavaskar scored much faster than Boycott (about 30% faster), so it is pointless to club him along with Boycott. Fred Trueman rated Gavakar superior to Geoff Boycott and said, "Unlike Geoff, Sunil has the ability to move into a higher gear when he situation demands." This is also reflected in their stats.

Gavaskar was faster than batsmen like Dravid who had a similar strike rate when he was displaced from Gavaskar by about three decades in time. Gavaskar's strike rate equivalent for modern cricket would be 55 - hardly anyone would call this slow batting. Gavaskar was a boundary hitter, and he rarely wasted bad balls. Unlike Richards, he would not take on the good balls and very few batsmen did that in the 70s and 80s. India rarely had the bowling to win matches, so Gavaskar became a draw specialist - he played to ensure that India got a draw because they could not win many. If we discard all cheap runs made by batsmen, most batsmen would have their runs sliced into half or a third - Gavaskar was no exception. Gavaskar sacrificed his own game for the team's interests, but he was quite capable of scoring fast. It was not without good reason that Sunny was voted the twelfth best cricketer of the 20th century and except Richards, he was voted far ahead of every other contemporary batsman.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153387.html

We are back to squire again - I never mentioned his Strike Rate; for 70s & 80s standard, it was quite good. Here someone tried to raise his SR considering Indian weak attack, which sounded very funny to me.

Let me reiterate once more - this thread is about over & under rated batsmen/players and in that regard, try to defend his "mastering of WI fearsome four" or "5 Centuries in AUS" or "best player against PAK". It's not about how good or great Gavasker was, it's about what he is credited for - he is indeed an ATG of the game, but IND based Cricket media tries to sell him as one of the openers of All time based Test team - which he never was.

That Wisden ranking is also biased, it put the mouth where the money is. I think, at the start of the Century, Wisden came with a list for players for the century which put Lillee at 6 & Imran at 8 (Tendulkar at 7, with 8 years of career, remember, it was 1999 list), Gavasker at 10 & Akram at 23 while Lara at 38 & someone Malcom Marshall at around 25 .......... as a keen student of the game, I felt, sometimes I waste too much money on toilet papers.

 

[Junaids]

For one year, across two away series against the world's best two bowling attacks (West Indies and Pakistan, with better attacks than any seen since McGrath and Warne retired), Mohinder Amarnath reached heights of batsmanship that probably no man in history - including Bradman - has ever equalled.

I repeat, no batsman in the last 70 years has ever batted as well as Amarnath did in those two series. And probably no batsman in history.

No, he didn't sustain it. But so what? If you want endurance at the top you have Tendulkar, being slightly better than most good batsmen for 20 years. But Amarnath across those two fiendishly difficult series reached far higher heights of batsmanship than Tendulka ever did.

 

[IndianWillow]

We are back to squire again - I never mentioned his Strike Rate; for 70s & 80s standard, it was quite good. Here someone tried to raise his SR considering Indian weak attack, which sounded very funny to me.

Let me reiterate once more - this thread is about over & under rated batsmen/players and in that regard, try to defend his "mastering of WI fearsome four" or "5 Centuries in AUS" or "best player against PAK". It's not about how good or great Gavasker was, it's about what he is credited for - he is indeed an ATG of the game, but IND based Cricket media tries to sell him as one of the openers of All time based Test team - which he never was.

That Wisden ranking is also biased, it put the mouth where the money is. I think, at the start of the Century, Wisden came with a list for players for the century which put Lillee at 6 & Imran at 8 (Tendulkar at 7, with 8 years of career, remember, it was 1999 list), Gavasker at 10 & Akram at 23 while Lara at 38 & someone Malcom Marshall at around 25 .......... as a keen student of the game, I felt, sometimes I waste too much money on toilet papers.

