What's new

Who was the better batsman? Sunil Gavaskar or Greg Chappell?

Ab Fan

Senior Test Player
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Runs
28,265
I think this will be a bit closer call and really tough to pick any one but I would like some experienced posters to point out their strength or weaknesses and where do they stand when compared with the likes of modern greats like Sachin or Lara or Ponting..
 
I will rate Greg slightly higher than Gavaskar.

Greg did better than anyone else against fearsome WI bowlers and like SRT did well wherever he played. His record in ODI is very good as well.
 
I will rate Greg slightly higher than Gavaskar.

Greg did better than anyone else against fearsome WI bowlers and like SRT did well wherever he played. His record in ODI is very good as well.

So did Gavaskar vs WI bowlers and did well almost everywhere..And he used to open the innings while Chappell mostly batted at 4..
 
So did Gavaskar vs WI bowlers and did well almost everywhere..And he used to open the innings while Chappell mostly batted at 4..

You are partially correct for the bold part, rest is fine.
 
I will rate Greg slightly higher than Gavaskar.

Greg did better than anyone else against fearsome WI bowlers and like SRT did well wherever he played. His record in ODI is very good as well.

Greg was only 2nd to Viv in his generation in Test & behind Viv & Zed in ODI. He 'll make my AUS all time XI at 4, with Bradman at 3 & Ponting at 5.
 
Probably Gavaskar. Expect an in depth response from other posters, I'll tag [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] for you.
 
Difficult one, this. Very close.

Chappell gets big points for standing up to WI on their own decks, and in WSC too.
 
I will rate Greg slightly higher than Gavaskar.

Greg did better than anyone else against fearsome WI bowlers and like SRT did well wherever he played. His record in ODI is very good as well.
You need to recheck Greg Chappels record.
 
Didn't see either but Imran Khan rated Gavaskar as best batsman of his generation after Viv Richards
 
Greg was only 2nd to Viv in his generation in Test & behind Viv & Zed in ODI. He 'll make my AUS all time XI at 4, with Bradman at 3 & Ponting at 5.
Chappel didnt play in India.Didnt tour WI after 1973.Never faced the 4 great spinners of India .So much for being the 2nd best test batsman of his era.
 
Difficult one, this. Very close.

Chappell gets big points for standing up to WI on their own decks, and in WSC too.
Do you even know how many tests Greg Chappel played in WI and when?

And WSC is not test cricket.
 
People are quick to point out that many of Gavaskar's runs against the West Indies did not come against their main bowlers (after around 1980), but the same is true for Greg Chappell. He never played against them in their home after 1973, excluding WSC. From 1979, when he first faced Roberts, Holding, Garner etc, Greg Chappell scored 356 runs at an average of 29.66 against them. He never faced Malcolm Marshall either.
 
Didn't see either but Imran Khan rated Gavaskar as best batsman of his generation after Viv Richards

Imran Khan also thought of Manzoor Elahi as the hardest hitter of the cricket ball in the world...

Shane Warne rated Darren Lehman a better batsman than Inzimam and Steve Waugh as the most selfish player...

Just because one great player thinks highly of another player, doesn't mean that opinion is rooted in fact or merit...
 
Chappel didnt play in India.Didnt tour WI after 1973.Never faced the 4 great spinners of India .So much for being the 2nd best test batsman of his era.

Try "which WI & AUS" Gavasker mastered - I have few posts on this.
 
Imran Khan also thought of Manzoor Elahi as the hardest hitter of the cricket ball in the world...

Shane Warne rated Darren Lehman a better batsman than Inzimam and Steve Waugh as the most selfish player...

Just because one great player thinks highly of another player, doesn't mean that opinion is rooted in fact or merit...

Some past players are more sensible than others, so you know who to listen to. Warne isn't one of them.
 
Chappel didnt play in India.Didnt tour WI after 1973.Never faced the 4 great spinners of India .So much for being the 2nd best test batsman of his era.

In 70 and 80's to a lesser extent, if a player did well in England and Australia ( counties included), you would think of him as a great player...

WI bowlers tested you in both England and Australia and if you did well, you were good...

So to conclude by saying Greg did not tour WI and India, he can't be great is actually incorrect....

Having said that, i think Sunny was better than most in 70's... Greg was a different type of player though..
 
In 70 and 80's to a lesser extent, if a player did well in England and Australia ( counties included), you would think of him as a great player...

WI bowlers tested you in both England and Australia and if you did well, you were good...

So to conclude by saying Greg did not tour WI and India, he can't be great is actually incorrect....

Having said that, i think Sunny was better than most in 70's... Greg was a different type of player though..

Greg Chappell didn't do well against the main West Indies bowlers even at home. He scored 356 runs at an average of 29.66 against them
 
WSC is not test Cricket.. I agree but it does count for something..

Gavaskar's record against prolong quartet is not very impressive but sample size is also small. It also doesn't take away from his performances against Holding and Co. in 70s.

Overall, I would place Greg slightly higher; not by much. He is arguably 2nd best OZ and marginally better than Ponting for me. Hadlee calls Gregg best batsman he bowled to, even ahead of Richard and Sunny
 
I don't think this stat is correct.... Is this from that series when he was out of form???

His test record against quartet is not impressive, however WSC average is which isn't counted toward official record.

I have read a lot about WSC and one of robelinda's post on crickeweb indicated that WSC series wasn't played at the same intensity level as test cricket.. However completely discarding WSC stats would be disingenuous
 
People are quick to point out that many of Gavaskar's runs against the West Indies did not come against their main bowlers (after around 1980), but the same is true for Greg Chappell. He never played against them in their home after 1973, excluding WSC. From 1979, when he first faced Roberts, Holding, Garner etc, Greg Chappell scored 356 runs at an average of 29.66 against them. He never faced Malcolm Marshall either.

Why will you start from 1979? He did face Roberts + Holding in 1975 series. He averaged 100+ in that series. Anyway, here is his entire record when Roberts, Holding or Garner played.

greg.jpg
 
Why will you start from 1979? He did face Roberts + Holding in 1975 series. He averaged 100+ in that series. Anyway, here is his entire record when Roberts, Holding or Garner played.

