VVS Laxman vs Inzamam-ul-Haq - Better Test batsman?

[bablu_2010]

Just because Inzi vs India is better than Laxman vs Pakistan doesn't mean that Inzi is better. Otherwise Bhajji >>>Warne , Srinath >>> Waqar .

ok valid point. I take it...

what about the overall average??

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

please give me a logical reason

 

[kungfu90]

@Navrocks The video of Inzi ducking a yorker .

 

[bablu_2010]

And further ruined the thread in the process, both in terms of weak content and longer loading times.

Whippy take of your glasses and read lols...
Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

what do you have to say about this??

 

[kungfu90]

ok valid point. I take it...

what about the overall average??

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

please give me a logical reason

I've already said , Inzi overall a better bat than Laxman.

 

[bablu_2010]

@Navrocks The video of Inzi ducking a yorker .

you didnt answer the question I asked you

what about the overall average??

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

please give me a logical reason .

I am waiting for yur reply.

 

[bablu_2010]

I've already said , Inzi overall a better bat than Laxman.

Ok good... well done for admitting..

 

[Zaz]

In all conditions, against all opposition inzy has more centuries and a better avge then VVS - case closed

 

[in_cutter]

Laxman chased against Australia when Australia were a weak team with ordinary bowlers

And Bangladesh were full of fiery fast bowlers were they?

But overall, Inzi edges it. Laxman is too inconsistent.

 

[James]

People struggle to read between the lines, so I'll say it again.

Laxman versus the Aussies and South Africa.
Inzy versus most other sides.
Not a huge gap between them overall.

 

[James]

For a supposed top class player laxman has very few test centuries (16 compared to inzys 25 even tho laxmans played 8 more tests) and ultimately big runs and not 50s win u games zy

Totally accept this, but it's worth remembering how many times Laxman has got a 70 or a 90 in a lower-scoring game and completely changed the complexion of it in the process.

 

[bablu_2010]

And Bangladesh were full of fiery fast bowlers were they?

But overall, Inzi edges it. Laxman is too inconsistent.

The thread is not about who chased and under what condition. The thread is about who is better test batsman. look at the following record and judge for yourself.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

 

[bablu_2010]

People struggle to read between the lines, so I'll say it again.

Laxman versus the Aussies and South Africa.
Inzy versus most other sides.
Not a huge gap between them overall.

9 centuries is not a huge gap?

 

[Zaz]

So after watching random dismissals..you want us to conclude inzi is better. Do even know how many ridicolous videos of inzi are in the web..from falling on wickets to blocking the ball to run outs. But posting them is an insult to anybody's intelligence because Inzi is way way way way better than what those random dismissals show.

I can show you a great shot by hafeez on youtube and a silly dismissal of tendulkar? so?


when does centuries decide who handles pressure better...

and btw..laxman plays with tailenders almost ..and his 50's have helped indian in many ways..


why am I even arguing with you !!

Poor excuse! I can name u many batsmen (m hussey has 15 test 100s batting at 5/6 in only 60 odd games )that have played at 5-6 and have more 100s than laxman! Heck Inzy batted at 4-5 all his career and still has 9 more 100s in 8 less tests

 

[in_cutter]

The thread is not about who chased and under what condition. The thread is about who is better test batsman. look at the following record and judge for yourself.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

Yes I know what the thread is about..I was quoting someone who said Laxman chased against a weak Aussie attack..so I countered that with my response...and I already mentioned that Inzi edges it.

 

[James]

9 centuries is not a huge gap?

I never saw a huge gap as match-winners (which is what really matters) and I've been watching them both for a long time. I'm a fan of both.

 

[ares1000]

Overall, Inzi was superior.

 

[cricketworm]

When Laxman is on the song, he is one of the most eye pleasing batsman. He is clearly gaining on Inzi for last 3-4 years.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/441826.html

best http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/456671.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/464526.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/463147.html

 

[Zaz]

Inzamam has also a much better avge in the first team innings of tests (52 compared to laxmans 44) and scored a lot more centuries in 1st team innings too (19 compared to laxmans 11) These runs are massive bcos matches are more or less won or lost based on 1st innings score

Also check out inzy avgeing 78 in won tests with 17 100s when vvs only avges 53 with 6 100s

 

[Punk27]

People struggle to read between the lines, so I'll say it again.

