Overall who was a better cricketer - Sachin Tendulkar or Viv Richards?

[A.A.Z]

I think it's fair to say that Indian people are the only people on the entire planet who don't think that Pakistan won a 3 Test series in India 2-1 in 1998-99! "Oh no", they say "we drew a series 1-1 and then lost a separate Test".

Mind you, [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] or [MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION] might deny that England lost The Ashes 3-0 in Australia in 1979-80, because supposedly The Ashes weren't at stake.

So my countrymen are just as capable of ignoring embarrassing series defeats as Indians are!

I'm sure a lot of Pakistanis would do the same, even the most warped logic makes sense when defending your record against your arch-nemesis .

 

[Junaids]

I'm sure a lot of Pakistanis would do the same, even the most warped logic makes sense when defending your record against your arch-nemesis .

Very true.

But just look at the dates!

28-31 January 1999, Chennai: PAKISTAN WON BY 12 RUNS
4-7 February 1999, Delhi: INDIA WON BY 212 RUNS
16-20 February 1999, Calcutta: PAKISTAN WON BY 46 RUNS

That, supposedly, means the series was drawn 1-1!

 

[Buffet]

The difference between Tendy and Viv in ODIs is that Viv dominated whole teams, and only really failed vs Pakistan.

Agree with this. He only failed vs Pakistan if you can call it failure in ODI format.

Having said that in the test format, Pakistan, Aus and NZ had ATG bowlers. Viv test average against these three oppositions is in lower 40s. He compensated it by averaging high against Ind and Eng.

I will take Viv in ODI and SRT in tests.

 

[amax]

Sachin is greater greater
[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION] also do one for Imran and Wasim.

 

[amax]

*cricketer

 

[thehub]

I think it's fair to say that Indian people are the only people on the entire planet who don't think that Pakistan won a 3 Test series in India 2-1 in 1998-99! "Oh no", they say "we drew a series 1-1 and then lost a separate Test".

Mind you, [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] or [MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION] might deny that England lost The Ashes 3-0 in Australia in 1979-80, because supposedly The Ashes weren't at stake.

So my countrymen are just as capable of ignoring embarrassing series defeats as Indians are!

How do you call that a 3 match series. Lol. Asian test championship tournament league match was a decider of the test series? If we had qualified for finals, you would have called that as 4 match series?

Promo and preseries talk was 2 match series. Only pak fans call that a 3 match series as they won that league match. Official Series head to head count is 3-3. This series was counted as draw.

 

[thehub]

Very true.

But just look at the dates!

28-31 January 1999, Chennai: PAKISTAN WON BY 12 RUNS
4-7 February 1999, Delhi: INDIA WON BY 212 RUNS
16-20 February 1999, Calcutta: PAKISTAN WON BY 46 RUNS

That, supposedly, means the series was drawn 1-1!

So there was no Asian test championship? How did pak win that test championship without playing against India? You want pak to get credit for test championship winner as well as test series winner? Nice logic.

 

[DRsohail]

I think you forgot it was a different series which cannot be combined with the Test series that was officially played when Pakistan toured India that year. And I don't have to be hurt, it's you who has been shifting goal posts right, left and center.

i knew it it was a different series but again the bowling unit was almost the same//..

 

[DRsohail]

for some indian fans that chmpionship is not a match all togethr because sachin average is 4.5 in that particular match...

 

[saifi]

Richards

 

[Proactive_]

Pakistan beat India in 2 out of 3 test matches played in close proximity to each other. In other words, they got the better of India in India in 1999, get over it.

 

[Sadevdesai]

I would say Tendulkar .... because he has won matches by taking Wickets also. I remember in that famous 2001 Test Match Series against the Australians, he had scored only 10 runs in both the innings of a Test Match, but in both the innings he had 3 wickets each ...... Hmmmmmm ....... !!!!

 

[Abdullah719]

I would say Tendulkar .... because he has won matches by taking Wickets also. I remember in that famous 2001 Test Match Series against the Australians, he had scored only 10 runs in both the innings of a Test Match, but in both the innings he had 3 wickets each ...... Hmmmmmm ....... !!!!

Viv scored 44 and then took a 6-fer to win a low-scoring ODI against India in 1989.

I don't think we need to judge this comparison by their bowling. Batting in Tests and ODIs should be the points of consideration.

 

[Buffet]

I would say Tendulkar .... because he has won matches by taking Wickets also. I remember in that famous 2001 Test Match Series against the Australians, he had scored only 10 runs in both the innings of a Test Match, but in both the innings he had 3 wickets each ...... Hmmmmmm ....... !!!!

SRT has 150+ international wickets, but he was still a part timer. Although, he looked really good while bowling leg spin.