View attachment 64565

I was talking about facing all of them together, since others said that many of Gavaskar's runs did not come against the quartet. Otherwise, Gavaskar has scored almost half the runs he has against West Indies against Garner, Holding or Roberts.
 
I was talking about facing all of them together, since others said that many of Gavaskar's runs did not come against the quartet. Otherwise, Gavaskar has scored almost half the runs he has against West Indies against Garner, Holding or Roberts.

Gavaskar has scored enough tough runs and discounting it is not fair.

Also, quartet has not played too many games together so I never get that argument to be honest.
 


In 70 and 80's to a lesser extent, if a player did well in England and Australia ( counties included), you would think of him as a great player...

Something to do with Imperial Cricket Conference or AUS/ENG controlling cricket and media at that time?

WI bowlers tested you in both England and Australia and if you did well, you were good...

Here we have someone who has done well both home and away and another one just at home.Its about who is better because both are good.
So to conclude by saying Greg did not tour WI and India, he can't be great is actually incorrect....

He can be a great.The question is who is better.
Having said that, i think Sunny was better than most in 70's... Greg was a different type of player though..

Except Viv Richards dont think another batsman overshadowed Gavaskar.
 
Which were thoroughly trashed by others in the forum.

Are you sure? I asked a question to your fellow Indian Poster [MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION], still waiting for the answer, I asked the same post to @Sensible Indian Fan, or [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] can answer you how they trashed it.

Forget about them, check the following link & try if you can trash those -

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...st-underrated-batsman-ever&highlight=Gavasker


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...eatest-Asian-Cricketer-of-all-time&highlight=


I am asking it - give a try, if you have it, or don't bother to troll around my post; rather try to focus on "Which WI & AUS" part - it 'll help you & it won't cost my valuable time to put you in your place.
 
Last edited:
And I am inviting any one in this forum, to discuss on this, in proper spirit - won't mind if anyone can "trash" it. And won't mind if someone goes for AWOL from PP for few days, if it's not properly "trashed".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you sure? I asked a question to your fellow Indian Poster [MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION], still waiting for the answer, I asked the same post to @Sensible Indian Fan, or [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] can answer you how they trashed it.

Forget about them, check the following link & try if you can trash those -

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...st-underrated-batsman-ever&highlight=Gavasker


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...eatest-Asian-Cricketer-of-all-time&highlight=


I am asking it - give a try, if you have it, or don't bother to troll around my post; rather try to focus on "Which WI & AUS" part - it 'll help you & it won't cost my valuable time to put you in your place.

You need to watch your tone. It looks like some of the praise here has gone to your head.

The West Indies quartet played 11 matches. How many matches do you expect a batsman to do well in against a specific group of 4 players who played so few matches together?

From http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...-the-the-greatest-Asian-Cricketer-of-all-time

MMHS said:
'83 for the first time he took the quartet - check out scores apart from the high scoring Gayana Tests. '83 was the only time when he did great against a full WI attack, but still Roberts was in decline (played only 2, I believe) & Garner didn't even came.

Do you know any one who has achieved significantly more than that against the quartet in tests? Forget WSC, otherwise I'm doing to start saying that Yusuf Pathan can demolish Steyn in tests just because he got 26 runs off him in an over in IPL 2014. As [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] said, a much better way to gauge a player's ability against fast bowling is to see how he does against great bowlers over a decent sample size.
 
You need to watch your tone. It looks like some of the praise here has gone to your head.

The West Indies quartet played 11 matches. How many matches do you expect a batsman to do well in against a specific group of 4 players who played so few matches together?

From http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...-the-the-greatest-Asian-Cricketer-of-all-time



Do you know any one who has achieved significantly more than that against the quartet in tests? Forget WSC, otherwise I'm doing to start saying that Yusuf Pathan can demolish Steyn in tests just because he got 26 runs off him in an over in IPL 2014. As [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] said, a much better way to gauge a player's ability against fast bowling is to see how he does against great bowlers over a decent sample size.

Why are you trying to fight for someone yaar? I don't need to be "praised" to defend myself.

Off course Sunny is among the top players of 2 decades, but he was behind Greg, which most players/posters 'll agree. Khan had a personal liking of Sunny (it was a nice mutual respect), besides, he hardly played against Greg. But, if you try to put a comparison between Greg & Sunny as one played both at home & away while the other only home, then you have to go beyond the stats.

Anyway, praise is something that you earn, not by lobbying or grouping - don't try to hurt someone from fellow feelings.
 
WSC is not similar to Ipl in any shape or form. However it shouldn't be used as a benchmark of excellence in praise of your heroes


On the other hand Gavaskar didn't master Imran when he was at his peak argument is pretty stupid, especially the man himself has said sunny was his toughest opponent after viv

Viv himself averages less than 40 against his bowlers., so he was lucky didn't have to play his own bowlers argument can easily be made. You can find numerical deficiency in any batsmans record and mold them to make your heroes look better in comparison

I personally think Gregg was slightly better but argument can be easily made in sunnys favor too
 
Why are you trying to fight for someone yaar? I don't need to be "praised" to defend myself.

Off course Sunny is among the top players of 2 decades, but he was behind Greg, which most players/posters 'll agree. Khan had a personal liking of Sunny (it was a nice mutual respect), besides, he hardly played against Greg. But, if you try to put a comparison between Greg & Sunny as one played both at home & away while the other only home, then you have to go beyond the stats.

Anyway, praise is something that you earn, not by lobbying or grouping - don't try to hurt someone from fellow feelings.

I don't think someone saying that your points were refuted (which appears to be the case skimming through the Amarnath thread) should be responded with something like "it won't cost my valuable time to put you in your place".

There is nothing wrong with rating Greg above Gavaskar. But you've mentioned so many times that most of Gavaskar's runs against the West Indies were not when the quartet was playing, so it made me wonder if there was any player who got many runs against the quartet. It turns out there were none, which is understandable since they only played 11 matches together. This is with some exceptions of course, like Bruce Laird who almost exclusively faced the quartet when playing against the West Indies so most of his runs against West Indies were also against the quartet. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;qualval1=runs;template=results;type=batting

A better way to look at it how many runs they have scored against at least one of those four. In that case both Gavaskar and Greg have good records, with Gavaskar scoring almost half of his runs against West Indies against one of those four.
 