Laxman versus the Aussies and South Africa.
Inzy versus most other sides.
Not a huge gap between them overall.

with that it's perhaps the time for our daily, 'Cook is best captain,Bell can't get out,Pietersen hits one handed six,Swann turns the ball..etc etc' gossip

 

[CORNERED-TIGER]

Inzamam-ul-Haq

although i love laxman batting aswel

 

[velu]

Inzamam-ul-Haq

although i love laxman batting aswel

i know you will be posting a video of laxman getting out to an in-swinger next

 

[bablu_2010]

Inzamam has also a much better avge in the first team innings of tests (52 compared to laxmans 44) and scored a lot more centuries in 1st team innings too (19 compared to laxmans 11) These runs are massive bcos matches are more or less won or lost based on 1st innings score

Also check out inzy avgeing 78 in won tests with 17 100s when vvs only avges 53 with 6 100s

That alone shows who is better batsman...
Now, if anyone wants to debate this topic will have to answer about these great stats about great Inzamam. Either the stats are lying or the person not accepting these stats is lying...

 

[cricketworm]

[UTUBE]tymG87WpXyI[/UTUBE] what a match this was!!! Phew! love India vs Aus. test match Anytime, Anyday, Anywhere!!

 

[bablu_2010]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Qn2MtuiK-dc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

if anyone hasn't seen this video please watch it.. Inzamam's match winning 100 vs Bangladesh in his home town Multan.

 

[CORNERED-TIGER]

i know you will be posting a video of laxman getting out to an in-swinger next

that can happen to any cricketer ..

like his style just like saeed anwar gr8 timer...

and above made runs when needed just like anwar

 

[Itachi]

if anyone hasn't seen this video please watch it.. Inzamam's match winning 100 vs Bangladesh in his home town Multan.

against whom? Tell again. I didn't hear. Did you say match winnings against bangladesh?

 

[bablu_2010]

against whom? Tell again. I didn't hear. Did you say match winnings against bangladesh?

you can watch the following video 184 vs India lols... you can post a video of VVS laxman scoring 100 against Pakistan if you can find any lols...

<iframe frameborder="0" width="480" height="323" src="http://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/xkx0gk"></iframe><br /><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkx0gk_inzamam-ul-haq-184-v-india-2005_sport" target="_blank">Inzamam-ul-Haq 184 v India 2005</a> <i>by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/Cornered-Tiger" target="_blank">Cornered-Tiger</a></i>

 

[bablu_2010]

against whom? Tell again. I didn't hear. Did you say match winnings against bangladesh?

Yeah that inning was against Bangladesh. of course you remember Bangladesh. the 2007 world cup. India vs Bangladesh and guess what who won ???

 

[Itachi]

its not cricket related by ur name 'itachi' and 'profile pic' gives me a feel good feeling,i don't know it's just funny,no it's not,ok it is,no offense
btw Laxman<Samaraveera :ahmed

are you smoking something or what?" Its ok, its not ok, oh no it is ok...." Sounds like the words of a delusional person having some panic attacks.

And if you say laxman < courtney walsh, even then i don't care. I don't need to prove anyone who laxman is. Who knows cricket, he knows where he stands.

If you read my posts, i never mentioned lax>inzy or lax <inzy. So save your energy for others.

 

[Itachi]

you can watch the following video 184 vs India lols... you can post a video of VVS laxman scoring 100 against Pakistan if you can find any lols...

<iframe frameborder="0" width="480" height="323" src="http://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/xkx0gk"></iframe><br /><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkx0gk_inzamam-ul-haq-184-v-india-2005_sport" target="_blank">Inzamam-ul-Haq 184 v India 2005</a> <i>by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/Cornered-Tiger" target="_blank">Cornered-Tiger</a></i>

lol.... From when pakistan became a benchmark to test players? They lost that status after '99-03 .

 

[bablu_2010]

that can happen to any cricketer ..

like his style just like saeed anwar gr8 timer...

and above made runs when needed just like anwar

very good point....

 

[Itachi]

Yeah that inning was against Bangladesh. of course you remember Bangladesh. the 2007 world cup. India vs Bangladesh and guess what who won ???

my dear sunshine, we are talking about test cricket here if you haven't realised it yet. From where world cup came?

 

[bablu_2010]

lol.... From when pakistan became a benchmark to test players? They lost that status after '99-03 .