Regarding Wisden's ranking, the panel had a lot of Englishmen and Australians. So high ranks awarded to Australians and the English are understandable. Gavaskar received lots of neutral votes to rank that high. Lots of contemporaries declared Gavaskar the finest opener of that era, and perhaps one of the greatest across all eras. Contemporaries rated Gavaskar very highly - Imran, Richards, Botham, Gooch, Willis, Proctor - the list is endless - all rated Gavaskar the best opener and batsman. Wasim Akram picked Gavaskar in his list of top ten batsmen he has bowled to - and he put Sunny's name at the top! Gavaskar did make some easy runs during the Packer era, but it is not his fault that he did not have to face the best bowlers at his peak. Gavaskar would make pretty much every All time XI. Most openers who played before the 70s did not have to face express fast bowlers any time.

Gavaskar came from a nation that had no pace bowlers. Before Kapil arrived, the best bowlers who bowled to Gavaskar at the nets were 110-120kph trundlers. Yet Gavaskar rose to become one of the greatest test openers ever. Openers like Greenidge were used to facing express pace in the domestic and net sessions. But still Gavaskar overcame the challenges to becomes the best opener of his era.

 

[IndianWillow]

For one year, across two away series against the world's best two bowling attacks (West Indies and Pakistan, with better attacks than any seen since McGrath and Warne retired), Mohinder Amarnath reached heights of batsmanship that probably no man in history - including Bradman - has ever equalled.

I repeat, no batsman in the last 70 years has ever batted as well as Amarnath did in those two series. And probably no batsman in history.

No, he didn't sustain it. But so what? If you want endurance at the top you have Tendulkar, being slightly better than most good batsmen for 20 years. But Amarnath across those two fiendishly difficult series reached far higher heights of batsmanship than Tendulka ever did.

The WI tour was extraordinary for Amarnath. Two hundreds, four fifties, 600 runs over five tests against Roberts, Holding, Marshall and Garner. Holding and Garner were somewhat off color during the series - both averaged 40+ over the series and all Indian batsmen played them with ease (not just Amarnath). But Marshall and Roberts were at their devastating best. Gavaskar did not do too well during this tour - probably he was out of form because he did not just finish behind Amarnath - he finished behind Kapil, Shastri, Yashpal and others.

 

[IndianWillow]

We are back to squire again - I never mentioned his Strike Rate; for 70s & 80s standard, it was quite good. Here someone tried to raise his SR considering Indian weak attack, which sounded very funny to me.

Let me reiterate once more - this thread is about over & under rated batsmen/players and in that regard, try to defend his "mastering of WI fearsome four" or "5 Centuries in AUS" or "best player against PAK". It's not about how good or great Gavasker was, it's about what he is credited for - he is indeed an ATG of the game, but IND based Cricket media tries to sell him as one of the openers of All time based Test team - which he never was.

That Wisden ranking is also biased, it put the mouth where the money is. I think, at the start of the Century, Wisden came with a list for players for the century which put Lillee at 6 & Imran at 8 (Tendulkar at 7, with 8 years of career, remember, it was 1999 list), Gavasker at 10 & Akram at 23 while Lara at 38 & someone Malcom Marshall at around 25 .......... as a keen student of the game, I felt, sometimes I waste too much money on toilet papers.

One more problem with the argument that nitpicks Gavaskar's stats (that he made lots of easy runs and often failed to deliver against tougher opponents) is that even a batsman of Viv's caliber did not have very impressive stats against tough opponents. Who were the toughest bowling teams during Viv's period? It can be safely assumed that these were the WI, Pakistan and Australia. Viv did not have to face WI. But how did he fare against Australia and Pakistan, when these teams had a strong bowling unit throughout the tour? Let us check out.

