Younis Khan vs Virender Sehwag - Who was the better Test batter?

[New Yorker]

Just that one? There is absolutely no good reason for someone to pick Clarke, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene and AB de Villiers over Younis Khan either.

Of course Kallis, Lara and Sachin are better than Khan but then again, they are also much better than Sehwag. Also, count me among those who will pick Smith, Cook and Hayden over Sehwag. Additionally, if "making an all-time XI" is the criteria then I'll just do what a lot of experts do and open with a great #3 batsman instead of wasting a spot on Sehwag.

Agreed, but some of those players are relatively stronger than YK in some countries, whereas with KP, well, in an irony of ironies, YK averages better than KP in South Africa. As for Kallis, at his peak he could have been played as an allrounder and probably still left a place for YK in a XI. Yet for his undoubted wall-like properties, he was not in fact more prolific than YK. The only batsman of YK's era who scored centuries at the same pace across his career was, if I am not mistaken, Matthew Hayden, but Hayden also did not play nearly as long as Younis. That must also be counted in YK's favor, that he maintained form over such a long period of time.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Well, in terms of body weight, undoubtedly, in every other objective measure, no, Inzi was a tremendous betrayal of natural talent. He could have been better than YK, he played pace better than him, but he did not have enough of whatever YK ate for breakfast every day. A lazy cricketer.

What measure? Inzy was a better player of spin and pace. Better suited to LOIs. Played in a far tougher era of 90s and far better bowlers.

If only total avg counted than YK avgs better than Sir Viv. But anyonr will tell you that YK was not even 20% of the batsman Viv was.

Whenever people will talk about Pak batting it will be about Miandad and Inzy. Rest will come way down the line.

 

[Buffet]

INzzy is really underrated in PP by some younger posters in the test format and over rated in the ODI format.

In the test format, he was very good batsman. Just to put it in context for folks who didn't see him bat,

Inzzy in 90s: 58 tests avg 43 and 8 tons

Inzzy in 00s: 62 tests avg 55 and 17 tons

Looking at his career average and then concluding anything is missing that he did average 55+ with 17 tons in 00s.

 

[Princejain191]

Imagine not only saying but actually believing that Younis is better than KP and AB in all aspects in test cricket. Only on PP guys. Never ceases to amaze us.

 

[Ab Fan]

INzzy is really underrated in PP by some younger posters in the test format and over rated in the ODI format.

In the test format, he was very good batsman. Just to put it in context for folks who didn't see him bat,

Inzzy in 90s: 58 tests avg 43 and 8 tons

Inzzy in 00s: 62 tests avg 55 and 17 tons

Looking at his career average and then concluding anything is missing that he did average 55+ with 17 tons in 00s.

Oh definitely he is not underrated. Afterall, we grew up all these years in PP watching posters compare Inzy to Sachin on the basis of match-winning abilities of them.

 

[Ab Fan]

INzzy is really underrated in PP by some younger posters in the test format and over rated in the ODI format.

In the test format, he was very good batsman. Just to put it in context for folks who didn't see him bat,

Inzzy in 90s: 58 tests avg 43 and 8 tons

Inzzy in 00s: 62 tests avg 55 and 17 tons

Looking at his career average and then concluding anything is missing that he did average 55+ with 17 tons in 00s.

His failures against Aus and SA home and away count against him big time.

 

[Ab Fan]

What measure? Inzy was a better player of <B>spin</B> and pace. Better suited to LOIs. Played in a far tougher era of 90s and far better bowlers.

If only total avg counted than YK avgs better than Sir Viv. But anyonr will tell you that YK was not even 20% of the batsman Viv was.

Whenever people will talk about Pak batting it will be about Miandad and Inzy. Rest will come way down the line.

No, he wasn't a better player of spin than Younis. Better against pace no doubt.

 

[Buffet]

His failures against Aus and SA home and away count against him big time.

Very few batsmen scored against that Aus and SA attack. Yes, he is not a top tier due to not able to do well against them but many players who debuted in 00s, scored runs after ATG bowlers retired and most of them don't have good record against bowlers like Steyn.


For example, many posters are singing praises for YK.


Well, YK has played 20 tests when McGrath/Warne/Pollock/Steyn played and guess what he averages in 30s as well. Inzzy record against Aus/SA was poor, but most of his career both bowling attacks had ATG bowlers.

 

[Hasan123]

Inzamam is a much better batsmen than Younis. Some Pakistan fans are hypnotized by seeing Younis in recent years.