Yeah maybe there is no video of laxmi bai scoring a 100 against pakistan. I feel your pain... lols

 

[bablu_2010]

my dear sunshine, we are talking about test cricket here if you haven't realised it yet. From where world cup came?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TzR-KK2HrBg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This Video is dedicated to Itachi. Itachi look at Laxman's expressions lols... He looks bit confused. dont u think?

 

[cricketworm]

Yeah maybe there is no video of laxmi bai scoring a 100 against pakistan. I feel your pain... lols

you are crossing line here! This is 2nd time you have posted, surprised you aren't warned.

 

[Itachi]

Itachi look at Laxman's expressions lols... He looks bit confused. dont u think?

you recently learn how to use youtube or what?

I can bring videos of inzys stupidity video where he got run out. Or he obstructed the ball thrown by a fielder and was given out.... But this isn't inzys calibre. It would be degrading his image which he certainly doesn't deserve.

But its useless talking to you cz i know you didn't understand any of the word i said. But i have done my part. Lax greater than inzy or inzy greater than lax.... I don't need to degrade one player to give upper status to the other.

Your new here. So go through some old threads and see how we debate here. Putting some videos as proof? Even a pakistani fan will tell you how useless it is.

 

[bablu_2010]

you are crossing line here! This is 2nd time you have posted, surprised you aren't warned.

dont get sentimental and enjoy the video...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TzR-KK2HrBg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Itachi]

Yeah maybe there is no video of laxmi bai scoring a 100 against pakistan. I feel your pain... lols

ow.... How i missed this gem? You should hope that no admin has seen it.

 

[bablu_2010]

you recently learn how to use youtube or what?

I can bring videos of inzys stupidity video where he got run out. Or he obstructed the ball thrown by a fielder and was given out.... But this isn't inzys calibre. It would be degrading his image which he certainly doesn't deserve.

But its useless talking to you cz i know you didn't understand any of the word i said. But i have done my part. Lax greater than inzy or inzy greater than lax.... I don't need to degrade one player to give upper status to the other.

Your new here. So go through some old threads and see how we debate here. Putting some videos as proof? Even a pakistani fan will tell you how useless it is.

ok if you have missed my earlier posts here is the other proof.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33


Is this more logical?? lols

 

[IgnitedMind]

ow.... How i missed this gem? You should hope that no admin has seen it.

I am with you. I pray to god that no admin sees the post where Bablu called Laxman Laxmi bai. Wish god obliges..

 

[cricketworm]

^ bablu, you are insulting India's one of the greatest freedom fighter and cricket player. If you can't respect anyone, then at least don't insult legends.

 

[bablu_2010]

^ bablu, you are insulting India's one of the greatest freedom fighter and cricket player. If you can't respect anyone, then at least don't insult legends.

I am not insulting anyone here, but seriously I do love this video.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sRGT8CWbLg4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[cricketworm]

I am not insulting anyone here, but seriously I do love this video.

ask your parents or elders, they will explain you what you did there. If they still say, you were right, then LOL I am not surprised by your behavior.

 

[bablu_2010]

ask your parents or elders, they will explain you what you did there. If they still say, you were right, then LOL I am not surprised by your behavior.

you are funny and after seeing the stats below you still say Laxman is better than you need to ask your parents for advice as well.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

 

[bablu_2010]

Also check out inzy avgeing 78 in won tests with 17 100s when vvs only avges 53 with 6 100s

 

[Itachi]

I am not insulting anyone here, but seriously I do love this video.

look bablu, you are new here so i am trying to be understanding as much as i can.

You know who laxmi bai is? You are insulting two persons at the same time. Its a public forum and there are rules here. You are certainly in violation of one of them where it is prohibited to insult historical figures or personal attack on any player. Read sheryarks guildline for posting on this forum. This isn't your dosto ka adda where you can say whatever you want.

Edit: just checked the joined date. Looks like you are using this id just to troll.... 2 years 146 post. Certainly fits. How many ids you have?

 

[bablu_2010]

I have nothing else to say. I will just copy paste these stats from now on. nuff said.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33

inzy avgeing 78 in won tests with 17 100s when vvs only avges 53 with 6 100s

 

[Sir_Afridi]

at Laxman ... should sue the OP

 

[James]

It was only Bangladesh.