Let us examine Viv's record against Australia first:

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1975/76
4 test series - average 38.7 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson. Gilmour - Strong opposition, relatively mediocre performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (Australia in West Indies), 1977/78
2 tests - average 31.0 - bowlers: Thomson, Wayne Clarke, Yardley - Moderate strength opposition, mediocre performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1979/80
3 tests - average 96.5 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson, Dymock - Strong opposition, very strong performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1981/82
3 tests - average 26.66 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson, Yardley - Strong opposition, poor performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (Australia in West Indies), 1983/84
5 tests - average 54 - bowlers: Lawson, Alderman, Hogg, Hogan - Weak opposition, Strong performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1984/85
5 tests - average 42.75 - bowlers: Lawson, Hogg, Holland, Bennett - Weak opposition, decent performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1988/89
5 tests - average 55.75 - bowlers: Hughes, Steve Waugh, Lawson, Hohns etc - Relatively Weak opposition, strong performance

Let us come to Pakistan now:

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1974/75
2 tests - average 5.66 - bowlers: Sarfraz, Masood, Asif Iqbal - Weak opposition, poor performance

Pakistan in West Indies Test Series, 1976/77
5 tests - average 28.55 - bowlers: Imran, Sarfraz, Altaf - Strong opposition, poor performance

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1980/81
4 tests - average 72.8 - bowlers: Imran, Iqbal Qasim, Abdul Qadir - Moderate opposition (because Imran did not bowl much on this tour), strong performance

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1986/87
3 tests - average 35 - bowlers: Imran, Akram, Qadir - Strong opposition, average performance

Pakistan in West Indies Test Series, 1987/88
2 tests - average 69.5 - bowlers: Imran, Akram, Qadir - Strong opposition, strong performance

How many tours had tough bowling conditions? Six
How many tours did Richards play the way he is expected to? Two

Success rates even for Richards when the bowling side had great bowlers in form is a mere 33%. Great bowlers are called great bowlers because they usually get the better of top batsmen. Very few batsmen dominate great bowlers at their peaks and this applies to batsmen of the caliber of Gavaskar and Richards. Though bowlers like Imran and Lillee praised Richards highly, it was not because Richards demolished them on every tour. Richards had a decent measure of success against them, but it was a two way street. Richards averaged 38,21,26,6,28 and 35 in various tours against Australia and Pakistan. Most of these low scoring series happened when the opposition fielded strong bowlers, not unsurprisingly. A similar analysis could be done on nearly every batsman, and this would be found to be true. Otherwise, all these top tier batsmen would have Bradmanesque career averages. They all settled at around the 50 mark in average because they often failed against very strong opposition. (except when they were going through a purple patch)

 

[cricketpatzer]

One more problem with the argument that nitpicks Gavaskar's stats (that he made lots of easy runs and often failed to deliver against tougher opponents) is that even a batsman of Viv's caliber did not have very impressive stats against tough opponents.

Success rates even for Richards when the bowling side had great bowlers in form is a mere 33%.

Very good analysis. One can choose negative aspects of a player's career while ignoring the positive, but that is just biased analysis. Looking over their entire careers I still maintain that Gavaskar comprehensively outperforms his nearest two competitors, that is Richards (higher average, higher rate of centuries, opener and weak bowling side) and Chappell (opener, weak bowling side, 53% of centuries scored abroad compared to Chappell's 23%, etc.).

 

[cricketpatzer]

Very good analysis. One can choose negative aspects of a player's career while ignoring the positive, but that is just biased analysis. Looking over their entire careers I still maintain that Gavaskar comprehensively outperforms his nearest two competitors, that is Richards (higher average, higher rate of centuries, opener and weak bowling side) and Chappell (opener, weak bowling side, 53% of centuries scored abroad compared to Chappell's 23%, etc.).

Chappell 33%, not 23%...

 

[MMHS]

One more problem with the argument that nitpicks Gavaskar's stats (that he made lots of easy runs and often failed to deliver against tougher opponents) is that even a batsman of Viv's caliber did not have very impressive stats against tough opponents. Who were the toughest bowling teams during Viv's period? It can be safely assumed that these were the WI, Pakistan and Australia. Viv did not have to face WI. But how did he fare against Australia and Pakistan, when these teams had a strong bowling unit throughout the tour? Let us check out.