WSC is not similar to Ipl in any shape or form. However it shouldn't be used as a benchmark of excellence in praise of your heroes


On the other hand Gavaskar didn't master Imran when he was at his peak argument is pretty stupid, especially the man himself has said sunny was his toughest opponent after viv

Viv himself averages less than 40 against his bowlers., so he was lucky didn't have to play his own bowlers argument can easily be made. You can find numerical deficiency in any batsmans record and mold them to make your heroes look better in comparison

I personally think Gregg was slightly better but argument can be easily made in sunnys favor too

Of course it isn’t, although you can argue that some of the players in an IPL team are better than those in some international T20 teams (like Gayle, Kohli, AB and Starc in RCB). Arguably, the WSC was a better test of a player’s skills than internationals. I just didn’t want to start another argument where Junaids gets involved and the thread goes on a tangent about Barry Richards.

Actual statistical flaws are tough to find in great batsmen too. But then if you look at their performances against 4 specific bowlers who have only played 11 matches together, you are bound to find some flaws. I think someone started a thread on how Sachin fared against a specific set of some 20 odd bowlers to show that he wasn’t good against quality fast bowlers.
 
Why are you trying to fight for someone yaar? I don't need to be "praised" to defend myself.

Off course Sunny is among the top players of 2 decades, but he was behind Greg, which most players/posters 'll agree. Khan had a personal liking of Sunny (it was a nice mutual respect), besides, he hardly played against Greg. But, if you try to put a comparison between Greg & Sunny as one played both at home & away while the other only home, then you have to go beyond the stats.

Anyway, praise is something that you earn, not by lobbying or grouping - don't try to hurt someone from fellow feelings.

What does this mean?
 
Of course it isn’t, although you can argue that some of the players in an IPL team are better than those in some international T20 teams (like Gayle, Kohli, AB and Starc in RCB). Arguably, the WSC was a better test of a player’s skills than internationals. I just didn’t want to start another argument where Junaids gets involved and the thread goes on a tangent about Barry Richards.

Actual statistical flaws are tough to find in great batsmen too. But then if you look at their performances against 4 specific bowlers who have only played 11 matches together, you are bound to find some flaws. I think someone started a thread on how Sachin fared against a specific set of some 20 odd bowlers to show that he wasn’t good against quality fast bowlers.

robelinda is the veteran who has made thousands of YT videos.. And according to him, WSC wasn't test standard by any means. I would rather trust him over all the armchair experts around here.. that being said they were still "test" so it def means something to me although I don't take it as a face value.

Any batsman from Don-Viv-Sobers-Sachin has several numerical deficiencies. You just have to look hard enough.
 
I understand, you haven't gone through the entire thread.

I misread the statement. I read it as "But, if you try to put a comparison between Greg & Sunny, as one played both at home & away while the other only home, then you have to go beyond the stats." as in you think that one only did well at home.
 
robelinda is the veteran who has made thousands of YT videos.. And according to him, WSC wasn't test standard by any means. I would rather trust him over all the armchair experts around here.. that being said they were still "test" so it def means something to me although I don't take it as a face value.

Hmmm. The Chappells, Barry Richards, Proctor, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Miandad, Zaheer, Greig, Amiss, Knott, Underwood, Hadlee, Lloyd, Viv Richards, Fredericks, Greenidge, Rowe, Gibbs, Holding, Roberts and Garner were not test standard by any means.

Now I've heard everything.
 
Hmmm. The Chappells, Barry Richards, Proctor, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Miandad, Zaheer, Greig, Amiss, Knott, Underwood, Hadlee, Lloyd, Viv Richards, Fredericks, Greenidge, Rowe, Gibbs, Holding, Roberts and Garner were not test standard by any means.

Now I've heard everything.

Try to take your rose-tinted glasses off for once. The "intensity" level wasn't just the same.. Here is the post from man himself..

"I have extensive footage of the 77/78 and 78/79 supertests, honestly the cricket is NOT a ridiculously high standard. The vibe is very relaxed, apart from the odd spell where the WI bowlers really decided to wake up. Was quite surprised at how slow the over rates were, VERY slow. In the one dayers it took teams 4 hours to bowl under 40 overs, no kidding. Now, im not saying ALL the WSC stuff was low key and casual, some of it was intense and great cricket, but there were a LOT of matches, and not all of them were played with test match intensity. Those who are older than me who watched more of it please comment too, i dont pay any attention to past players glorification of series they played, they all exaggerate. "

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/59714-malcolm-marshall-vs-glen-mcgrath-7.html
 
Last edited:
robelinda is the veteran who has made thousands of YT videos.. And according to him, WSC wasn't test standard by any means. I would rather trust him over all the armchair experts around here.. that being said they were still "test" so it def means something to me although I don't take it as a face value.

Any batsman from Don-Viv-Sobers-Sachin has several numerical deficiencies. You just have to look hard enough.

When did he say that? In one of the comments or CW?
 
robelinda is the veteran who has made thousands of YT videos.. And according to him, WSC wasn't test standard by any means. I would rather trust him over all the armchair experts around here.. that being said they were still "test" so it def means something to me although I don't take it as a face value.

Any batsman from Don-Viv-Sobers-Sachin has several numerical deficiencies. You just have to look hard enough.

To start with, I think Robi is correct - WSC started with fun, exactly the reason ICL started. Zee Sports failed to acquire BCCI contract, for a "technical" clause that wrote "2 years experience" in cricket broadcasting. So, Subhash Chandra decided to spree few million greenbacks, so that he can compete for next round, which over 5 years is a billion $ bag. Packer, wanted exclusive rights for AUS cricket like BBC & tried to unsettle the establishment by hiring some mercenary.

