Rohit Sharma vs Saeed Anwar - Who is the better ODI batsmen?

[Zaz]

Comparing orange and pears here Anwar batted in a totally different era to the one sharma is now A comparison is silly as the game is very different to what it was 20 years ago

One batted in an era where 270 in more games than not was a winning total Sharma is batting in an era where 350 can be chased down without a sweat

 

[Darkrai]

Here you go,

View attachment 84760

One thing you have to note that graph can be comparing 15 years vs 5 years and yet they will appear covering entire area. For example, in this comparison, SRT's career has graph of 10+ years in range of 750-880. If some one has just 2 years of cricket in that range then you have to notice that and not see both graphs as the same despite graphs covering the same area.

Can you show us one for Javed Miandad and Zaheer Abbas?

 

[Buffet]

Can you show us one for Javed Miandad and Zaheer Abbas?

Here you go,



One thing can be a bit misleading is time span for each player in these graphs. You have to pay attention to time span because graph simply spans for their entire career, but one player may have played for 20 years vs other 10 years. Some one with 3 good years with 5 years of career may look as good as another player with 10 good years out of 15 years of career.

In above graph, Abbas has a fantastic end to his career, but if you notice carefully, it was just 3-4 years. Javed had a much longer career and for around 10 years he remained around or above 750.

In my opinion, both were equally gun ODI players even though I had never compared them in rating side by side. I have seen tendency to underrate Javed by some posters looking at his raw stats and then comparing it with modern era. Rating does take some context in account and he has rightly spent 10+ years around or above 750 rating. Posters simply looking at raw stats forget that ODI has changed a lot. Abbas appear to be as good as anyone, but unfortunately his career was shorter. Still, if I recall he had second best SR after Viv in that era. That's something to remember.

 

[Darkrai]

Here you go,

View attachment 84762

One thing can be a bit misleading is time span for each player in these graphs. You have to pay attention to time span because graph simply spans for their entire career, but one player may have played for 20 years vs other 10 years. Some one with 3 good years with 5 years of career may look as good as another player with 10 good years out of 15 years of career.

In above graph, Abbas has a fantastic end to his career, but if you notice carefully, it was just 3-4 years. Javed had a much longer career and for around 10 years he remained around or above 750.

In my opinion, both were equally gun ODI players even though I had never compared them in rating side by side. I have seen tendency to underrate Javed by some posters looking at his raw stats and then comparing it with modern era. Rating does take some context in account and he has rightly spent 10+ years around or above 750 rating. Posters simply looking at raw stats forget that ODI has changed a lot. Abbas appear to be as good as anyone, but unfortunately his career was shorter. Still, if I recall he had second best SR after Viv in that era. That's something to remember.

Thanks a lot man. I didn't realize Miandad was this good in ODIs, and Zaheer Abbas wow-wish he had played longer. These two are definitely underrated.

 

[Snow]

I would take Anwar, unless its super flat track.

 

[light]

Would be a fair question when Rohit calls it a quit. Many players takes a nose dive close to retirement. But If you ask me about current rohit and Anwar at his best, Rohit hands down.

 

[Peshwa]

I would take Anwar, unless its super flat track.

Yes anwar was beast on Green mamba tracks

 

[RamLakhan]

I get immense laughter when I see people praising yesteryear batsmen for their achievements, comparing and defaming the modern day batsmen completely! It is like saying Indian seamers (who are the best in the world currently who can outperform even South African & England counterparts at times! They can definitely bowl better than anyone in SC conditions! And definitely the best in India's history) would be better than WI pacers of 70s/80s and SA pacers of 90s and Aus pacers of 00s if they played then because of the so-called bowling-friendly conditions & batsmen-non-friendly rules! Shall we say like this? Rules should apply the same to everyone isn't it?

If Pakistan has produced such a top-class batsman then who has stopped them to produce them now when the pitches are so super-flat? All I can say is Saeed Anwar would have taken early VRS not able to cope with the demands of modern-day power play and fitness, unavailability of substitutes/runners (if he had played in top teams like India, England, etc) OR would have at the most played for Pakistan and contributed like Fakhar, Babar, etc and would have won them a rare mighty CT...!!!

 

[Bhaijaan]

The replies in this post simply reveals the age group of most posters. Against a quality bowling line up Sharma does not hold a candle to Anwar who was till 1996 the best LOI batsman in the world and ahead of Tendulkar.

Twice he hit 3 centuries in a row and he could take the attack to any ATG attack especially on lively surfaces.

Right now there is no ATG LOI bowler let alone ATG LOI bowling attack which at least 4 teams had back in the day.

 

[MP2011]

In my opinion its futile to compare cricketers across eras.

 

[RamLakhan]

In my opinion its futile to compare cricketers across eras.

Comparisons is a fashion on PP... Between eras, between countries... Without knowing & understanding that there are so many parameters & variables which clash!

 

[MP2011]

Comparisons is a fashion on PP... Between eras, between countries... Without knowing & understanding that there are so many parameters & variables which clash!

True!

 

[MP2011]

Comparing someone like Anwar with Rohit is as futile as it gets! Two totally different cricketing eras....

 

[RamLakhan]

The replies in this post simply reveals the age group of most posters. Against a quality bowling line up Sharma does not hold a candle to Anwar who was till 1996 the best LOI batsman in the world and ahead of Tendulkar.

Twice he hit 3 centuries in a row and he could take the attack to any ATG attack especially on lively surfaces.

Right now there is no ATG LOI bowler let alone ATG LOI bowling attack which at least 4 teams had back in the day.

Shahid Afridi & Sanath Jayasuriya are best examples of what they did in so-called ATG era & non-ATG era, because they fall to the bridge era (had bites of both eras!) Their peak (or rather insane intensity) is much higher than Saeed Anwar! But how come they did well in the beginning and then fell apart later? And then we have examples of Sachin, Gilchrist, etc, (if you talk about prime period of a career or whatever) who did well throughout their career and rightly they are proper ATGs! I see these Pakistanis bringing up their Saeed Anwar so much because of probably the scarcity of batting talent from them, even we don't boast Virender Sehwag so much even though he simply tore apart all kind of ATGs in the severest conditions brutally forever (The pitches on one of NZ Tours was probably the greenest ever in the history of cricket game!) OR for that matter we don't boast Kumble as a bowler hailing from India for achieving feats much more than Anwar as a batsman from Pakistan!

 

[anoop]

The replies in this post simply reveals the age group of most posters. Against a quality bowling line up Sharma does not hold a candle to Anwar who was till 1996 the best LOI batsman in the world and ahead of Tendulkar.

Twice he hit 3 centuries in a row and he could take the attack to any ATG attack especially on lively surfaces.

Right now there is no ATG LOI bowler let alone ATG LOI bowling attack which at least 4 teams had back in the day.

Brian Lara was the best LOI batsman till 96 not Anwar