Who was technically the best opening batsmen of all time?

[Harsh Thakor]

Here I am rating in order of merit the most technically sound opening batsmen of all time.It does not ***** overall merit but pure technical correctness.

1.Len Hutton
2.Vijay Merchant
3.Barry Richards
4.Sunil Gavaskar/Hanif Mohammad
6.Jack Hobbs
7.Geoff Boycott
8.Glen Turner
9.Gordon Greenidge/Conrad Hunte
11.Graham Gooch
12.Desmond Haynes


Hutton was simply the epitome of batting perfection.Many cricketing greats like Fred Trueman ,Tom Graveney,Peter May,Alec Bedser or Ray Lindwall rank Hutton as the most technically accomplished batsmen of all .

Merchant never got beaten by the new ball and was a master on wet tracks.No better lesson for a schoolboy than seeing Vijay batting in the nets .
Madhav Mantri,uncle of Sunil Gavaskar felt that even his nephew did not posese Merchant's perfection.

Barry Richards was explosive as a dynamite but still had the perfection of an architect designing a building.Like Viv Richards and Gavaskar rolled into one.

Gavaskar and Hanif were clinical precision personified.Supreme in defence treating every ball on it's merit and would never let a bad delivery go unpunished.


Hobbs mastered wet tracks better than any great batsmen ever and took the art of batting to a higher dimension.He pioneered cricketing art of the golden age.


Boycott resembled a boulder surviving a thunderstorm more than anyone.



Turner was classically correct.

 

[The Googly]

My favourite is Gordon Greenidge. Magnificent, attacking opener.

Gavaskar is up there as one the top 3 openers of all time - maybe even the best. Proven against all bowling. Home and away. Truly great test opener. Not an ODI player but I feel that tests are the real judge of a player.

Barry Richards - great player also.

Gooch was a top player - especially after age 30.

Haynes and Greenidge were surely the greatest opening partnership of all time.

 

[Junaids]

Barry Richards.

As @The_Googly points out, Greenidge and Richards are ATG's. And they were the Hampshire county opening pair in the 1970s!

I half agree with him about Greenidge and Haynes - theya re the best international opening pair I've seen.

But Greenidge and Barry Richards were even better.

 

[tejamainhoon]

Sunny G takes the cake !!!!

 

[Agent 47]

Graham Gooch

 

[TQ89]

Sunil gavaskar

 

[TQ89]

Overall i would say greenidge and haynes

 

[Coconut]

Gavskar is the greatest test opener of all time. What a player.

 

[TQ89]

@ Junaids

You surely would have watched him live in the 70's/80's. Can you tell why is he still perceived a little bit negatively by some english/australia fans? I mean as far as i know he scored runs everywhere and was good against new ball in every conditions. But something tells me he must have done something knowingly or unknowingly to rile them up.

 

[Junaids]

You surely would have watched him live in the 70's/80's. Can you tell why is he still perceived a little bit negatively by some english/australia fans? I mean as far as i know he scored runs everywhere and was good against new ball in every conditions. But something tells me he must have done something knowingly or unknowingly to rile them up.

On a serious note - because I enjoy arguing with you - I really don't know.

Gavaskar was an absolutely brilliant batsman. By the very end of his career he was even a great ODI batsman, let alone a Test one.

I would just say two things.

Firstly, his personality explains a lot of why people don't give him the credit he deserves. He really was a spoiled little brat. Think of the clip I just showed, but also the 36 not out in 60 overs in the first World Cup.

Secondly, because India was a minnow they didn't get invited to play much against the West Indies at the peak of the 4 man pace attack. Everyone knew that Gavaskar had a brilliant record against the West Indies, but they also knew that it was compiled before any of the truly fast bowlers were playing.

But TBH, it's his behaviour which makes people ignore him. Because to be honest he was an absolutely brilliant batsman.

 

[TQ89]

On a serious note - because I enjoy arguing with you - I really don't know.

Gavaskar was an absolutely brilliant batsman. By the very end of his career he was even a great ODI batsman, let alone a Test one.

I would just say two things.

Firstly, his personality explains a lot of why people don't give him the credit he deserves. He really was a spoiled little brat. Think of the clip I just showed, but also the 36 not out in 60 overs in the first World Cup.

Secondly, because India was a minnow they didn't get invited to play much against the West Indies at the peak of the 4 man pace attack. Everyone knew that Gavaskar had a brilliant record against the West Indies, but they also knew that it was compiled before any of the truly fast bowlers were playing.

But TBH, it's his behaviour which makes people ignore him. Because to be honest he was an absolutely brilliant batsman.

Hahahaha junaid you are a very big troll. I am sure you would keep your friends entertained on weekend get togethers.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

It has to be Gavaskar. A great batting record and the way Imran Khan and Wasim Akram talk about him testifies that.

 

[kaifmazhar]

Barry Richards who you would also find in many analysts ATG teams.
Lee Hutton is the other one highly regarded by past greats.

 

[Buffet]

On a serious note - because I enjoy arguing with you - I really don't know.

Gavaskar was an absolutely brilliant batsman. By the very end of his career he was even a great ODI batsman, let alone a Test one.

I would just say two things.