 

[Hasan123]

Viv was probably the better odi batsmen as he dominated bowlers and had a brilliant strike rate which no one could match in era. But as an overall batsmen I'll take Sachin. At 17/18 he was scoring against the best bowlers of that era, and even in the twilight of his career he was scoring against the best of this era. He has scored runs in all conditions as well. Add the pressure of being the best batsmen in his team and carrying the hopes of a mad cricket nation like India, where the scrutiny and pressure is very high I'll go with Sachin.

 

[Hitman]

Pakistan beat India in 2 out of 3 test matches played in close proximity to each other. In other words, they got the better of India in India in 1999, get over it.

Seriously speaking you need to change that flag close to your username. I have seen so many of your posts, and it's so blatantly apparent that you aren't Indian.

 

[Tusker]

Viv was probably the better odi batsmen as he dominated bowlers and had a brilliant strike rate which no one could match in era. But as an overall batsmen I'll take Sachin.

Kapil Dev had a higher strike rate than Viv Richards if we are purely speaking of strike rates.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/30028.html?class=2;template=results;type=batting

 

[James]

Tendulkar.

 

[Sachin136]

Pakistan beat India in 2 out of 3 test matches played in close proximity to each other. In other words, they got the better of India in India in 1999, get over it.

That is not what is being discussd. This is like considering the Champion's Trophy matches between Pakistan and India as part of the 2012 ODI series between them.

 

[Hasan123]

Kapil Dev had a higher strike rate than Viv Richards if we are purely speaking of strike rates.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/30028.html?class=2;template=results;type=batting

Viv was batting a strike not many other could match then. Wasn't aware of Kapils strike rate.

 

[Abdullah719]

Viv was batting a strike not many other could match then. Wasn't aware of Kapils strike rate.

Highest strike-rates in ODI cricket during Viv's career (minimum 1000 ODI runs):

[table= class:grid][tr][td]Player[/td][td]Mat[/td][td]Inns[/td][td]NO[/td][td]Runs[/td][td]HS[/td][td]Ave[/td][td]BF[/td][td]SR[/td][td]100[/td][td]50[/td][td]0[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev (INDIA)[/td][td]163[/td][td]147[/td][td]28[/td][td]3132[/td][td]175*[/td][td]26.31[/td][td]3132[/td][td]100.00[/td][td]1[/td][td]14[/td][td]11[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IVA Richards (WI)[/td][td]187[/td][td]167[/td][td]24[/td][td]6721[/td][td]189*[/td][td]47.00[/td][td]7451[/td][td]90.20[/td][td]11[/td][td]45[/td][td]7[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Saleem Malik (PAK)[/td][td]125[/td][td]117[/td][td]15[/td][td]3406[/td][td]102[/td][td]33.39[/td][td]3975[/td][td]85.68[/td][td]4[/td][td]21[/td][td]10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Zaheer Abbas (PAK)[/td][td]60[/td][td]58[/td][td]5[/td][td]2484[/td][td]123[/td][td]46.86[/td][td]2921[/td][td]85.03[/td][td]7[/td][td]12[/td][td]2[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RW Marsh (AUS)[/td][td]85[/td][td]70[/td][td]12[/td][td]1183[/td][td]66[/td][td]20.39[/td][td]1416[/td][td]83.54[/td][td]0[/td][td]4[/td][td]6[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Patil (INDIA)[/td][td]45[/td][td]42[/td][td]1[/td][td]1005[/td][td]84[/td][td]24.51[/td][td]1223[/td][td]82.17[/td][td]0[/td][td]9[/td][td]4[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham (ENG)[/td][td]99[/td][td]90[/td][td]12[/td][td]1738[/td][td]72[/td][td]22.28[/td][td]2122[/td][td]81.90[/td][td]0[/td][td]7[/td][td]5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SP O'Donnell (AUS)[/td][td]85[/td][td]63[/td][td]15[/td][td]1232[/td][td]74*[/td][td]25.66[/td][td]1507[/td][td]81.75[/td][td]0[/td][td]9[/td][td]5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CH Lloyd (WI)[/td][td]85[/td][td]68[/td][td]19[/td][td]1946[/td][td]102[/td][td]39.71[/td][td]2402[/td][td]81.01[/td][td]1[/td][td]11[/td][td]1[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Ijaz Ahmed (PAK)[/td][td]82[/td][td]74[/td][td]9[/td][td]1594[/td][td]124*[/td][td]24.52[/td][td]1977[/td][td]80.62[/td][td]2[/td][td]7[/td][td]1[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]PA de Silva (SL)[/td][td]87[/td][td]84[/td][td]7[/td][td]2275[/td][td]104[/td][td]29.54[/td][td]2828[/td][td]80.44[/td][td]1[/td][td]17[/td][td]4[/td][/tr][/table]

 

[Junaids]

To give this a bit of context, may I refer to an article in this month's "The Cricketer" magazine, written by the legendary Michael Henderson?