 

[New Yorker]

Very few batsmen scored against that Aus and SA attack. Yes, he is not a top tier due to not able to do well against them but many players who debuted in 00s, scored runs after ATG bowlers retired and most of them don't have good record against bowlers like Steyn.


For example, many posters are singing praises for YK.


Well, YK has played 20 tests when McGrath/Warne/Pollock/Steyn played and guess what he averages in 30s as well. Inzzy record against Aus/SA was poor, but most of his career both bowling attacks had ATG bowlers.

YK averaged 50 in Australia and played coterminously with Inzi for much of his career. In fact, YK averages more than Inzi also in Eng and SAF, though Inzi was purportedly a better player of pace, and unlike Inzi has a century in SAF. In India, the rival par excellence, YK towers above Inzi, averaging 25 points more. The 2005 series was YK's series. Inzis max ICC rating was 870, YK's 880. But the most telling stat is centuries per Test, YK 34 in 118 Tests, Inzi only 25 in 120. It bears repeating: YK scored centuries more quickly than Lara and Sachin over his career, and can accordingly by the end of his career be favorably compared to them, on an important objective measure, even if he is not necessarily better than them. YK was not twice as good as Inzi or vica versa, this kind of talk is hyperbole, but he edges Inzi very consistently on most any objective measure. Which is why we have to resort to arguments like "anyone can tell you" and "everybody knows." It precisely means there is no evidence for what you are saying, but subjective opinion.

 

[New Yorker]

No, he wasn't a better player of spin than Younis. Better against pace no doubt.

But not quite with the record to show for that purportedly vast gap.

 

[Buffet]

YK averaged 50 in Australia and played coterminously with Inzi for much of his career. In fact, YK averages more than Inzi also in Eng and SAF, though Inzi was purportedly a better player of pace, and unlike Inzi has a century in SAF. In India, the rival par excellence, YK towers above Inzi, averaging 25 points more. The 2005 series was YK's series. Inzis max ICC rating was 870, YK's 880. But the most telling stat is centuries per Test, YK 34 in 118 Tests, Inzi only 25 in 120. It bears repeating: YK scored centuries more quickly than Lara and Sachin over his career, and can accordingly by the end of his career be favorably compared to them, on an important objective measure, even if he is not necessarily better than them. YK was not twice as good as Inzi or vica versa, this kind of talk is hyperbole, but he edges Inzi very consistently on most any objective measure. Which is why we have to resort to arguments like "anyone can tell you" and "everybody knows." It precisely means there is no evidence for what you are saying, but subjective opinion.

How is your reply is even remotely relevant to what I said. Inzzy faced SA/Aus with ATG bowlers. If anyone is going to cite that then it's make sense to take a look at YK against McGrath/Warne/Pollock/Steyn.

Instead of replying to factual point you are talking about totally different thing. You can surely rate YK or that matter any batsman over Inzzy in the test format. I don't have anything to say for that. I only raised the point to see Inzzy record in context and not simply look at average or any other metric.


You are not making much sense by quoting peak rating of 870 vs 880 to draw a conclusion. That's as irrelevant as it can get.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Inzamam is a much better batsmen than Younis. Some Pakistan fans are hypnotized by seeing Younis in recent years.

True. He scored runs on the pattas we see across the world. His 175 came on a track where 4 Aussies got centuries. In the capetown Test Asad Shafiq got a 100 as well. Just because he scored more in certain country doesn't mean he is good in all the conditions. He is a real feisty player with great determination. But talentwise he is nowhere close to Inzi or Sehwag.

 

[Princejain191]

Imagine not only saying but actually believing that Younis is better than KP and AB in all aspects in test cricket. Only on PP guys. Never ceases to amaze us.

Yeah, imagine that. These guys are definitely not watching the same sport as I am.

 

[Hasan123]

True. He scored runs on the pattas we see across the world. His 175 came on a track where 4 Aussies got centuries. In the capetown Test Asad Shafiq got a 100 as well. Just because he scored more in certain country doesn't mean he is good in all the conditions. He is a real feisty player with great determination. But talentwise he is nowhere close to Inzi or Sehwag.

Inzamam looked much more comfortable versus pace than Younis did. Also I think he topped the icc batting ranking something which Younis hasn't done. Also had to face top bowlers.

I would Miandad and Inzi over Younis in tests.

 

[Princejain191]

Yeah, imagine that. These guys are definitely not watching the same sport as I am.