Firstly, his personality explains a lot of why people don't give him the credit he deserves. He really was a spoiled little brat. Think of the clip I just showed, but also the 36 not out in 60 overs in the first World Cup.

Secondly, because India was a minnow they didn't get invited to play much against the West Indies at the peak of the 4 man pace attack. Everyone knew that Gavaskar had a brilliant record against the West Indies, but they also knew that it was compiled before any of the truly fast bowlers were playing.

But TBH, it's his behaviour which makes people ignore him. Because to be honest he was an absolutely brilliant batsman.

Can you list how many test matches all teams played against peak 4 pacers against WI? Let's make it simple, can you list how many tests were played by WI with 4 peak pacers?

As far as I know, talk about peak 4 pacers playing together and performing against them is meaningless if they didn't really play together much.

 

[Junaids]

Can you list how many test matches all teams played against peak 4 pacers against WI? Let's make it simple, can you list how many tests were played by WI with 4 peak pacers?

As far as I know, talk about peak 4 pacers playing together and performing against them is meaningless if they didn't really play together much.

Put it this way, here is Gavaskar's record in the West Indies:

1970-71 against no top fast bowlers: 774 runs at 154.80

1975-76 against two top fast bowlers: 390 runs at 54.71

1982-83 against the full four man pace attack: 240 runs at 30.00

This is why Gavaskar was viewed with some skepticism during his career. He looked like he had a brilliant record in the West Indies, but it actually did not withstand close scrutiny.

 

[Junaids]

To further answer [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION]

The West Indies started operating a four man pace attack at home to Pakistan in 1976-77.

The team which encountered it most was Australia, if you count the SuperTests.

England played against it outside Asia in 19 Tests between then and the end of Gavaskar's career.

India played against it outside Asia in 5 Tests in that time.

Even New Zealand played against it in 10 Tests outside Asia in that period.

I have clearly described Gavaskar today as "brilliant". But he was certainly fortunate that he played 8 of his 13 Tests in the West Indies before they started using four fast bowlers.

 

[Buffet]

Put it this way, here is Gavaskar's record in the West Indies:

1970-71 against no top fast bowlers: 774 runs at 154.80

1975-76 against two top fast bowlers: 390 runs at 54.71

1982-83 against the full four man pace attack: 240 runs at 30.00

This is why Gavaskar was viewed with some skepticism during his career. He looked like he had a brilliant record in the West Indies, but it actually did not withstand close scrutiny.

I wasn't talking about Gavaskar here. I was just talking about WI fearsome 4 playing together as an unit. I don't think that they played together a lot as an unit. I may be wrong here and that's why asked to name matches where they played together. All 4 pace attacks were not the same.

 

[Junaids]

I wasn't talking about Gavaskar here. I was just talking about WI fearsome 4 playing together as an unit. I don't think that they played together a lot as an unit. I may be wrong here and that's why asked to name matches where they played together. All 4 pace attacks were not the same.

Great point, but it's very subjective if you want to separate out the packs of four.

I tend to just say "from 1976-77 until Australia beat them in 1995, they played four quicks in every Test outside Asia".

I don't count any team prior to 76-77, simply because until Garner and Croft joined Roberts and Holding the quality was low. Bernard Julian and Wayne Daniel don't count!

 

[Robert]

In the formative era of the game - Sir Jack Hobbs. He and Ranji basically invented batting.

More recently Gavaskar.

 

[Rayyman]

Azhar Ali

 

[Arsalan Pro]

Khurram Manzoor

 

[PakLFC]

Sunil Gavaskar. He also played during a period when fast bowlers were everywhere. Great technique albeit not the most entertaining batsman to watch.

 

[Sachin136]

Hobbs may be technically sound for that era, but compared to modern batsmen, it looks hideous.

 

[Tusker]

I know you are trolling but let me bite

Secondly, because India was a minnow they didn't get invited to play much against the West Indies at the peak of the 4 man pace attack. Everyone knew that Gavaskar had a brilliant record against the West Indies, but they also knew that it was compiled before any of the truly fast bowlers were playing.

Test Matches Played vs WI between 1970 and 1990 by each team :

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting

IN WI:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

----

Teams that Played the most matches vs the WI team that had all of their 4 most famous fast bowlers playing:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting


Batsmen who made the most runs in those tests :
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

And I will leave it to you to find out bowling attack in the 1983 WC final ....

But let this in anyway stop you from your agenda of trying to convince everyone that India was a minnow

 

[Junaids]

I know you are trolling but let me bite



Test Matches Played vs WI between 1970 and 1990 by each team :

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting

IN WI:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

----

Teams that Played the most matches vs the WI team that had all of their 4 most famous fast bowlers playing:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting


Batsmen who made the most runs in those tests :
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

And I will leave it to you to find out bowling attack in the 1983 WC final ....

But let this in anyway stop you from your agenda of trying to convince everyone that India was a minnow

I clearly specified OUTSIDE ASIA.

But you have included India's home Tests, which defeats the purpose of a comparison of aptitude against fast bowling.

India WAS a minnow. They won the 1983 World Cup Final, but were slaughtered in home and away ODI series to the West Indies immediately before and after.

More to the point, they lost AT HOME in a Test series to England - deprived of their South African rebels - whose team featured the likes of Graeme Fowler, Richard Ellison and Tim Robinson.