 

[Shayan]

Really don't think there's a huge difference between these 2 (in test cricket). The difference in the number of centuries/average could perhaps be explained by the fact that Laxman has spent some of his career down the order and having to shepherd the tail.

Overall, a good comparison, both very similar.

No contest in ODIs though lol.

 

[James]

ok if you have missed my earlier posts here is the other proof.

Inzamam 200 innings 25 centuries Averages 49.60
Laxman 214 innings 16 centuries Averages 46.33


Is this more logical?? lols

God yer, cricket is played on Microsoft Excel. The end.

 

[IgnitedMind]

Laxman had some breath taking knock to his credit...he always plays with the tail ..explains his less than 50 average

 

[Desi]

a potentially great thread ruined by idiots

well done pak passion diehards

 

[cricketjoshila]

Pretty close hard to choose.

 

[Zaz]

Laxman had some breath taking knock to his credit...he always plays with the tail ..explains his less than 50 average

Thats simply an excuse for performing poorly. VVS has a batting avge of 50 batting at 6.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rderby=default;template=results;type=allround


His batting avge is lower the further up the order he plays - avge of 44 when batting in top 5 and only 12 centuries in 91 tests. Compare this with gilchrist who played most of his innings at 7 and he still had 17 test centuries in 96 games

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rderby=default;template=results;type=allround


and check out laxmans even poorer figures when he bats in top 4 - avge of 40

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rderby=default;template=results;type=allround

The fact is laxmans likes to hide away near the tail and only does well because he has the likes of sehwag, dravid and teenda above him, if he was the main man in the side like inzy was for pakistan and had to carry the batting hed crumble under the pressure

 

[Saurav]

Laxman will hardly ever win a stats race among great bats,but his value is more than that.he performed against Aussies wen they were at thier best

 

[Zaz]

Laxman will hardly ever win a stats race among great bats,but his value is more than that.he performed against Aussies wen they were at thier best

Ijaz ahmed has great stats against the aussies of the mid to late 90s - he avged 62 against them in that period with 4 centuries in 7 tests


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround


He made 6 centuries in total against the aussies in 14 tests
But was he a better player than Inzy? No

 

[James]

Cos Inzy never hid from the new ball...ever...oh wait he sacrificed the openers and let Younis and Yousuf bat before him too - EVERY TIME!

 

[Zaz]

Cos Inzy never hid from the new ball...ever...oh wait he sacrificed the openers and let Younis and Yousuf bat before him too - EVERY TIME!

Looks like uve not understood the point im trying to make

Yes inzy batted at 4-5 for most his career but he still avged 50 and made 25 centuries

Im disputing the excuse (which laxman fans keep using) that bcos laxman bats lower down the order he has a lowish avge and cant make the centuries

Batting at 5 or 6 is no excuse for his lack of centuries or his lowish avge

 

[James]

Im disputing the excuse (which laxman fans keep using) that bcos laxman bats lower down the order he has a lowish avge and cant make the centuries

First, he does not have a lowish average. It's a mere few points below Inzy.

And, it is harder to score centuries from six and below, because the final five wickets usually fall quicker, and for less runs, than the first five wickets. This is proven. Simply put, the players from eight and below are a lot worse than the others, ergo smaller quantity of reliable partner for number six batsman, ergo harder for number six batsman to score century. Easy maths.

This is why the likes of Hussey and Bell have usually been moved up from six, and why Laxman would have batted higher, had there not been many even bigger names stopping him from doing so. When good players are left at six they rarely have the time or means to impose themselves fully.

Remember many of Laxman's best innings came against a newish ball when the top four had failed anyway. You don't have his record at any position without being a very good player. In short, I don't think this part of your argument stands up very well.

 

[Saurav]

Ijaz ahmed has great stats against the aussies of the mid to late 90s - he avged 62 against them in that period with 4 centuries in 7 tests


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...;spanval1=span;template=results;type=allround


He made 6 centuries in total against the aussies in 14 tests
But was he a better player than Inzy? No

thats what I said,his stats arent great,but his value is much more.e.g.if u use stats,281 in 2nd innings following on would be equal to 281 bating first in a drawn game

 

[Abhinav_MrCricket]

First, he does not have a lowish average. It's a mere few points below Inzy.