Henderson uses his article to argue that the MCC should have as its President a legendary cricketer. But consider these two telling sentences, which really end this debate once and for all:

"The greatest cricketer of all is Garfield Sobers, though it might be asking a bit much to get Garry over from Barbados."

"Since Sobers retired in 1974 the greatest player, we can all agree, has been Viv Richards."

And there you have it. It's mystifying for all of us who aren't Asian that there is even a discussion as to whether Richards or Tendulkar was better. There really is nothing to discuss!

 

[Tusker]

To give this a bit of context, may I refer to an article in this month's "The Cricketer" magazine, written by the legendary Michael Henderson?

Henderson uses his article to argue that the MCC should have as its President a legendary cricketer. But consider these two telling sentences, which really end this debate once and for all:

"The greatest cricketer of all is Garfield Sobers, though it might be asking a bit much to get Garry over from Barbados."

"Since Sobers retired in 1974 the greatest player, we can all agree, has been Viv Richards."

And there you have it. It's mystifying for all of us who aren't Asian that there is even a discussion as to whether Richards or Tendulkar was better. There really is nothing to discuss!

Is that why you almost always have to dig into verbal "certificates of accomplishments " to prove your point ? Easier than hard facts and numbers I suppose ?

So is this fella "Michael Henderson" is a certified authority on rating cricketers ? His word is the final word on these matters ?

 

[Junaids]

Is that why you almost always have to dig into verbal "certificates of accomplishments " to prove your point ? Easier than hard facts and numbers I suppose ?

So is this fella "Michael Henderson" is a certified authority on rating cricketers ? His word is the final word on these matters ?

Well done - you've hoist me with my own petard!

After all, I'm always whingeing when people use the glowing tributes to Tendulkar from Bradman et al as a reference.

So I am a hypocrite, but my point was really just to illustrate that outside India, nobody even thinks that you can compare Tendulkar and Richards. As they would say in an American sitcom "is that even a thing?"

 

[Sachin136]

Well done - you've hoist me with my own petard!

After all, I'm always whingeing when people use the glowing tributes to Tendulkar from Bradman et al as a reference.

So I am a hypocrite, but my point was really just to illustrate that outside India, nobody even thinks that you can compare Tendulkar and Richards. As they would say in an American sitcom "is that even a thing?"

You seem to have the view that "outside India" is only made up of you and a few select individuals who agree with you.

 

[Tusker]

Well done - you've hoist me with my own petard!

believe me that wasn't the intention ... (see below)

After all, I'm always whingeing when people use the glowing tributes to Tendulkar from Bradman et al as a reference.

So I am a hypocrite, but my point was really just to illustrate that outside India, nobody even thinks that you can compare Tendulkar and Richards. As they would say in an American sitcom "is that even a thing?"

So this is why I rely on my own judgement ... why should I care what some TDH thinks about Tendulkar ? I know my cricket well enough to stand by my posts on my own without relying on crutches to support me ... you know your cricket well too ... so I just don't get your logic of repeatedly reaching for the crutches to support your case. Why not debate based on evidence that everyone can check out and make their own mind ?

 

[Junaids]

That is not what is being discussd. This is like considering the Champion's Trophy matches between Pakistan and India as part of the 2012 ODI series between them.

Oh I see!

So India beat Pakistan at Delhi on the Sunday of one week, and nobody in their right mind would think that the Test against the same opposition at Calcutta was related, because it didn't start until ten days later on the Wednesday of the following week?

Totally unconnected.

India drew the series 1-1 and then lost a one-off Test.

 

[Suleiman]

To be fair if you look at this from a biomechanical perspective, batsmen who are shorter in height, at or below 5'7", tend to do quite well compared to their taller counterparts because of a lower center of gravity so they have a more solid foundation and are more balanced in their shots.

So in a way Sachin had a bit of an unfair advantage over other batsmen and so you have to keep that in mind when doing comparisons.

 

[Hitman]

Well done - you've hoist me with my own petard!

After all, I'm always whingeing when people use the glowing tributes to Tendulkar from Bradman et al as a reference.

So I am a hypocrite, but my point was really just to illustrate that outside India, nobody even thinks that you can compare Tendulkar and Richards. As they would say in an American sitcom "is that even a thing?"

I think David Gower isn't from India, right?