The India Test team of the 1980s was similar in stature to the West Indies team now. They just got lucky in England in 1986 facing shellshocked opposition fresh from the Caribbean.

 

[Tusker]

I clearly specified OUTSIDE ASIA.

But you have included India's home Tests, which defeats the purpose of a comparison of aptitude against fast bowling.

well you clearly didnt read my post then ... I did post stats for matches played IN WI.

here again : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Bonus point for spotting the minnow ( per your own logic ) ...

Classic example of what I meant in my post in the football thread. Without technology I would have had no option but to go by what the Elders said .... these days there is no place to hide.

India WAS a minnow. They won the 1983 World Cup Final, but were slaughtered in home and away ODI series to the West Indies immediately before and after.

More to the point, they lost AT HOME in a Test series to England - deprived of their South African rebels - whose team featured the likes of Graeme Fowler, Richard Ellison and Tim Robinson.

The India Test team of the 1980s was similar in stature to the West Indies team now. They just got lucky in England in 1986 facing shellshocked opposition fresh from the Caribbean.

We have done this topic before let me know if you want me to bump that thread .... last I recall you going silent after I pointed out that India did fairly well against Aus and Pak and you trying to water that down for obvious reasons.

 

[Junaids]

[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION], I'm really confused now.

I described Gavaskar as "absolutely brilliant" in Post 10 in this thread.

I don't for a second doubt his greatness - he's probably the best Asian batsman that I've ever seen. He was an obnoxious unsporting oaf, but he was a great batsman.

It's just, as I pointed out, that his best work against the West Indies came long before the fast bowling foursome was created.

In Port of Spain in 1970-71, for example, the West Indian bowling attack was:

Vanburn Holder - he really did bowl in the 120's, I watched him in 1976.
Uton Dowe - biblically sledged by his own fans with posters stating "Dowe Shall Not Bowl".
John Shepherd - I watched him for years at kent, bowling in the low 120's.
Garry Sobers - aged 34, and by now mainly a spin bowler.
Inshan Ali - a very wild Chinaman bowler

Now, it's lovely that Gavaskar scored 774 runs at an average of 154.80 in that series. But it wasn't hard to do, and it bloated his record against the West Indies for evermore.

 

[Junaids]

well you clearly didnt read my post then ... I did post stats for matches played IN WI.

here again : http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Bonus point for spotting the minnow ( per your own logic ) ...

Classic example of what I meant in my post in the football thread. Without technology I would have had no option but to go by what the Elders said .... these days there is no place to hide.




We have done this topic before let me know if you want me to bump that thread .... last I recall you going silent after I pointed out that India did fairly well against Aus and Pak and you trying to water that down for obvious reasons.

As I told you at the time, in the 1980s Australia was competing with India for the title of second worst Test team in the world behind Sri Lanka.

India only played 3 series against a full-strength Pakistan - i.e. with Imran Khan - in the 1980s.

In 1982-83 they were smashed 3-0 in Pakistan.

In 1986-87 they lost 1-0 at home to Pakistan.

In 1989-90 they drew 0-0 in Pakistan.

You can say that they did well when the Pakistan opening attack was Azeem Hafeez and Tahir Naqqash, but does that really mean anything?

 

[QalandarFan]

Ahmed Shehzad, am I right or what [MENTION=865]Big Mac[/MENTION] ?

 

[Tusker]

[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION], I'm really confused now.

I described Gavaskar as "absolutely brilliant" in Post 10 in this thread.

I don't for a second doubt his greatness - he's probably the best Asian batsman that I've ever seen. He was an obnoxious unsporting oaf, but he was a great batsman.

It's just, as I pointed out, that his best work against the West Indies came long before the fast bowling foursome was created.

In Port of Spain in 1970-71, for example, the West Indian bowling attack was:

Vanburn Holder - he really did bowl in the 120's, I watched him in 1976.
Uton Dowe - biblically sledged by his own fans with posters stating "Dowe Shall Not Bowl".
John Shepherd - I watched him for years at kent, bowling in the low 120's.
Garry Sobers - aged 34, and by now mainly a spin bowler.
Inshan Ali - a very wild Chinaman bowler

Now, it's lovely that Gavaskar scored 774 runs at an average of 154.80 in that series. But it wasn't hard to do, and it bloated his record against the West Indies for evermore.

I was referring to your India = Minnow therefore they werent invited much to WI so there was no question of them facing the top bowlers much .

Are we done discussing that ? Turns out that Pakistan was the minnow per your own logic.

 

[Tusker]

As I told you at the time, in the 1980s Australia was competing with India for the title of second worst Test team in the world behind Sri Lanka.

You dont win a WC (that too in India+Pak) by being a minnow.

India only played 3 series against a full-strength Pakistan - i.e. with Imran Khan - in the 1980s.

In 1982-83 they were smashed 3-0 in Pakistan.

In 1986-87 they lost 1-0 at home to Pakistan.

In 1989-90 they drew 0-0 in Pakistan.

You can say that they did well when the Pakistan opening attack was Azeem Hafeez and Tahir Naqqash, but does that really mean anything?

So when Pakistan do well its because they had a weak team so does not count but when India don't do well they are minnows ! fantastic logic.