It started for fun (& I am not sure about the integrity of the players either), BUT it changed one night - WI side were all out for 58 (?) & then players were doing cheap staff in dressing room with beer - Packer came to WI dressing room & gave 5 minutes speech - Something like

"Gentleman, you are not like me, proud of your profession, but at least try to justify the money you are getting to feed your kids. I didn't call you because you guys are poor & I have money, in abundance, I can kick all of you out right now, paying your full contract & bring another set like you, but I selected you because I do believe in your capability. Don't need to be loyal to me, but don't disgrace the game that has made you famous"

It changed after that - WI hit back Australia like a reborn team, in fact Lloyd never smiled before he took the 1st WSC trophy from Packer 3 months later. The games were fought with blood & sweat, Ian Chappell & Aussies thought they were the better team, but got hammered ball by ball; Deniss Lille is the fiercest rival in the history of the game - he gave everything to fight back & inspired his team, while Viv was settling scores of 2 years back - next year a World XI was formed with 15 of the best cricketers around & every match went to the wire.

There are many great cricketers & administrators in the game, but I think Packer was the most influential person in history of Cricket - he drew it's landscape that has made billionaires out of a British dying sports. If one series can produce an Imran Khan, I don't think anyone will ever be able to convince me on it's low quality.
 
To start with, I think Robi is correct - WSC started with fun, exactly the reason ICL started. Zee Sports failed to acquire BCCI contract, for a "technical" clause that wrote "2 years experience" in cricket broadcasting. So, Subhash Chandra decided to spree few million greenbacks, so that he can compete for next round, which over 5 years is a billion $ bag. Packer, wanted exclusive rights for AUS cricket like BBC & tried to unsettle the establishment by hiring some mercenary.

It started for fun (& I am not sure about the integrity of the players either), BUT it changed one night - WI side were all out for 58 (?) & then players were doing cheap staff in dressing room with beer - Packer came to WI dressing room & gave 5 minutes speech - Something like

"Gentleman, you are not like me, proud of your profession, but at least try to justify the money you are getting to feed your kids. I didn't call you because you guys are poor & I have money, in abundance, I can kick all of you out right now, paying your full contract & bring another set like you, but I selected you because I do believe in your capability. Don't need to be loyal to me, but don't disgrace the game that has made you famous"

It changed after that - WI hit back Australia like a reborn team, in fact Lloyd never smiled before he took the 1st WSC trophy from Packer 3 months later. The games were fought with blood & sweat, Ian Chappell & Aussies thought they were the better team, but got hammered ball by ball; Deniss Lille is the fiercest rival in the history of the game - he gave everything to fight back & inspired his team, while Viv was settling scores of 2 years back - next year a World XI was formed with 15 of the best cricketers around & every match went to the wire.

There are many great cricketers & administrators in the game, but I think Packer was the most influential person in history of Cricket - he drew it's landscape that has made billionaires out of a British dying sports. If one series can produce an Imran Khan, I don't think anyone will ever be able to convince me on it's low quality.

There are others who have watched it too.. Not many buys this WSC being equal to or even better than test quality (as claimed by some players who participated in) notion.. At best it's considered as competitive FC standard.

Here is another guy who watched it: "i agree with this. i never took the WSC was test match quality stuff/ better than test cricket etc etc BS seriously. usually the "barry richards was the greatest test opener" theorists and the "lillee was the greatest fast bowler ever" club members like to quote WSC stats to "prove" why they are right.basically WSC games were, at best, good FC games that have, over time, been rightfully relegated to footnotes in cricket history. "
 
Last edited:
There are others who have watched it too.. Not many buys this WSC being equal to or even better than test quality (as claimed by some players who participated in) notion.. At best it's considered as competitive FC standard.

I don't think so - read Gavasker's Idols. He rated Greg's 246 after 11 hours of fielding (with 102 F fever) as one of the best ever innings.

WSC was a rebellion, it challenged the establishment & egoistic snobs like Bradman, Cowdrey, Dexter tried every bit to defame it & the British media had it's support. As of today, it's still not considered as FC cricket, where as ICC once awarded the World XI - MCC match Test status (only to revoke later).

As a fan, I have the highest respect for 3 people - Imran, Viv & Lillee. All 3 agrees that WSC turned their career to new dimension, it can't be cheap.

It wasn't club cricket - WI & AUS players were representing their flag, yet World XI came out as winner in 2nd edition, tells lot about the intensity of the games. I don't think it should be given Test status, but cricket was never of higher quality than WSC, particularly in year 2 & 3.

I give you a clue - snob ACB & ECB had to agree with Packer's term in two years time, simply because they realized that they had no chance to compete with Packer's cricket, for it's quality, intensity & competitiveness.
 
Are you sure? I asked a question to your fellow Indian Poster [MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION], still waiting for the answer, I asked the same post to @Sensible Indian Fan, or [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] can answer you how they trashed it.

Forget about them, check the following link & try if you can trash those -

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...st-underrated-batsman-ever&highlight=Gavasker


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...eatest-Asian-Cricketer-of-all-time&highlight=


I am asking it - give a try, if you have it, or don't bother to troll around my post; rather try to focus on "Which WI & AUS" part - it 'll help you & it won't cost my valuable time to put you in your place.

In 1974 WI came with only a pair of fast bowler - Roberts & Jullien (?) - Gavasker went AOWL

Lot of lies in your posts.

In 1974 WI came with Roberts Holder Julien and Gibbs.Gavaskar got injured in the 1st test and then only returned in the 5th test to score a 86 . So your theory of only couple of fast bowlers is rubbish so is saying that Gavaskar went AWOL.

In 1976 IND chased 400+ at PoS, Gavasker (& a couple of others) did get a 100, but that WI attack only had a young Holding. That was a Test WI went with 3 spinners & Lloyd actually declared after discussing with his spinners - 3 of them (Insan Ali, Padmore & forgot the 3rd one) - for next 12 years only spinner played a single Test for WI - Butts, as a replacement of injured Lloyd.

In 1976 2 tests were played at port of spain.In the first one Gavaskar scored a 156 againist Holding and Roberts.In the third test of the series also played at POS on the same wicket LLoyld dropped Roberts to play extra spinners as the pitch was the same used barely a week ago for the 2nd test.The Pitch turned and Indian spinners ran riot.WI spinners failed,though WI also had Holding and Julien in the attack.Gavaskar scored a 102 N.O in that match.