Let us examine Viv's record against Australia first:

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1975/76
4 test series - average 38.7 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson. Gilmour - Strong opposition, relatively mediocre performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (Australia in West Indies), 1977/78
2 tests - average 31.0 - bowlers: Thomson, Wayne Clarke, Yardley - Moderate strength opposition, mediocre performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1979/80
3 tests - average 96.5 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson, Dymock - Strong opposition, very strong performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1981/82
3 tests - average 26.66 - bowlers: Lillee, Thomson, Yardley - Strong opposition, poor performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (Australia in West Indies), 1983/84
5 tests - average 54 - bowlers: Lawson, Alderman, Hogg, Hogan - Weak opposition, Strong performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1984/85
5 tests - average 42.75 - bowlers: Lawson, Hogg, Holland, Bennett - Weak opposition, decent performance

The Frank Worrell Trophy (West Indies in Australia), 1988/89
5 tests - average 55.75 - bowlers: Hughes, Steve Waugh, Lawson, Hohns etc - Relatively Weak opposition, strong performance

Let us come to Pakistan now:

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1974/75
2 tests - average 5.66 - bowlers: Sarfraz, Masood, Asif Iqbal - Weak opposition, poor performance

Pakistan in West Indies Test Series, 1976/77
5 tests - average 28.55 - bowlers: Imran, Sarfraz, Altaf - Strong opposition, poor performance

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1980/81
4 tests - average 72.8 - bowlers: Imran, Iqbal Qasim, Abdul Qadir - Moderate opposition (because Imran did not bowl much on this tour), strong performance

West Indies in Pakistan Test Series, 1986/87
3 tests - average 35 - bowlers: Imran, Akram, Qadir - Strong opposition, average performance

Pakistan in West Indies Test Series, 1987/88
2 tests - average 69.5 - bowlers: Imran, Akram, Qadir - Strong opposition, strong performance

How many tours had tough bowling conditions? Six
How many tours did Richards play the way he is expected to? Two

Success rates even for Richards when the bowling side had great bowlers in form is a mere 33%. Great bowlers are called great bowlers because they usually get the better of top batsmen. Very few batsmen dominate great bowlers at their peaks and this applies to batsmen of the caliber of Gavaskar and Richards. Though bowlers like Imran and Lillee praised Richards highly, it was not because Richards demolished them on every tour. Richards had a decent measure of success against them, but it was a two way street. Richards averaged 38,21,26,6,28 and 35 in various tours against Australia and Pakistan. Most of these low scoring series happened when the opposition fielded strong bowlers, not unsurprisingly. A similar analysis could be done on nearly every batsman, and this would be found to be true. Otherwise, all these top tier batsmen would have Bradmanesque career averages. They all settled at around the 50 mark in average because they often failed against very strong opposition. (except when they were going through a purple patch)

Don't want to drag, but you shouldn't rate Viv only with average (not even with SR, he was something special). I think, he was brilliant against ENG as well & against a very good English attack. Against PAK, those Series were extremely low scoring, only average actually doesn't give the impact. For example, take the 109* at Delhi in 1988, opposition 'll not tell the quality of the innings. Finally, in AUS wickets, if you rate Aldermann, Lawson, Hogg & Hughes as mediocre then you 'll be struggling to find quality runs by Gavasker. Am I mistaken that 1984 & 88, he played against Mcdermott & Reid?

Any way, no body rates Viv for his milestones, statistically he was poorer than Gavasker, if that makes you happy.............

 

[pacesensation]

You need to know a bit history for that. Let me sum up for you (though I don't like bringing stats time & again to defame a great).