So whats your take on the 89 series vs Pak in which India was without Gavaskar , Jimmy and Vengsarkar ?

 

[msb314]

Here I am rating in order of merit the most technically sound opening batsmen of all time.It does not ***** overall merit but pure technical correctness.

1.Len Hutton
2.Vijay Merchant
3.Barry Richards
4.Sunil Gavaskar/Hanif Mohammad
6.Jack Hobbs
7.Geoff Boycott
8.Glen Turner
9.Gordon Greenidge/Conrad Hunte
11.Graham Gooch
12.Desmond Haynes


Hutton was simply the epitome of batting perfection.Many cricketing greats like Fred Trueman ,Tom Graveney,Peter May,Alec Bedser or Ray Lindwall rank Hutton as the most technically accomplished batsmen of all .

Merchant never got beaten by the new ball and was a master on wet tracks.No better lesson for a schoolboy than seeing Vijay batting in the nets .
Madhav Mantri,uncle of Sunil Gavaskar felt that even his nephew did not posese Merchant's perfection.

Barry Richards was explosive as a dynamite but still had the perfection of an architect designing a building.Like Viv Richards and Gavaskar rolled into one.

Gavaskar and Hanif were clinical precision personified.Supreme in defence treating every ball on it's merit and would never let a bad delivery go unpunished.


Hobbs mastered wet tracks better than any great batsmen ever and took the art of batting to a higher dimension.He pioneered cricketing art of the golden age.


Boycott resembled a boulder surviving a thunderstorm more than anyone.



Turner was classically correct.

Loved Gavaskar as a classical opening batsman.

Hayden and Langer also did a great job for Australia in Tests.

Alastair Cook is also a borderline ATG in Tests now.

 

[Junaids]

You dont win a WC (that too in India+Pak) by being a minnow.



So when Pakistan do well its because they had a weak team so does not count but when India don't do well they are minnows ! fantastic logic.

So whats your take on the 89 series vs Pak in which India was without Gavaskar , Jimmy and Vengsarkar ?

Oh come on!

The Australia team which won the 1987 World Cup was a bigger minnow than Bangladesh is now. The 1983 Indians were similar, and the 1996 Sri Lankans were similar.

These were three rubbish teams that couldn't take 20 wickets in Test matches, but found a way to win ODIs at a time when ODIs were viewed as being of marginal importance.

As for the 1980s, and India's series against damaged and understrength Pakistan and England teams, well it depends upon how serious you are in assessing things.

If you are objective, you will say that doing well against an attack led by Azeem Hafeez is not the same as doing well against an attack led by Imran Khan. How would India have fared without Kapil Dev at that time?

But if you want to inflate a misplaced sense of pride, by all means ignore the state of England when India beat them after the West Indies had pulverised them six weeks earlier in the Caribbean in 1986.

It's really up to you.

But don't forget that Azeem Hafeez only played in the temporary absence of Imran Khan. By 1989, Gavaskar and Amarnath were gone forever - and Vengsarkar wasn't good enough to get into the India team. India was actually at full strength in that series.

 

[Tusker]

Oh come on!

The Australia team which won the 1987 World Cup was a bigger minnow than Bangladesh is now. The 1983 Indians were similar, and the 1996 Sri Lankans were similar.

So Kapil, Sunny, Jimmy, Vengsarkar, Border, Steve Waugh, McDermott, Reid, Mark Taylor, Dean Jones, Geoff Marsh, Boon , Arjuna, Murali, Vaas, De Silva etc are just as good cricketers as Shakib, Tamim, Mushfiq ?

Seriously ?

These were three rubbish teams that couldn't take 20 wickets in Test matches, but found a way to win ODIs at a time when ODIs were viewed as being of marginal importance.

As for the 1980s, and India's series against damaged and understrength Pakistan and England teams, well it depends upon how serious you are in assessing things.



If you are objective, you will say that doing well against an attack led by Azeem Hafeez is not the same as doing well against an attack led by Imran Khan. How would India have fared without Kapil Dev at that time?

But if you want to inflate a misplaced sense of pride, by all means ignore the state of England when India beat them after the West Indies had pulverised them six weeks earlier in the Caribbean in 1986.

It's really up to you.

But don't forget that Azeem Hafeez only played in the temporary absence of Imran Khan. By 1989, Gavaskar and Amarnath were gone forever - and Vengsarkar wasn't good enough to get into the India team. India was actually at full strength in that series.

Perhaps you are talking about a different series but in the 89 series that Iam talking about Imran, Wasim, Qadir played in most Test matches and Waqar featured in atleast 2 of the 4.

 

[Big Mac]

Ahmed Shehzad, am I right or what [MENTION=865]Big Mac[/MENTION] ?

Never forget

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...g-the-greatest-innings-of-all-time&highlight=

 

[Chief Destroyer]

How is Justin Langer not on this list? One of the tightest techniques you'll ever see.

 

[Junaids]

So Kapil, Sunny, Jimmy, Vengsarkar, Border, Steve Waugh, McDermott, Reid, Mark Taylor, Dean Jones, Geoff Marsh, Boon , Arjuna, Murali, Vaas, De Silva etc are just as good cricketers as Shakib, Tamim, Mushfiq ?

Seriously ?