1970s cricket was disturbed by WSC, for next WI Series Gavasker mastered a Packered reject WI side for 650+ with 4 centuries in 6 Tests - that WI side was missing their top 15 cricketers, barring Kalicharan. That attack didn't have Holding, Roberts, Garner, Croft, Clarke, Holder & Mosely. Only a 20 years old Marshall made his debut in a high scoring series where 6 Test produced only 1 result & rest 5 were high scoring draws

How much do you lie?

In 1978 Clarke Holder and Marshall all 3 played.

The twin centuries in Kolkata was againist Marshall Clarke and Holder.

Gavasker faced a full strength WI side in 1982-83 in WI - taking out his 147* in a high scoring draw at Guyana (which is traditionally the highest scoring ground in WI those days), he would have averaged under 15 in that Series.

Gavaskar was in poor form before that 83 series in WI.He had had a poor series in AUS at the start of 81 followed by a wretched tour of NZ and 6 months later he struggled vs England at home except a 170 odd on a flattish wicket,6 months later he struggled on his tour of England and though he bashed a hapless Lanka at home after that.He was clearly struggling.

Now another of your lies.The Guyana test was draw due to no play being possible due to rain on two days not because it was some flat deck high scoring highway.Overall the series was indeed poor for Gavaskar.






He played last time against WI was in 1983-84 at home against Marshal & Holding (Garner didn't come & Roberts hardly played) - his 236* (In deed a great knock) actually took his series total to 400+, in a 6 Test series. -

In the 2nd test at Delhi Gavaskar scored a 121 vs Marshal Holding Davis and Wayne Daniel.The next match he scored a 90 odd againist the same attack.And followed it with the legendary 236 vs Marshall Holding and Roberts.




3. Against NZ, he has a century at Acuckland in 1975, a match that IND won & NZ was missing a certain name - RJ Hadlee. In 1979-80, he did face RJ - for a total of 135 in 3 Tests, at an average of.................. -

Gavaskar did struggle in the 1981 tour of NZ but before that he had scored runs againist Hadlee in India and also during 1976 tour.Even before that 1981 tour of NZ Gavaskar was struggling with his form.

4. Gavasker had great record against PAK - but not so in the 1982-83 series when Imran was at his prime. He mastered a PAK attack of Azim Hafeez & forgot names in 1983 & had a great series in 1978 at home, when Khan was mostly injured. In between, he had a great Test at Karachi in 1978, I agree, one of few in a 125 Test career -

Another lie.Gavaskar avgs 57.92 in matches in which Imran Khan played againist him.

In 82-83 series in Pakistan Gavaskar avgd 48.Imran Khan played all the 6 tests so did Sarfaraz Nawaz and Abdul Qadir.His scores in that series read 83/8,42/12,127/17 60/13/5,67.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60507.html

Link to the 1982-83 series.

In 79 series at home Imran Khan missed only the 4th test and NOT MOSTLY INJURED.ANOTHER LIE.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60482.html LINK to 79 series.Imran Khan played 5 matches out of 6.

In 78 series in Pakistan Gavaskar's scores read 89/5,97/111,137

Gavaskar also had a good last series at home againist Pakistan in 1987.Imran/Wasim/Qadir all played that series.

The only series that Imran missed was 3 test series of 1983(Second series of the year,the 1st series had 6 tests).



Look, I have nothing personal against him, one of the all time greatest; but he simply wasn't the player he is credited for. Besides,he was the utmost selfish, vindictive & ill headed person.

You have personal bias againist Indians which is why you run to every thread and try to prove that Gavaskar and Tendulkar are not the batsman the world knows them to be.Gavaskar is the greatest opener to have played the game your whining doesnt change that.Now since you have little substance againist his performances you want to take digs at his personality.


I give you 4 examples -
1. In 1975-76 when Pataudi retired, there were 2 incumbent for Indian Captaincy - Sunny & Bedi. Most of the management was for Bedi for his few years in County, Gavasker never liked that & he had a life time dig at BS whenever he got the chance. Later, Bombay lobby forced Bedi to resign on disciplinary grounds & a compromise choice (Venkat, from South) was picked.

LIES LIES LIES.BIG TIME LIES.Bedi was made captain in 1975-76 and continued till 1978 when he was removed because he LOST A SERIES TO PAKISTAN.Gavaskar was then made Captain and he won the home series vs WI.Bedi then created a ruckus almost begged that he wont play his last series under Gavaskar and so Venkat was made the captain for that one series in ENG in 1979 in which Bedi retired.

SERIES CAPTAINCY RECORDS OF BEDI/GAVASKAR and VENKAT.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rt;template=results;type=allround;view=series

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rt;template=results;type=allround;view=series

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rt;template=results;type=allround;view=series



2. A MCG 1980-81, Lillee got him LBW (probably he in-side edged that) & showed him the way - Gavasker declared, conceded the match (& series). It was Indian Manager Pataudi, that ran into the field & sent Chauhan back to batting for a match IND eventually won.

Gavaskar was not in great touch in that series and was given poor decisions.He desperately wanted to score a century vs Lillee as he was the only great bowler of that era againist whom Gavaskar didnt have a century.Gavaskar had complained to the manager and the board about the poor umpiring.But since those were the days of Imperial Cricket nothing was done.Gavaskar made his point when he was given LBW of an inside edge.And he never conceded the match or the series,the Umpires threatened him that if he left the field of play with Chauhan India will concede the match and series.

3. He had twice a mid pitch brawl with Fletcher & Zaheer - in a meaning less match, in last hour, both those Captains offered draws, Gavasker used his influence to home Umpire & made them continue the match till he reached his 100. Zaheer was damn upset, but he was good buddy of Sunny, not much happened there, but Fleatcher wasn't that sober then.

We are talking facts here not stories.

4. In 1984-85 5th Test, Azhar was 65* & could have got 4th century of his career (in 3rd Test, 2nd of the match - a record hold by Sunny) - he declared the innings giving a side leading 2-1 (ENG) to chase 250 in 40 overs & win it 3-1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Again a lie.Azhar was on 54.England was given that target to chase so that India could have a chance of dismissing England and square the series.And England DIDNT CHASE IT TO WIN 3-1.India scored at 7.5 runs a over in their 2nd innings in order to set a target for ENG and try to win the series.Another LIE EXPOSED.