1. Gavasker is most famous for his greatness against hostile fast bowling - which is not correct actually. He hardly played WI fearsome 4 attack - In 1971-72 he scored 774 runs against an WI attack which had 36 years old Sobers as opening bowler. That was the lean patch of WI cricket when they hardly had any bowler (If you click the links of the career, you 'll see apart from Sobers, hardly any name)

In 1974 WI came with only a pair of fast bowler - Roberts & Jullien (?) - Gavasker went AOWL
In 1976 IND chased 400+ at PoS, Gavasker (& a couple of others) did get a 100, but that WI attack only had a young Holding. That was a Test WI went with 3 spinners & Lloyd actually declared after discussing with his spinners - 3 of them (Insan Ali, Padmore & forgot the 3rd one) - for next 12 years only spinner played a single Test for WI - Butts, as a replacement of injured Lloyd.
1970s cricket was disturbed by WSC, for next WI Series Gavasker mastered a Packered reject WI side for 650+ with 4 centuries in 6 Tests - that WI side was missing their top 15 cricketers, barring Kalicharan. That attack didn't have Holding, Roberts, Garner, Croft, Clarke, Holder & Mosely. Only a 20 years old Marshall made his debut in a high scoring series where 6 Test produced only 1 result & rest 5 were high scoring draws.
Gavasker faced a full strength WI side in 1982-83 in WI - taking out his 147* in a high scoring draw at Guyana (which is traditionally the highest scoring ground in WI those days), he would have averaged under 15 in that Series. He played last time against WI was in 1983-84 at home against Marshal & Holding (Garner didn't come & Roberts hardly played) - his 236* (In deed a great knock) actually took his series total to 400+, in a 6 Test series.

2. Gavasker is credited among very few players having a 100 at every venue on mainland AUS (all the Test venues of his time, Hobert wasn't a Test venue then) - again massive, massive mis-leading bravado. In 1977-78, he took on a Packer reject AUS (Thompson was there, but he was mostly injured) - Lille, Maxwaker, Pascoe wasn't there & Hogg didn't debut. Try to find to the credentials of the bowlers he mastered for 3 Centuries. 1979-80 against AUS at hime, he again mastered 600+ in 6 Test with 4 hundreds, but that attack didn't have Lillee, Thompson, Pascoe or Hogg (? - sure about first 3). After the great generation of 70s, AUS went into a slump in mid 80s, one of the weakest ever AUS side & that too was hurt by the self exile of Rackman, Lawson, Aldermann & young McDermott was injured - AUS opened with Simon Davis & ........ in 1985-86 home series - Gavasker mastered 166 (out of 600/4 d) & 170+.

In between, only time Gavasker faced Lillee, Pascoe & Hogg was 1980-81; barring his 70 at 3rd Test, he would have ended 3 Test series with total less than 100 for the Series.


3. Against NZ, he has a century at Acuckland in 1975, a match that IND won & NZ was missing a certain name - RJ Hadlee. In 1979-80, he did face RJ - for a total of 135 in 3 Tests, at an average of..................

4. Gavasker had great record against PAK - but not so in the 1982-83 series when Imran was at his prime. He mastered a PAK attack of Azim Hafeez & forgot names in 1983 & had a great series in 1978 at home, when Khan was mostly injured. In between, he had a great Test at Karachi in 1978, I agree, one of few in a 125 Test career

5. Gavasker had relatively better outings in UK, made a great hundred in 1974 at Old Traford & 222 at Oval in 1979, but his majority of the runs against ENG was at home, that too not much in 1972 or 1976 when ENG had Willis, Snow, Old & Underwood at their prime. He roosted a poor English side in 1982 for 700+.............