Perhaps you are talking about a different series but in the 89 series that Iam talking about Imran, Wasim, Qadir played in most Test matches and Waqar featured in atleast 2 of the 4.

Precisely.

The 1987 Australia team was monumentally rubbish, and had only just been humiliated in a home Ashes series.

You are making the mistake of thinking that the players in 1987 were at the level they grew to be. They weren't.

Allan Border was a great player. Steve Waugh and Dean Jones were just kids. David Boon was an international joke for his comical failures against Richard Hadlee.

Mark Taylor was over a year away from making his debut.

But the other players in the team apart from Allan Border would not even get close to the current Bangladesh team. (See, I don't always worship the past). Geoff Marsh was rubbish. Mike Veletta was rubbish. Greg Dyer was rubbish. Simon O'Donnell was rubbish. Peter Taylor was like Moeen Ali minus the batting. Craig McDermott's bowling had fallen in a heap as he had bulked up far too much in the gym and he was returning from a long period of unselectability, to which he was about to go back. Bruce Reid was okay: a poor man's Mohammad Irfan.

The same is true of India in 1983. Gavaskar and Amarnath and Kapil Dev were class players. The rest were just unmitigated garbage, which is how Zimbabwe reduced them to 19-5 at Tunbridge Wells.

I can assure you: they got lucky in a cold and wet English spring, which is the only way club cricketers like Madan Lal and Sandhu were going to get away with bowling 110K dibbly-dobbly seamers.

As for 1989, again you are making the mistake of ignoring the stage that the players were at in their careers.

Imran Khan was finished as a bowler, his pace down in the low 130s.

Waqar Younis was a complete beginner, on debut and as raw as it gets.

Wasim Akram was the real deal, but returning from a groin operation and only bowling within himself for fear of missing the tour of Australia

Abdul Qadir was absolutely finished, and about to be replaced by Mushtaq Ahmed.

So the names look good - which is why Indians get excited about the footage of Tendulkar tonking Abdul Qadir around. But Imran and Qadir were absolutely finished, Waqar wasn't even started, and Wasim Akram was bowling at half-pace.

 

[Tusker]

Precisely.

The 1987 Australia team was monumentally rubbish, and had only just been humiliated in a home Ashes series.

You are making the mistake of thinking that the players in 1987 were at the level they grew to be. They weren't.

don't forget who you are comparing them to ... Remember you claim the current Bangla players to be better than those I listed.

So again ... it will Take Bangladesh atleast another decade to achieve what those players did ... they are not even in the same zip code. Laughable really.

And you missed out the SL lot Murali Vaas, Jayasuriya, Aravinda, Arjuna, Hashan.

As for 1989, again you are making the mistake of ignoring the stage that the players were at in their careers.

Imran Khan was finished as a bowler, his pace down in the low 130s.

Waqar Younis was a complete beginner, on debut and as raw as it gets.

Wasim Akram was the real deal, but returning from a groin operation and only bowling within himself for fear of missing the tour of Australia

Abdul Qadir was absolutely finished, and about to be replaced by Mushtaq Ahmed.

So the names look good - which is why Indians get excited about the footage of Tendulkar tonking Abdul Qadir around. But Imran and Qadir were absolutely finished, Waqar wasn't even started, and Wasim Akram was bowling at half-pace.

well I wasn't the one hyping the Pakistan team of the 80s and 90s remember ? ... quite funny how the tune of the narrative changes depending on how well India does. Eng were shell shocked by WI thrashing and Pakistan were just Old ... can never lose an argument like this.

So maybe India should stop foriegn tours unless they make sure that they have the best XI playing and all are in top shape ... otherwise you will not consider that as an achievement worth your time?

 

[The_Odd_One]

Gavaskar and it's not even close.

 

[Hasan123]

Gavaskar is the best of all time. The best I have seen in my lifetime of watching cricket is Greame Smith. Didn't have the best technique but one of the gutsiest cricketers I have ever seen. Probably South Africa's gutsiest crickter ever.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

My favourite is Gordon Greenidge. Magnificent, attacking opener.

Gavaskar is up there as one the top 3 openers of all time - maybe even the best. Proven against all bowling. Home and away. Truly great test opener. Not an ODI player but I feel that tests are the real judge of a player.

Barry Richards - great player also.

Gooch was a top player - especially after age 30.

Haynes and Greenidge were surely the greatest opening partnership of all time.

Very good assesment appreciate

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Gavaskar is the best of all time. The best I have seen in my lifetime of watching cricket is Greame Smith. Didn't have the best technique but one of the gutsiest cricketers I have ever seen. Probably South Africa's gutsiest crickter ever.

appreciate thanks

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Gavaskar and it's not even close.

Watch videos of Barry then you will accurately judge

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Sunil Gavaskar. He also played during a period when fast bowlers were everywhere. Great technique albeit not the most entertaining batsman to watch.

I feel Gooch was more prolific against the best West Indian pace quartet if you judge record.See Gooch's performances in 1981,19988 and 1991 aginst the great Calypso atack and compare it with Sunny's in 1982-83.No doubt overall Gavaskar was better and arguably the best of them all .

 

[Harsh Thakor]

It has to be Gavaskar. A great batting record and the way Imran Khan and Wasim Akram talk about him testifies that.