Scorecard of the said Test Match.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63395.html

5. In 1985-86, IND became the 1st Asian side coming very close to win a Test Series in AUS, at MCG IND needed 120+ with rain threatening around - Kapil was the Captain, who had just replaced Gavasker as Indian Captain. Do you know what Sunny did - he took 75 minutes & 50 balls to score 8, until rain saved AUS..........

Another half truth.Australia were saved by some poor captaincy by Kapil as well.The last Aussie pair of Border and Gilbert who added 77 runs and Kapil allowed the game to drift.When India came to bat Gavaskar was asked to hold one end up and Srikkanth who had scored a 86 off 95 odd balls in the 1st innings was asked to up the scoring from the other end.The pitch by that time had become very hard to bat on and Srikkanth struggled.

The main culprit was the defensive mindset of the Indian team of those days.Not Gavaskar.

Look, I again say, don't judge me with my Nationality or question my integrity, I love this game & do study lot on this from passion.

The number of lies that you spread in these posts tell your intention behind the posts.Your integrity is not my concern it is for others to judge seeing your posts here and the lies within.And your bias shows why posters judge the posts with the authors nationality.





@Sensible Indian Fan, or [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] [MENTION=38544]Indianfan[/MENTION] [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION]

Next time this guy tries these sort of tactics do call him out..

You know you can try to push as much as your agenda with your lies spun through immaculately worded and long winding posts and try to some how make Gavaskar and Tendulkar look inferior batsmen it doesnt work.Many just take your posts on face value because they simply dont have the energy intent time and keeness to find the truth behind them.All it exposes is your bias and hatred for Indian cricketers.These lies may work on others but not on me.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=428]Romali_rotti[/MENTION] you also go through my post 45 .

Relax, no need to call for support, you are alone enough. Entire PP knows who segregates players/posters based on flag.

This was the response of IndianWillow for the post that that you are asking him to call out

Wow, I mentioned nearly the same thing in an old post of mine here. May be in 2011/2012 or so. How did you come to the same conclusion? Gavaskar was an ATG, but he wasn't as good as he is made out to be especially when it comes to his record against the WI.

Vishy and Kapil Dev were better team players compared to Gavaskar and usually delivered where it mattered more. Vishy was a pressure specialist like Laxman though he didn't utilize all easier chances like Gavaskar.
- See more at: http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...-ever&highlight=Gavasker#sthash.DUpVBW50.dpuf
 

Relax, no need to call for support, you are alone enough. Entire PP knows who segregates players/posters based on flag.

It was you who started tagging posters not me.Infact you thought you would intimidate me by warning me and saying"don't bother to troll around my post; rather try to focus on "Which WI & AUS" part - it 'll help you & it won't cost my valuable time to put you in your place."

Next time try these tactics with someone else.Everytime you try to spread lies about Indian Players you will be called out.And yes that flag beside your name does make a huge lot of difference to what you post.

This was the response of IndianWillow for the post that that you are asking him to call out

Wow, I mentioned nearly the same thing in an old post of mine here. May be in 2011/2012 or so. How did you come to the same conclusion? Gavaskar was an ATG, but he wasn't as good as he is made out to be especially when it comes to his record against the WI.

Vishy and Kapil Dev were better team players compared to Gavaskar and usually delivered where it mattered more. Vishy was a pressure specialist like Laxman though he didn't utilize all easier chances like Gavaskar.
- See more at: http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...-ever&highlight=Gavasker#sthash.DUpVBW50.dpuf

So this is your answer to how is trashed your so called great post on how Gavaskar is NOT A GREAT PLAYER.
 
Last edited:
Chappell was a better batsman, considering he did well in both tests and ODIs and had better array of shots.
 
OK [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] has now convinced me that Chappel was probably the better Test player as well as being miles ahead in ODIs.
 
It started for fun (& I am not sure about the integrity of the players either), BUT it changed one night - WI side were all out for 58 (?) & then players were doing cheap staff in dressing room with beer - Packer came to WI dressing room & gave 5 minutes speech - Something like

"Gentleman, you are not like me, proud of your profession, but at least try to justify the money you are getting to feed your kids. I didn't call you because you guys are poor & I have money, in abundance, I can kick all of you out right now, paying your full contract & bring another set like you, but I selected you because I do believe in your capability. Don't need to be loyal to me, but don't disgrace the game that has made you famous"

That reads about right to me. There is also the story that Lillee punched Chappelli in the guts for suggesting that the fast bowler wasn't bowling fast any more, and Lillee was stung by the slur and ran harder in the second series.
 
As I noted in an earlier thread, Gavaskar comprehensively outperformed his nearest two competitors, who were:

1) Richards: Gavaskar had a higher average, a higher rate of centuries per test, he was an opener and played for a weak bowling side

2) Chappell: Gavaskar was an opener and played for a weak bowling side. Gavaskar scored 53% of his centuries abroad whereas Chappell scored only 33% abroad. Chappell was very good at home, not so abroad.

After Bradman, Gavaskar in his time was the greatest.
 
As I noted in an earlier thread, Gavaskar comprehensively outperformed his nearest two competitors, who were:

1) Richards: Gavaskar had a higher average, a higher rate of centuries per test, he was an opener and played for a weak bowling side

I would have taken Richards over Gavaskar every day of every week, for his sheer shock value and the speed he scored at. Imran said he had nightmares about bowling to him, but I bet he never had nightmares about Gavaskar.

Richards remains the best batter I ever saw.
 
I would have taken Richards over Gavaskar every day of every week, for his sheer shock value and the speed he scored at. Imran said he had nightmares about bowling to him, but I bet he never had nightmares about Gavaskar.

Richards remains the best batter I ever saw.

The scoreboard didn't tick along with :viv, it flew along and suddenly the Windies were running away with the match.
 
I would have taken Richards over Gavaskar every day of every week, for his sheer shock value and the speed he scored at. Imran said he had nightmares about bowling to him, but I bet he never had nightmares about Gavaskar.

Richards remains the best batter I ever saw.

The world doesn't revolve Imran.
 
@Sensible Indian Fan, or [MENTION=50394]IndianWillow[/MENTION] [MENTION=38544]Indianfan[/MENTION] [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION]

Next time this guy tries these sort of tactics do call him out..