More like repeating myself

 

[Princejain191]

Inzamam looked much more comfortable versus pace than Younis did. Also I think he topped the icc batting ranking something which Younis hasn't done. Also had to face top bowlers.

I would Miandad and Inzi over Younis in tests.

Exactly, looked very average for a 50+ average batsman against good pace. But peeps here are too patriotic and ignorant to real cricket. Apparently Younis was probably a better player of pace than AB according to the Amla-Is-Better-Than-Virat-In-ODIs guy since AB is inferior to master Younis in tests in every single thing.

 

[New Yorker]

Exactly, looked very average for a 50+ average batsman against good pace. But peeps here are too patriotic and ignorant to real cricket. Apparently Younis was probably a better player of pace than AB according to the Amla-Is-Better-Than-Virat-In-ODIs guy since AB is inferior to master Younis in tests in every single thing.

You can't claim to be in tune with reality, that of cricket or otherwise and not know that Younis did reach no 1 in the ICC rankings. And at his best, had a higher all-time point ICC rating than Inzi.

Not apparent who, besides yourselves, has claimed Younis was better than ABDV in all respects. Younis was clearly better than ABDV, as well as Sachin and Lara, in the regularity with which he scored centuries.

ABDV is a fabulous batsman, and better than Younis in some respects, but he has been a bit inconsistent, failed to score as heavily as Younis did in his pomp, and not delivered series-breaking perfomances with the same frequency as did Younis. Strangely, neither did Inzi.

Now, what any of this has to do with Sehwag I don't know. Perhaps we might say that there are certain kinds of players who will always be irresistibly tempting selections because of what they can do, their potential, or talent, or what-not.

But when we look at back their careers one discovers that they did rather less than expected. That somewhere along the way their Hare were overtaken by a less fancied Tortoise. On the sublime end of this spectrum we might place players like Sehwag and ABDV, on the pathetic and ridiculous, Afridi and Wahab and Umar Akmal.

 

[New Yorker]

Inzamam looked much more comfortable versus pace than Younis did. Also I think he topped the icc batting ranking something which Younis hasn't done. Also had to face top bowlers.

I would Miandad and Inzi over Younis in tests.

Yes, appearances are what matter, not results.

 

[New Yorker]

Exactly, looked very average for a 50+ average batsman against good pace. But peeps here are too patriotic and ignorant to real cricket. Apparently Younis was probably a better player of pace than AB according to the Amla-Is-Better-Than-Virat-In-ODIs guy since AB is inferior to master Younis in tests in every single thing.

You can't claim to be in tune with reality, that of cricket or otherwise and not know that Younis did reach no 1 in the ICC rankings. And at his best, had a higher all-time point ICC rating than Inzi.

Not apparent who, besides yourselves, has claimed Younis was better than ABDV in all respects. Younis was clearly better than ABDV, as well as Sachin and Lara, in the regularity with which he scored centuries.

ABDV is a fabulous batsman, and better than Younis in some respects, but he has been a bit inconsistent, failed to score as heavily as Younis did in his pomp, and not delivered series-breaking perfomances with the same frequency as did Younis. Strangely, neither did Inzi.

Now, what any of this has to do with Sehwag I don't know. Perhaps we might say that there are certain kinds of players who will always be irresistibly tempting selections because of what they can do, their potential, or talent, or what-not.

But then you look at back their careers one discovers that they did rather less than expected. That somewhere along the way their Hare were overtaken by a less fancied Tortoise. On the sublime end of this spectrum we might place players like Sehwag and ABDV, on the pathetic and ridiculous, Afridi and Wahab.

 

[AMSS]

During this ongoing SA-Aus match, Shaun Pollock and Mark Nicholas got talking about Viru when de Villiers was teeing off with Maharaj. Shaun Pollock and Nicholas both agreed that Viru would be in their ATG XIs not just for his skills and achievement but also the entertainment and fear factor he brings to the table. Pollock especially seemed like he thought highly of Viru.

KP is another current cricketer who has talked about having Viru in his ATG XI. I wonder if these cricketers would ever have such words for Younis.

 

[jnaveen1980]

During this ongoing SA-Aus match, Shaun Pollock and Mark Nicholas got talking about Viru when de Villiers was teeing off with Maharaj. Shaun Pollock and Nicholas both agreed that Viru would be in their ATG XIs not just for his skills and achievement but also the entertainment and fear factor he brings to the table. Pollock especially seemed like he thought highly of Viru.