Appreciate comment but would like you to see video of Barry Richards batting and what many experts have to say about him.anyway great comment.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

In the formative era of the game - Sir Jack Hobbs. He and Ranji basically invented batting.

More recently Gavaskar.

To me Hobbs was the greatest overall but technically Gavaskar,Hutton and Barry were ahead.How would you compare Gavaskar with Hutton and Barry?Gavaskar may have been better overall but still technically I preferred Hutton and Barry.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Barry Richards.

As @The_Googly points out, Greenidge and Richards are ATG's. And they were the Hampshire county opening pair in the 1970s!

I half agree with him about Greenidge and Haynes - theya re the best international opening pair I've seen.

But Greenidge and Barry Richards were even better.

where do you technically rank Gavaskar?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Watch videos of Barry then you will accurately judge

How many test runs does Barry Richards have?

And please dont ask me to compare first class runs with test runs.

Big difference.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

How many test runs does Barry Richards have?

And please dont ask me to compare first class runs with test runs.

Big difference.

See his Wsc supertests performances. from 1977-78 Overshadowed Viv Richards and Chappell brothers averaging over 70 including tow of the finest centuries,including a double hundred.

 

[cricketjoshila]

See his Wsc supertests performances. from 1977-78 Overshadowed Viv Richards and Chappell brothers averaging over 70 including tow of the finest centuries,including a double hundred.

WSC runs are not even FC runs.It has no significance in this discussion when the other man has 10k test runs.

Try again.Please bring some facts and not ancedotes.

While you are at it also find the number of runs Barry Richards has on turning SC pitches.

 

[Tusker]

To me Hobbs was the greatest overall ...........

Just in case you are into facts .... Hobbs awesome technique on display here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rrx2nrgev4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2wXENbhueE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkHWtsrt9Sk

WSC runs are not even FC runs.It has no significance in this discussion when the other man has 10k test runs.

Try again.Please bring some facts and not ancedotes.

While you are at it also find the number of runs Barry Richards has on turning SC pitches.

I predict silence after this.

 

[TQ89]

Though i don't agree with Hobbs automatically being assumed as the best opening batsmen when you have guys like gavaskar, greenidge as contenders. Nevertheless, I consider him a great test bat as he was a visionary opener & started the concept of playing in the "V" area as told by Sir Richie benaud

 

[Harsh Thakor]

WSC runs are not even FC runs.It has no significance in this discussion when the other man has 10k test runs.

Try again.Please bring some facts and not ancedotes.

While you are at it also find the number of runs Barry Richards has on turning SC pitches.

You have a point against spin.I agree he was not tested on turning tracks. Still against fiery pace had the edge over Sunny .Read what Ian Chapel and Denis Lillee have to say about him and his best scores in Wsc cricket which was more testing than Orthodox test cricket.Morally WSC Packer cricket should be counted as morally it was even more of atset of a cricketer's ability considering the strength of teams,pitches etc.Read what the likes of Viv Richards or Lillee have to say about them.We can only accurately rate Lillee,Greg Chappell or Viv adding performances in WSC supertests.

 

[Junaids]

WSC runs are not even FC runs.It has no significance in this discussion when the other man has 10k test runs.

Try again.Please bring some facts and not ancedotes.

While you are at it also find the number of runs Barry Richards has on turning SC pitches.

That's just cricket politics.

Imran Khan, no less, got it right many years ago, when I saw him on the BBC saying that every run and every wicket he scored in WSC was worth ten in official Tests.

 

[Junaids]

While you are at it also find the number of runs Barry Richards has on turning SC pitches.

He (quite rightly) wasn't allowed in to the subcontinent.

But on the English county circuit - where Northampton was a dusty turning wicket - every top class spinner from Bishan Bedi to Intikhab Alam to Derek Underwood recognised Barry Richards as the world's best batsman against spin.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

He (quite rightly) wasn't allowed in to the subcontinent.

But on the English county circuit - where Northampton was a dusty turning wicket - every top class spinner from Bishan Bedi to Intikhab Alam to Derek Underwood recognised Barry Richards as the world's best batsman against spin.

Great answer,sir .appreciate

 

[Harsh Thakor]

That's just cricket politics.

Imran Khan, no less, got it right many years ago, when I saw him on the BBC saying that every run and every wicket he scored in WSC was worth ten in official Tests.

Could not agree more,junaid .You hit the nail on the head.

 

[cricketjoshila]

He (quite rightly) wasn't allowed in to the subcontinent.

But on the English county circuit - where Northampton was a dusty turning wicket - every top class spinner from Bishan Bedi to Intikhab Alam to Derek Underwood recognised Barry Richards as the world's best batsman against spin.

There is a difference between playing test cricket and FC cricket.There is difference in playing spinners in India or Pakistan and in England.

Barry Richards World's best batsman againist spin. LOL.

 

[cricketjoshila]

That's just cricket politics.

Imran Khan, no less, got it right many years ago, when I saw him on the BBC saying that every run and every wicket he scored in WSC was worth ten in official Tests.

When you play something for "MONEY" and jeopardise playing for your country you try to justify it in many ways.