 

[Hasan123]

Highest strike-rates in ODI cricket during Viv's career (minimum 1000 ODI runs):

[table= class:grid][tr][td]Player[/td][td]Mat[/td][td]Inns[/td][td]NO[/td][td]Runs[/td][td]HS[/td][td]Ave[/td][td]BF[/td][td]SR[/td][td]100[/td][td]50[/td][td]0[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev (INDIA)[/td][td]163[/td][td]147[/td][td]28[/td][td]3132[/td][td]175*[/td][td]26.31[/td][td]3132[/td][td]100.00[/td][td]1[/td][td]14[/td][td]11[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IVA Richards (WI)[/td][td]187[/td][td]167[/td][td]24[/td][td]6721[/td][td]189*[/td][td]47.00[/td][td]7451[/td][td]90.20[/td][td]11[/td][td]45[/td][td]7[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Saleem Malik (PAK)[/td][td]125[/td][td]117[/td][td]15[/td][td]3406[/td][td]102[/td][td]33.39[/td][td]3975[/td][td]85.68[/td][td]4[/td][td]21[/td][td]10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Zaheer Abbas (PAK)[/td][td]60[/td][td]58[/td][td]5[/td][td]2484[/td][td]123[/td][td]46.86[/td][td]2921[/td][td]85.03[/td][td]7[/td][td]12[/td][td]2[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RW Marsh (AUS)[/td][td]85[/td][td]70[/td][td]12[/td][td]1183[/td][td]66[/td][td]20.39[/td][td]1416[/td][td]83.54[/td][td]0[/td][td]4[/td][td]6[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Patil (INDIA)[/td][td]45[/td][td]42[/td][td]1[/td][td]1005[/td][td]84[/td][td]24.51[/td][td]1223[/td][td]82.17[/td][td]0[/td][td]9[/td][td]4[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham (ENG)[/td][td]99[/td][td]90[/td][td]12[/td][td]1738[/td][td]72[/td][td]22.28[/td][td]2122[/td][td]81.90[/td][td]0[/td][td]7[/td][td]5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SP O'Donnell (AUS)[/td][td]85[/td][td]63[/td][td]15[/td][td]1232[/td][td]74*[/td][td]25.66[/td][td]1507[/td][td]81.75[/td][td]0[/td][td]9[/td][td]5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CH Lloyd (WI)[/td][td]85[/td][td]68[/td][td]19[/td][td]1946[/td][td]102[/td][td]39.71[/td][td]2402[/td][td]81.01[/td][td]1[/td][td]11[/td][td]1[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Ijaz Ahmed (PAK)[/td][td]82[/td][td]74[/td][td]9[/td][td]1594[/td][td]124*[/td][td]24.52[/td][td]1977[/td][td]80.62[/td][td]2[/td][td]7[/td][td]1[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]PA de Silva (SL)[/td][td]87[/td][td]84[/td][td]7[/td][td]2275[/td][td]104[/td][td]29.54[/td][td]2828[/td][td]80.44[/td][td]1[/td][td]17[/td][td]4[/td][/tr][/table]

So only Kapil was batting at a higher strike rate.

 

[Junaids]

Guys, strike rate wasn't even a thing in 60 overs ODI's, which included Viv Richards' 3 World Cup Finals.

Lunch was taken after 35 overs, and Tea was taken around 25 overs into the second innings.

Strike Rate? That's funny!

 

[cr7great]

sachin is best cricketer after bradman

 

[Sachin136]

To be fair if you look at this from a biomechanical perspective, batsmen who are shorter in height, at or below 5'7", tend to do quite well compared to their taller counterparts because of a lower center of gravity so they have a more solid foundation and are more balanced in their shots.

So in a way Sachin had a bit of an unfair advantage over other batsmen and so you have to keep that in mind when doing comparisons.

So should taller bowlers be rated a little less because they have an unfair advantage?

In any sport, players have some physical characteristics that they are born which help them out. That has nothing to do with a discussion of who is a better cricketer.

 

[Suleiman]

So should taller bowlers be rated a little less because they have an unfair advantage?

In any sport, players have some physical characteristics that they are born which help them out. That has nothing to do with a discussion of who is a better cricketer.

Brother, I never said Viv is better or vice versa. But am not going to shy away from the truth. Sachin would've surpassed Bradman as well if he didn't get tennis elbow turn of the century.

 

[sali]

There is no comparison between the two eras. Viv played against top pace bowlers with no helmet, no batting ODI pitches, no Indian batting friendly pitches where Sachin scored most of his runs, and special bats.

 

[TestMatch]

To be fair if you look at this from a biomechanical perspective, batsmen who are shorter in height, at or below 5'7", tend to do quite well compared to their taller counterparts because of a lower center of gravity so they have a more solid foundation and are more balanced in their shots.

Yes, according to a documentary I saw some years ago, the Ponting/Sachin/Lara/Kohli bodyshape, and height especially, is ideal for batting. Viv Richards was a bit of an anomaly, being a bit more lanky.

 

[Savak]

Viv Richards was perhaps the first batsman in history to terrify the bowlers at the mere thought of bowling to him, doubt Tendulkar had the same impact.

 

[Hitman]

Yes, according to a documentary I saw some years ago, the Ponting/Sachin/Lara/Kohli bodyshape, and height especially, is ideal for batting. Viv Richards was a bit of an anomaly, being a bit more lanky.

I've heard the same.