KP is another current cricketer who has talked about having Viru in his ATG XI. I wonder if these cricketers would ever have such words for Younis.

Younis is not exactly a technically masterful batsman. He had limitations. But he worked very well within those limitations. One thing that i will hand to Younis is, he is a mentally, physically a tough guy. I remember him doing push ups in high temperature during a successful chase of 300 plus runs against India after he got to 100 just to show he was still fit and raring to go.

 

[AMSS]

Younis is not exactly a technically masterful batsman. He had limitations. But he worked very well within those limitations. One thing that i will hand to Younis is, he is a mentally, physically a tough guy. I remember him doing push ups in high temperature during a successful chase of 300 plus runs against India after he got to 100 just to show he was still fit and raring to go.

My larger point was that Sehwag was a pioneering sort of cricketer who is still talked about in borderline reverential terms everywhere. Like today by the likes of Pollock and Border in a match being played between SA and Aus. With all due respect to what he achieved as a cricketer, Younis as a player simply didn't have that impact on the game.

 

[Hasan123]

Yes, appearances are what matter, not results.

Inzamam scored plenty of runs as well.

 

[AMSS]

Younis is not exactly a technically masterful batsman. He had limitations. But he worked very well within those limitations. One thing that i will hand to Younis is, he is a mentally, physically a tough guy. I remember him doing push ups in high temperature during a successful chase of 300 plus runs against India after he got to 100 just to show he was still fit and raring to go.

My larger point was that Sehwag was a pioneering sort of cricketer who is still talked about in borderline reverential terms everywhere. Like today by the likes of Pollock and Border in a match being played between SA and Aus. With all due respect to what he achieved as a cricketer, Younis as a player simply didn't have that impact on the game.

 

[New Yorker]

My larger point was that Sehwag was a pioneering sort of cricketer who is still talked about in borderline reverential terms everywhere. Like today by the likes of Pollock and Border in a match being played between SA and Aus. With all due respect to what he achieved as a cricketer, Younis as a player simply didn't have that impact on the game.

Impact on the game is not the same as impact in games. Younis was there when it counted more often than Sehwag. Yhere may well be middle order bats who would be preferred to Younis for a number of reasons. But we don't have to engage in hypotheticals. We know the historical record, and looking at it we can see that Sehwag was not, by several objective measures, over the course of his career a better batsman than Younis. More special, sure, but that is another argument.

 

[New Yorker]

Inzamam scored plenty of runs as well.

Right, but not nearly as many as regularly as YK.

 

[AMSS]

Impact on the game is not the same as impact in games. Younis was there when it counted more often than Sehwag. Yhere may well be middle order bats who would be preferred to Younis for a number of reasons. But we don't have to engage in hypotheticals. We know the historical record, and looking at it we can see that Sehwag was not, by several objective measures, over the course of his career a better batsman than Younis. More special, sure, but that is another argument.

You seem to have convinced yourself that you can somehow 'objectively' declare Younis to be the better batsman using a set of hysterically random criteria. Won't wash. In fact, doesn't wash with the great bowlers of our times including Pollock. But by all means keep banging on.

 

[Protea Fan]

During this ongoing SA-Aus match, Shaun Pollock and Mark Nicholas got talking about Viru when de Villiers was teeing off with Maharaj. Shaun Pollock and Nicholas both agreed that Viru would be in their ATG XIs not just for his skills and achievement but also the entertainment and fear factor he brings to the table. Pollock especially seemed like he thought highly of Viru.

KP is another current cricketer who has talked about having Viru in his ATG XI. I wonder if these cricketers would ever have such words for Younis.

Pollock is a long admirer of sehwag,i remember one instance like this

When someone in the commentary box asked pollock who is the toughest indian batsman to ball from sachin,dravd and laxman

Pollock replied without any hesitation that none from the list its Sehwag

Let alone these professional players but even in normal cricket environment sehwag will be remembered more just for his unique style like viv

 

[Princejain191]

You can't claim to be in tune with reality, that of cricket or otherwise and not know that Younis did reach no 1 in the ICC rankings. And at his best, had a higher all-time point ICC rating than Inzi.

Not apparent who, besides yourselves, has claimed Younis was better than ABDV in all respects. Younis was clearly better than ABDV, as well as Sachin and Lara, in the regularity with which he scored centuries.

