Examing the Gap
Hello, It seems that often Sachin Tendulkar and Sir Vivian Richards being a tier apart from each other is generally considered the conventional wisdom, and it makes sense considering Viv only has around 9000 runs while averaging 50 while Tendulkar has around 16000 runs while averaging 54, so logically that means Sachin has a decent statistical edge, but in actuality I believe the case to be a lot closer than the raw statistics suggest, or moreso, I believe the gap present statistically is not what their actual stats gap would look like, Since I'm of the belief that Tendulkar's numbers flatter him ever so slightly while Richard's numbers are a little rough on him.World Series Cricket Records
world series cricket, as we know, was an experient by Kerry Pecker in 70s where he tried fully to control cricket, at the time he bought all of the dtars of world Cricket and used them to have a private series, but these numbers and performances are not actually displayed in their international numbers which is in my opinion somewhat unfair considering that per sources the teams did put in the effort"... he had his jaw shattered by a bouncer from Andy Roberts ... Until that moment, WSC had looked suspiciously like a thrown-together entertainment package; Hookes' injury impressed the contest's intensity on all observers."
Lillee bowled nearly 23 overs every single inning, and it was a competition entirely between the Greatest players in the world, the likes of Ian Chappel have claimed it's the highest level they played at, I think at the very least they should be considered on par with the statistics in normal tests, surely they didn't have the intensity of a BGT or an Ashes or an Indo-Pakistan match but surely compareable to the intensity of a match like India vs New Zealand or India vs West Indies in modern cricket. Why does this matter? well, because Viv has high output in those matches.
A true measure of quality: World Series Cricket
A statistical look at World Series Cricket
Viv has 1281 runs at 55.6 average in 25 innings in World Series Cricket, so what are the adjusted numbers for Viv Richards? 9821 runs at the average of 50.88, still far off of Tendulkar, so why do I think they're relative?
Minnows: did Viv really play them?
Minnows, conceptually they have been a part of Cricket in almost every era, the term was largely coined to describe Bangladesh in the 2000s, what would I describe as minnows? well, a team that can't even average less than 40 as a unit when it comes to bowling in my eyes is a minnow, so what really counts as a minnow? the biggest examples being 2000s Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, who won no matches, weren't competitive at all and were mostly just lottery runs.
Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
in the 80s, the only such team was arguably Sri Lanka but...Viv never got to play Sri Lanka...so he never got to score those lottery runs that Tendulkar in the 2000s got to score.
Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
and now adding onto, why am I not counting 90s Zimbabwe as Minnow? because first they were somewhat competitive and their overall bowling average is a unit is pretty okay, likely because 90s wickets were tricky and raised average bowlers to tricky/decent level.
Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
so did Sachin get to cash in on minnows to amplify his average? Yes, he did.
Talk about Bradman-esque, these runs were pretty easy, mostly against nothing bowlers on flatties, something Viv never really got to do to amplify his statistics, if you take these runs out then Sachin has 14,286 runs at the average of 50.65, even if you take out the 90s Zimbabwe runs as well then the average falls to...51, about the same as Viv's true average.
Prime and Decline
Now, as we know Sachin averaged 56-57 20 or so years into his career, but what is flawed with those statistics is it doesn't take the Ban/Zim bashing and in comparision with Viv it's unfair by default. Here is a fairer stat, it's mostly agreed Sachin's prime ended after he destroyed Steyn in South Africa in the 2010-11 series, at the end of that series, against top teams, Sachin averaged 53.9
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Viv, at the end of his prime/start of his decline which is usually agreed to be the century on a lightning fast Perth wicket, also averaged 53.09
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
All around, Sachin's average against Viv is inflated by about 3 points by doing something Viv never got the chance to do.
The Case for Both
so when statistically even, what is the case for both? 1. Viv Richards — The case for Viv is simple, he is simply the greatest player of pace bowling that the world has ever seen. From destroying Dennis Lillee and Jeff Thompson on lightning fast traditional Australian wickets to destroying Prime Willis/Underwood/John Snow on tough English wickets to destroying Prime Botham with dukes, to defeating Imran and Qadir on the most underprepared uneven pitches, to even dominate Imran and Wasim combined on Windies wickets and so forth. Even murdering the quaret on spin friendly wickets. also taming Hadlee on some difficult Windies wickets and so forth. Viv's argument is domination, deconstruction of legends and perhaps the greatest batting prime after the Don himself.
2. Sachin Tendulkar — simply speaking, Sachin is a one in a lifetime batsmen, he played for 24 years and even at the very end he dominated one of the greatest of all time in their own backyard, as a teenager he scored 2 hundreds in Australia, in England as a young man he made 2 hundreds, when he was barely 20 he made a hundred against Donald on tough Saffer pitches, he has the perfect technique in the game that allowed him to stay at the very top of the world for 2 decades besides minor dips while Richards barely managed one decade. Sachin's argument is longetivity, consistency and the picture perfect technique.
Both have valid arguments, there is no runaway winner unlike in One day batting, at the end I've them as my #3 and #4 best test Batsmen of all time, I made this because I overall thought the raw numbers are decieving when it comes to the gap between Viv Richards and Sachin Tendulkar, when playing against test class sides, their numbers are nearly equivalent and at the end it just comes down to the above factors and arguments I mentioned for both of them.