You know you can try to push as much as your agenda with your lies spun through immaculately worded and long winding posts and try to some how make Gavaskar and Tendulkar look inferior batsmen it doesnt work.Many just take your posts on face value because they simply dont have the energy intent time and keeness to find the truth behind them.All it exposes is your bias and hatred for Indian cricketers.These lies may work on others but not on me.

Prefer MMHSs posts on current matters where he's usually making sense. I think pretty much everyone who claims to be an old spectator of the game is extremely unreliable and i mean no disrespect to you brother MMHS, this grudge i have against others as well. You guys all present a rather biased view point while discussing history of cricket.

Also find it rather hilarious how certain posters here happen to be the spokesmen of their nations just coz there aren't many posters here from their country.

Someone like Mamoon who is in his 20s i'd take more seriously when he posts about 70s cricket than our older brothers who claim to have seen it all and yet often present a hilariously biased picture, sometimes with some lies as well.

With emergence of youtube, and guys like Roblinda around these days you don't need to be too reliant on unreliable stories from old fellas. Stuff like hey in our times Jeffy the Thomson baby used to bowl at 180 kph and yo Keith Miller could fight a shark :)))
 
Gavaskar wasn't that good vs WI pace quarlet isn't a valid reason to discard him as no one really was.The post isn't about Gavaskar being the greatest of all time but its about who was better between him and Greg..

Just want to know some valid reasons for the one being better among the two..ODI format wasn't that significant back then but it should be considered.
 
Prefer MMHSs posts on current matters where he's usually making sense. I think pretty much everyone who claims to be an old spectator of the game is extremely unreliable and i mean no disrespect to you brother MMHS, this grudge i have against others as well. You guys all present a rather biased view point while discussing history of cricket.

Also find it rather hilarious how certain posters here happen to be the spokesmen of their nations just coz there aren't many posters here from their country.

Someone like Mamoon who is in his 20s i'd take more seriously when he posts about 70s cricket than our older brothers who claim to have seen it all and yet often present a hilariously biased picture, sometimes with some lies as well.

With emergence of youtube, and guys like Roblinda around these days you don't need to be too reliant on unreliable stories from old fellas. Stuff like hey in our times Jeffy the Thomson baby used to bowl at 180 kph and yo Keith Miller could fight a shark :)))

Thanks yaar - sometimes my posts on Kapil Panji, Kumble, Virat, Viru, Vishi, Bedi, Rahul, Azhar, Mankad, Tiger Pataudi, Babu, & of course MSD vi try karlo, I don't change my flag then.
 
I would have taken Richards over Gavaskar every day of every week, for his sheer shock value and the speed he scored at. Imran said he had nightmares about bowling to him, but I bet he never had nightmares about Gavaskar.

Richards remains the best batter I ever saw.

Numbers are objective, opinions are subjective.
 
Gavaskar wasn't that good vs WI pace quarlet isn't a valid reason to discard him as no one really was.The post isn't about Gavaskar being the greatest of all time but its about who was better between him and Greg..

Just want to know some valid reasons for the one being better among the two..ODI format wasn't that significant back then but it should be considered.

Gavasker was 3rd best Test batsman of 70s, just after Viv & Greg, while ahead of Lloyd & Boycott. But that doesn't take out any credit from him - Viv is Viv, while only few including Bradman, doesn't consider Greg as 2nd best ever Aussie batsman - one clue is, he his Vic Richardson's Grandson.

If you add ODI in the mix, Sunny 'll fall well behind a lot, led by Viv, Greg (Zed is better in ODI than Greg, but he is opposite of Gavasker when we mix it with Test), Llyod, Javed, AB & probably even both GG - he was a pathetic ODI player, & that's not only for that 36 (60) - it's a decent stat, only problem is that 60 is 6 balls overs.
 
Gavasker was 3rd best Test batsman of 70s, just after Viv & Greg, while ahead of Lloyd & Boycott. But that doesn't take out any credit from him - Viv is Viv, while only few including Bradman, doesn't consider Greg as 2nd best ever Aussie batsman - one clue is, he his Vic Richardson's Grandson.

If you add ODI in the mix, Sunny 'll fall well behind a lot, led by Viv, Greg (Zed is better in ODI than Greg, but he is opposite of Gavasker when we mix it with Test), Llyod, Javed, AB & probably even both GG - he was a pathetic ODI player, & that's not only for that 36 (60) - it's a decent stat, only problem is that 60 is 6 balls overs.

I respect your opinion. But i just want to know why you rate Greg better than Gavaskar..That's all.Viv was simply a notch ahead.No arguments there at all.
 
I would have taken Richards over Gavaskar every day of every week, for his sheer shock value and the speed he scored at. Imran said he had nightmares about bowling to him, but I bet he never had nightmares about Gavaskar.

Richards remains the best batter I ever saw.

Absolutely...No questions on that..
 
I think among batsmen post 70s it goes like this:

Viv>Sachin>Lara>Greg>Gavaskar>Ponting>Border>Miandad>Kallis>Dravid>Sangakkara..

Obviously posters can have their own choices and there is not much to differ between them unless you compare extreme ones.
 
Greg Chappell averaged 2 more than Gavaskar but played on lower scoring surfaces.

He proved in WSC that he was third behind Barry and Viv Richards against relentless top quality pace.

But he also was the best player of his and Gavaskar's generation against the two greatest spinners of the time - Lance Gibbs and Derek Underwood. Although Gavaskar's final Test innings was a masterclass of batting against mediocre spinners on a lethal turner.
 
I respect your opinion. But i just want to know why you rate Greg better than Gavaskar..That's all.Viv was simply a notch ahead.No arguments there at all.

Viv was the greatest of that era.But chappel was behind Gavaskar.

Chappell didnt play WI after 1973.

Never toured India and faced the spin quatret.

But but but he is better than Sunny,because Sunny is an Indian.
 
Greg Chappell averaged 2 more than Gavaskar but played on lower scoring surfaces.

He proved in WSC that he was third behind Barry and Viv Richards against relentless top quality pace.

But he also was the best player of his and Gavaskar's generation against the two greatest spinners of the time - Lance Gibbs and Derek Underwood. Although Gavaskar's final Test innings was a masterclass of batting against mediocre spinners on a lethal turner.