 

[cricketjoshila]

You have a point against spin.I agree he was not tested on turning tracks. Still against fiery pace had the edge over Sunny .Read what Ian Chapel and Denis Lillee have to say about him and his best scores in Wsc cricket which was more testing than Orthodox test cricket.Morally WSC Packer cricket should be counted as morally it was even more of atset of a cricketer's ability considering the strength of teams,pitches etc.Read what the likes of Viv Richards or Lillee have to say about them.We can only accurately rate Lillee,Greg Chappell or Viv adding performances in WSC supertests.

Cobbling up names in a team doesnt make it a great team.What happened when ICC cobbled up a World 11 vs Australia??

What was the motivation playing this unofficial cricket?Money.

When you leave your country and play something for cricket you try to justify it by all sorts of arguments.

 

[cricketjoshila]

See his Wsc supertests performances. from 1977-78 Overshadowed Viv Richards and Chappell brothers averaging over 70 including tow of the finest centuries,including a double hundred.

In 1977 WSC series Barry Richards faced no WI great.He faced only one great bowler and that was Dennis Lillee.

In the 1st test Barry Richards scored 76 and 48 and there was no Lillee in the line up.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315992/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-1st-Match

In the 2nd test Barry Richards did score a 207, the top 3 batsman for that WSC world 11 scored 207,140 and 177.

Yes Dennis lillee did play that match but the other bowlers were Gilmour Walker and White.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315993/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-2nd-Match

In the 3rd test Lillee was joined by Pascoe. Barry Richards scored 76 and 0 .

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315994/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-3rd-Match

In these 3 unofficial tests the scores of Viv Richards were,

119,18 / 177 / 170,18

In the 1978 WSC series


Barry Richards did not play in the 1st test vs Australia 11

He played in the 2nd test vs WI 11

His score was 37.This was the only time Barry Richards faced the WI greats.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8614/scorecard/316194/WSC-West-Indies-vs-WSC-World-XI-

The last Super test was again vs Australia 11 and Barry Richards scored 28 and 101 . The bowlers were Lillee Pascoe and Gilmour


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8614/scorecard/316196/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-Final

And on the basis of this you want to say that Barry Richards is better than someone who has 10k test runs in 125 tests and faced everyone from WI quatret to IK and Sarfaraz to Hadlee to Thomson and Lillee(Ony 2 tests though) to Willis and Snow.

Not to forget Underwood Qadir etc.
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION]

Thing is some people come here and talk about cricketing history and most posters lap it up because they havent heard seen or read any of these stuff.Problem is i have been brought up on a dose of cricketing history.

 

[The_Odd_One]

No way should Barry Richards rated higher than Gavaskar. Richards was potentially an ATG batsman but he did not even play 20 tests.

 

[Tusker]

[MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] it is considered fashionable to sing praises of obscure players from long bygone era's. The more praise you can attach to an obscure player the better. Some people also mistake that for some sort of higher intellect and understanding of cricket if they do that. It runs into turbulence when they encounter practical types like you.

as for me I rely mainly on some authentic footage to decide the caliber of players before my time. There is nothing in his technique that will make me sit up and watch him play.

But I will be surprised if you get any response from Harsh on this thread or in any future thread for obvious reasons

 

[Junaids]

No way should Barry Richards rated higher than Gavaskar. Richards was potentially an ATG batsman but he did not even play 20 tests.

That's just daft.

They were contemporaries, and even though I freely recognize Gavaskar as the GOAT Asian batsman, Barry Richards was universally recognized throughout the world of cricket as the better batsman.

It's not even close.

 

[Junaids]

In 1977 WSC series Barry Richards faced no WI great.He faced only one great bowler and that was Dennis Lillee.

In the 1st test Barry Richards scored 76 and 48 and there was no Lillee in the line up.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315992/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-1st-Match

In the 2nd test Barry Richards did score a 207, the top 3 batsman for that WSC world 11 scored 207,140 and 177.

Yes Dennis lillee did play that match but the other bowlers were Gilmour Walker and White.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315993/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-2nd-Match

In the 3rd test Lillee was joined by Pascoe. Barry Richards scored 76 and 0 .

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17141/scorecard/315994/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-3rd-Match

In these 3 unofficial tests the scores of Viv Richards were,

119,18 / 177 / 170,18

In the 1978 WSC series


Barry Richards did not play in the 1st test vs Australia 11

He played in the 2nd test vs WI 11

His score was 37.This was the only time Barry Richards faced the WI greats.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8614/scorecard/316194/WSC-West-Indies-vs-WSC-World-XI-

The last Super test was again vs Australia 11 and Barry Richards scored 28 and 101 . The bowlers were Lillee Pascoe and Gilmour


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8614/scorecard/316196/WSC-Australia-vs-WSC-World-XI-Final

And on the basis of this you want to say that Barry Richards is better than someone who has 10k test runs in 125 tests and faced everyone from WI quatret to IK and Sarfaraz to Hadlee to Thomson and Lillee(Ony 2 tests though) to Willis and Snow.

Not to forget Underwood Qadir etc.
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION]

Thing is some people come here and talk about cricketing history and most posters lap it up because they havent heard seen or read any of these stuff.Problem is i have been brought up on a dose of cricketing history.

Just because you aren't familiar with Gary Gilmour and Len Pascoe doesn't mean that they weren't brilliant cricketers.