And, it is harder to score centuries from six and below, because the final five wickets usually fall quicker, and for less runs, than the first five wickets. This is proven. Simply put, the players from eight and below are a lot worse than the others, ergo smaller quantity of reliable partner for number six batsman, ergo harder for number six batsman to score century. Easy maths.

This is why the likes of Hussey and Bell have usually been moved up from six, and why Laxman would have batted higher, had there not been many even bigger names stopping him from doing so. When good players are left at six they rarely have the time or means to impose themselves fully.

Remember many of Laxman's best innings came against a newish ball when the top four had failed anyway. You don't have his record at any position without being a very good player. In short, I don't think this part of your argument stands up very well.

Bang on! 1 guy who knows his cricket well.

Sad to say,50% of the Pakistani posters here are like those Indian guys who comment on cricinfo without thinking anything.

If Cricket was played on paper,India would never lose. Sadly,it isn't. That's why you are seeing a new guy in Pattinson troubling them. On paper,he has nothing much to show. Indian batsmen have everything to show. It's not played like that.

But Whippy-Hats off. ! Ur a true cricket fan buddy.

 

[octavian]

Totally accept this, but it's worth remembering how many times Laxman has got a 70 or a 90 in a lower-scoring game and completely changed the complexion of it in the process.

If you are gonna count 70 or a 90 or a 80. count inzi's too. no ?

 

[James]

If you are gonna count 70 or a 90 or a 80. count inzi's too. no ?

Yep defos, big Inzy fan too, but the Lax is a beast and deserves some support in this thread, which has suffered the usual shower

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Two good players but Inzi is almost a great. Much better player than VVS and was the bedrock of a batting lineup something VVS has never been.

 

[octavian]

@Whippy

There is not a huge gap between the two. I being a pakistani maybe a little biased but Inzi inches it for me.

Laxman has had the advanatage of batting with a very solid batting line-up for all of his career while Inzi was a lone warrior most of the time in a very brittle batting line-up.

They both bat low down the order and Inzi 9 more centuries coupled with the fact that he usually batted in a crisis, is a testimony to how good he was. Def better than Laxman.

 

[Zaz]

First, he does not have a lowish average. It's a mere few points below Inzy.

And, it is harder to score centuries from six and below, because the final five wickets usually fall quicker, and for less runs, than the first five wickets. This is proven. Simply put, the players from eight and below are a lot worse than the others, ergo smaller quantity of reliable partner for number six batsman, ergo harder for number six batsman to score century. Easy maths.

This is why the likes of Hussey and Bell have usually been moved up from six, and why Laxman would have batted higher, had there not been many even bigger names stopping him from doing so. When good players are left at six they rarely have the time or means to impose themselves fully.

Remember many of Laxman's best innings came against a newish ball when the top four had failed anyway. You don't have his record at any position without being a very good player. In short, I don't think this part of your argument stands up very well.

Ive shown in my post above that laxman avges more the lower he plays He avges only 40 batting in top 4 The facts show him at no 6 he avges more than him batting in top 4

So why the excuse his lower avge is down to his position when its proven thats rubbish

 

[DeadlyVenom]

lol @ few points under.

3.30 is HUGE over the span of a career.

 

[James]

3.3 isn't huge and you know it, it is a three. Silly exaggerated adjective from you.

6.6 would be approaching huge.

I would argue Laxman would have averaged higher in a top four position than he does right now, if he had been given an extended run there. Times like this summer in England, he ended up in the top four randomly sometimes, before dropping in the order again later.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Come on Whippy, Would you say someone averaging 47 is averaging close to 50?

 

[James]

47 is pretty darn good.

Might even be HUGE.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

but is it close to 50?

 

[Zaz]

next whippy will say that the diff of 8 test centuries in 10-12 less tests isnt that huge

 

[James]

And I have said Laxman is a better player where in this thread?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Laxman would have had to score another 436 runs in the tests he's played to get his average up by a mere 3 runs.

 

[James]

45+ is generally a very very good player.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Gilly avgs 47 in tests as well and will walk into any team ahead of Inzy just on basis of his batting.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

45+ is generally a very very good player.

Agreed, but don't dismiss an average of 3 points higher as "mere", its not, its a big difference.

 

[James]

Not sure that it is to be honest.

 

[AZ]

Absolutely disgusted with this thread, shocked I didn't spot it as mod, would have shif deleted it to hell.

Comparing INZY with friggin' Laxman?!