Chappell didnt played the WI pacers in WI as he never toured WI after 1973.Never played the spin quatret

And the best players of spin of that generation were Gavaskar and Zaheer Abbas not Chappell.

Gavaskar avgd 57 in the tests he faced Gibbs and his exploits againist Abdul Qadir are well known.
 
Viv was the greatest of that era.But chappel was behind Gavaskar.

Chappell didnt play WI after 1973.

Never toured India and faced the spin quatret.

But but but he is better than Sunny,because Sunny is an Indian.

Great posts mah bro joshila,I had fun reading the whole thread, MMHS as usual is biased and arrogant
 
Great posts mah bro joshila,I had fun reading the whole thread, MMHS as usual is biased and arrogant
Well he was always biased.But never thought he was arrogant till he said he will put me in my place.LOL.The guy has no idea how long my family is associated with cricket in India and how deeply they have worked so i know things about Indian cricket he doesnt even have a idea.

Bias is ok but arrogance.Well what can i say.
 
Prefer MMHSs posts on current matters where he's usually making sense. I think pretty much everyone who claims to be an old spectator of the game is extremely unreliable and i mean no disrespect to you brother MMHS, this grudge i have against others as well. You guys all present a rather biased view point while discussing history of cricket.

Also find it rather hilarious how certain posters here happen to be the spokesmen of their nations just coz there aren't many posters here from their country.

Someone like Mamoon who is in his 20s i'd take more seriously when he posts about 70s cricket than our older brothers who claim to have seen it all and yet often present a hilariously biased picture, sometimes with some lies as well.

With emergence of youtube, and guys like Roblinda around these days you don't need to be too reliant on unreliable stories from old fellas. Stuff like hey in our times Jeffy the Thomson baby used to bowl at 180 kph and yo Keith Miller could fight a shark :)))


Lol exactly, the bold part is literally what I heard a former cricketer say, now do you want us to take you seriously after saying something like that
 
Viv was the greatest of that era.But chappel was behind Gavaskar.

Chappell didnt play WI after 1973.

Never toured India and faced the spin quatret.

But but but he is better than Sunny,because Sunny is an Indian.

And I am yet to find any valid reason on how is Greg a better test batsmen than Gavaskar..Chappell avgd 2 more and all are simply illogical stuff.
 
Well he was always biased.But never thought he was arrogant till he said he will put me in my place.LOL.The guy has no idea how long my family is associated with cricket in India and how deeply they have worked so i know things about Indian cricket he doesnt even have a idea.

Bias is ok but arrogance.Well what can i say.

I have always seen a tinge of arrogance in all his posts, maybe all the adulation that he gets on this forum has gone to his head
 
And I am yet to find any valid reason on how is Greg a better test batsmen than Gavaskar..Chappell avgd 2 more and all are simply illogical stuff.
Gavaskar is worse because he is Indian.No other reason needed.

Read my post 45.How many lies of MMHS has been exposed.
 
And I am yet to find any valid reason on how is Greg a better test batsmen than Gavaskar..Chappell avgd 2 more and all are simply illogical stuff.

With batsman this close to each other in ability, minor statistical blemishes aren't going to make one better than the other. The only way to decide is by watching the batsman and see who you think is better. This discussion about averaging 2 points more is nonsense, but then again it is coming from the same guy who thinks Sangakkara and Kallis are better than Sachin just because of their averages.
 
I'll put Gavaskar slightly ahead of Chappell because he played much longer under more varied conditions with similar stats. Being a opener is another factor in his favor.
 
Viv was the greatest of that era.But chappel was behind Gavaskar.

Chappell didnt play WI after 1973.

Never toured India and faced the spin quatret.

But but but he is better than Sunny,because Sunny is an Indian.

Just a correction away from home..
 
I think this will be a bit closer call and really tough to pick any one but I would like some experienced posters to point out their strength or weaknesses and where do they stand when compared with the likes of modern greats like Sachin or Lara or Ponting..

Gavaskar was better.
Infact, gavaskar is one of the best batsmen ive ever seen. It was a delight to watch him play. Loved every minute of it.

On a side not, Gavasker is definitely the best batsman india ever produced. Way ahead of tendu and dravid.
 
I respect your opinion. But i just want to know why you rate Greg better than Gavaskar..That's all.Viv was simply a notch ahead.No arguments there at all.

One of the reason was, a batsman's best years are between 25 to 32. Due to Packer Series, Greg missed 3 of his best years, when AUS played about 25 Tests. At the same time (both are similar age), Gavasker was a bit lucky to play about 17 Tests (11 Against AUS, 6 Against WI), against their back up team & he made those really count - I think 11 centuries & over 2,000 runs at 70+. That 1978-79 WI tour had Marshall, but he was a 20 years debutante that time.

Greg didn't play in WI after 1973 because of WSC. In 1977, Packer reject AUS toured WI, while next time AUS toured WI was 1984, when Greg was retired. He had some unique issues with Allergy & with ACB, for which he didn't tour even 1981 Ashes either. Greg didn't tour IND because those days there were very few IND-AUS series, AUS toured IND in 1969, after that 1978 & 1986 - that 1978 Series was a depleted AUS side, with many of their 1st choice, including Greg opted out.

Another reason is, if you follow the scorecard, in late 70s to mid 80s, India's home Test strategy was to play 1st Test on turners & rest 4/5 Test on absolute belters, often ending most of the matches in boring high scoring draws. IND-WI '78, it was 1-0 (6 Test), IND-AUS 2-0 (6), IND-ENG 1-0 (6), IND-PAK 2-0 (6), IND-SRL 0-0 (1), IND-ENG 1-2 (5), IND-WI 0-3 (6), IND-PAK 0-0 (3), IND-PAK 0-1 (5), I might be missing few. While Greg's majority career was on result wickets. Besides, I think in late 70s, early 80s, playing WI in AUS was probably most challenging, for their pace attack & Aussie wickets.

Here the question was better batsman between 2 - including Test & ODI, which isn't even a contest. Even Gavasker himself considers Greg as more complete batsman than Viv, you can read his book - Idols.
 
Back
Top