In the first ever World Cup, Gilmour took 5 wickets in both the semi-final (6-14) and final (5-48).

Len Pascoe was lightning fast. The only problem was that he peaked in the same period as World Series Cricket and so had a short Test career due to Lillee, Thommo, Walker, Hogg, Alderman and Lawson.

All the same - a SuperTest average of 79.14 and a Test average of 72.57!

 

[Leo23]

Just because you aren't familiar with Gary Gilmour and Len Pascoe doesn't mean that they weren't brilliant cricketers.

In the first ever World Cup, Gilmour took 5 wickets in both the semi-final (6-14) and final (5-48).

Len Pascoe was lightning fast. The only problem was that he peaked in the same period as World Series Cricket and so had a short Test career due to Lillee, Thommo, Walker, Hogg, Alderman and Lawson.

All the same - a SuperTest average of 79.14 and a Test average of 72.57!

is barry richards the second greatest batsman of all time after bradman?

 

[Tusker]

Just because you aren't familiar with Gary Gilmour and Len Pascoe doesn't mean that they weren't brilliant cricketers.

In the first ever World Cup, Gilmour took 5 wickets in both the semi-final (6-14) and final (5-48).

Len Pascoe was lightning fast. The only problem was that he peaked in the same period as World Series Cricket and so had a short Test career due to Lillee, Thommo, Walker, Hogg, Alderman and Lawson.

All the same - a SuperTest average of 79.14 and a Test average of 72.57!

here we go again with the everything before 80s = Great storyline .... give it a rest !!

here is Lenny : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXUFyqrg7Os

If thats lightening fast then ... umesh Yadav bowls about 10K quicker than that.

 

[Tusker]

That's just daft.

They were contemporaries, and even though I freely recognize Gavaskar as the GOAT Asian batsman, Barry Richards was universally recognized throughout the world of cricket as the better batsman.

It's not even close.

well then it shouldn't be hard to describe his batting technique ( as in stance, grip, backlift, footwork etc) based on some real footage ... instead of words . Vijay, Dhawan, Cook, Dravid etc have better technique than him.

 

[Junaids]

is barry richards the second greatest batsman of all time after bradman?

I think so.

 

[cricketjoshila]

That's just daft.

They were contemporaries, and even though I freely recognize Gavaskar as the GOAT Asian batsman, Barry Richards was universally recognized throughout the world of cricket as the better batsman.

It's not even close.

Another lie.

Gavaskar Hobbs Hutton are recognised as the 3 greatest test openers ever.Not Barry Richards lol.

4 test wonder Barry Richards shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath.


Then again.Your lies about Indians is well known.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Just because you aren't familiar with Gary Gilmour and Len Pascoe doesn't mean that they weren't brilliant cricketers.

In the first ever World Cup, Gilmour took 5 wickets in both the semi-final (6-14) and final (5-48).

Len Pascoe was lightning fast. The only problem was that he peaked in the same period as World Series Cricket and so had a short Test career due to Lillee, Thommo, Walker, Hogg, Alderman and Lawson.

All the same - a SuperTest average of 79.14 and a Test average of 72.57!

We are talking test cricket.Didnot know World cups were test cricket.

Nobody called Len Pascoe a bad bowler he was a good bowler and Gavaskar played numerous such good bowlers and scored runs.

Super Tests have same status as mohalla Gali cricket or Masala matches.That is no official status.Your whining wont change it.

4 tests to 125 tests.LoL.

Gavaskar wipes the floor with Barry Richards in Test Match Cricket.

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

Barry Richards could have been the greatest, but 4 tests is a nothing sample so it is unfair to judge him against other openers. He is a what-if case.

 

[Junaids]

Another lie.

Gavaskar Hobbs Hutton are recognised as the 3 greatest test openers ever.Not Barry Richards lol.

4 test wonder Barry Richards shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath.


Then again.Your lies about Indians is well known.

I didn't say that.

I said that in my first five years of watching cricket, 1975-1980, Barry Richards was universally acclaimed as the greatest current opener in the world. Even Sunil Gavaskar wouldn't have nominated Sunil Gavaskar.

Going into Packer, the main question was "Which Richards is The Best Batsman In The World - Barry or Viv?"

But then one averaged 79 while the other averaged 56.

In low scoring conditions on difficult wickets.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I didn't say that.

I said that in my first five years of watching cricket, 1975-1980, Barry Richards was universally acclaimed as the greatest current opener in the world. Even Sunil Gavaskar wouldn't have nominated Sunil Gavaskar.

Going into Packer, the main question was "Which Richards is The Best Batsman In The World - Barry or Viv?"

But then one averaged 79 while the other averaged 56.

In low scoring conditions on difficult wickets.

Your personal opinion is not world opinion.If i was looking for a FC opener i may select Barry Richards but if i want a test opener i will choose Sunil Gavaskar.


Who gives a damn about some pvt unofficial galli mohalla matches?In real cricket that is Test Cricket Viv Richards Barry Richards every day night hour minute and second.

Infact its a dis service to Viv and Sunny to compare them to a FC great like Barry Richards.

And despite only playing 4 tests and mainly playing second rate attacks Its not that barry richards didnt avg 60 or 70 in FC he avgd around 54.