Look, I have nothing personal against him, one of the all time greatest; but he simply wasn't the player he is credited for. Besides,he was the utmost selfish, vindictive & ill headed person. I give you 4 examples -
1. In 1975-76 when Pataudi retired, there were 2 incumbent for Indian Captaincy - Sunny & Bedi. Most of the management was for Bedi for his few years in County, Gavasker never liked that & he had a life time dig at BS whenever he got the chance. Later, Bombay lobby forced Bedi to resign on disciplinary grounds & a compromise choice (Venkat, from South) was picked.
2. A MCG 1980-81, Lillee got him LBW (probably he in-side edged that) & showed him the way - Gavasker declared, conceded the match (& series). It was Indian Manager Pataudi, that ran into the field & sent Chauhan back to batting for a match IND eventually won.
3. He had twice a mid pitch brawl with Fletcher & Zaheer - in a meaning less match, in last hour, both those Captains offered draws, Gavasker used his influence to home Umpire & made them continue the match till he reached his 100. Zaheer was damn upset, but he was good buddy of Sunny, not much happened there, but Fleatcher wasn't that sober then.
4. In 1984-85 5th Test, Azhar was 65* & could have got 4th century of his career (in 3rd Test, 2nd of the match - a record hold by Sunny) - he declared the innings giving a side leading 2-1 (ENG) to chase 250 in 40 overs & win it 3-1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
5. In 1985-86, IND became the 1st Asian side coming very close to win a Test Series in AUS, at MCG IND needed 120+ with rain threatening around - Kapil was the Captain, who had just replaced Gavasker as Indian Captain. Do you know what Sunny did - he took 75 minutes & 50 balls to score 8, until rain saved AUS..........

Not to mention his 36* (60 overs).

Look, I again say, don't judge me with my Nationality or question my integrity, I love this game & do study lot on this from passion. You spoiled my Sunday morning yaar - we are smashing those chokers, sorry Proteus..........

You summed it quite well. In an objective way, this is how one should judge players. People just praise players by saying they mastered aussies and windies but they do not know or acknowledge that those performances were against extremely depleted aussie and windies attackts. Instead they will tell you that you are undermining SG because you are a pakistani.

 

[MMHS]

You summed it quite well. In an objective way, this is how one should judge players. People just praise players by saying they mastered aussies and windies but they do not know or acknowledge that those performances were against extremely depleted aussie and windies attackts. Instead they will tell you that you are undermining SG because you are a pakistani.

I am a Bangladeshi

 

[pacesensation]

I am a Bangladeshi

I know, i was talking about myself. I mean when i was talking to some indians about some player...and i was evaluating his performance in respect of the quality of attack of opposition....
Btw off topic

Don't you think that aussies of late 90s and early 2000 are over-rated. I mean in late 90s wasim and waqar were over the hill. Ambrose walsh were over the hill almost plus richie richardsom retired in 97(premature)

Further, pollock lost some venom due to his back injury...donald was 33 and to make things worse he had a knee injury in 1999 thus he was a spent force by 2000.Plus absence of cronje

So don't you think that aussies domination of late 90s and early 2000 is over-rated?

 

[Sachin136]

You summed it quite well. In an objective way, this is how one should judge players. People just praise players by saying they mastered aussies and windies but they do not know or acknowledge that those performances were against extremely depleted aussie and windies attackts. Instead they will tell you that you are undermining SG because you are a pakistani.

Any West Indies attack without all of Roberts, Croft, Holding and Garner playing becomes extremely depleted?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Any West Indies attack without all of Roberts, Croft, Holding and Garner playing becomes extremely depleted?

Gavaskar avgd 49 when either Marshall Garner Holding or Roberts played againist him.

 

[ind_win]

Mohinder Amarnath - the most underrated Indian batsman ever

Many Indians, including me, talk/praise about Kapil Dev - but what a player Mohinder Amarnath was !

Against the two most tough teams of his times & against those ferocious fast bowling units, his test averages were.

Vs
Aus - in Aus 56 almost
WI - in WI 55 almost

Away - 52 almost
Home - 30
Over all - 42.5, with 11 100s.

And his ODI career was quite useful to say the least.
Who could forget his batting/bowling contributions in 1983 world cup ?

Just a pity and shame he always had issues with the selectors and vice-versa. His career had to extra special.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/player/26225.html

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/26225.html?class=1;template=results;type=batting