ABDV is a fabulous batsman, and better than Younis in some respects, but he has been a bit inconsistent, failed to score as heavily as Younis did in his pomp, and not delivered series-breaking perfomances with the same frequency as did Younis. Strangely, neither did Inzi.

Now, what any of this has to do with Sehwag I don't know. Perhaps we might say that there are certain kinds of players who will always be irresistibly tempting selections because of what they can do, their potential, or talent, or what-not.

But then you look at back their careers one discovers that they did rather less than expected. That somewhere along the way their Hare were overtaken by a less fancied Tortoise. On the sublime end of this spectrum we might place players like Sehwag and ABDV, on the pathetic and ridiculous, Afridi and Wahab.

I am not even sure now how THIS is a reply to what I wrote. I couldn't care less about the rankings or how Inzi compares to Younis. I wouldn't want to compare AB with Younis too. AB is too complete a batsman to be compared to many in this generation apart from very few - and Younis doesn't belong to that list, irrespective of how much he averages and where. I would pick Sehwag in my all-time XI and toss a coin between the two in an average batting order. That is MY opinion. You have different opinion and that is fine. Have a good day.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Pollock is a long admirer of sehwag,i remember one instance like this

When someone in the commentary box asked pollock who is the toughest indian batsman to ball from sachin,dravd and laxman

Pollock replied without any hesitation that none from the list its Sehwag

Let alone these professional players but even in normal cricket environment sehwag will be remembered more just for his unique style like viv

So Sehwag ranks less than Laxman?Doesn't count in his favour tbh

 

[The_Odd_One]

Very few batsmen scored against that Aus and SA attack. Yes, he is not a top tier due to not able to do well against them but many players who debuted in 00s, scored runs after ATG bowlers retired and most of them don't have good record against bowlers like Steyn.


For example, many posters are singing praises for YK.


Well, YK has played 20 tests when McGrath/Warne/Pollock/Steyn played and guess what he averages in 30s as well. Inzzy record against Aus/SA was poor, but most of his career both bowling attacks had ATG bowlers.

A 35+ years old YK has a 175* against Starc, Hazlewood, Lyon, a double hundred against Anderson and Broad, a hundred against Steyn, Philander, and Morkel.

How many 100s did Inzy score against top pacers of his time? Zero?

Inzy was a far superior batsman in ODIs but in tests, Younis had a much better career with his limited skills.

 

[The_Odd_One]

True. He scored runs on the pattas we see across the world. His 175 came on a track where 4 Aussies got centuries. In the capetown Test Asad Shafiq got a 100 as well. Just because he scored more in certain country doesn't mean he is good in all the conditions. He is a real feisty player with great determination. But talentwise he is nowhere close to Inzi or Sehwag.

What a strange argument. Aussie batsmen scored 4 centuries in Adelaide. It does not mean that Kohli did play not high class innings in that match.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Kp is better than younis....chanderpaul sangakara alister cook shewag hayden greame smith all are better than younis...Younis khan is only good for UAE hundreads...

Out of his 34 100s, only 11 came in the UAE.

 

[Buffet]

A 35+ years old YK has a 175* against Starc, Hazlewood, Lyon, a double hundred against Anderson and Broad, a hundred against Steyn, Philander, and Morkel.

How many 100s did Inzy score against top pacers of his time? Zero?

Inzy was a far superior batsman in ODIs but in tests, Younis had a much better career with his limited skills.

Group of these bowlers are not even close to McGrath, Steyn, Pollock, Donald taken together. I had posted stats of YK against Aus/SA when some of those ATG bowlers played and YK averaged in 30s as well.

Inzzy was inferior in ODI to be honest and only reason he gets rated higher in ODI than the test format in PP is due to his 1-2 knocks in WC when Pakistan won.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Group of these bowlers are not even close to McGrath, Steyn, Pollock, Donald taken together. I had posted stats of YK against Aus/SA when some of those ATG bowlers played and YK averaged in 30s as well.

Inzzy was inferior in ODI to be honest and only reason he gets rated higher in ODI than the test format in PP is due to his 1-2 knocks in WC when Pakistan won.

Broad and Anderson is the most successful bowling pair in the last decade. Steyn, Philander, and Morkel is an ATG bowling attack in SA. Starc and Hazlewood is the best bowling pair across all formats in world cricket today.

Yes, overall these attacks were comparable to what Inzy faced in the 90s. Note that, I only included YK's innings in alien conditions.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Inzy at home against SA and Australia - 0 100s and average of 32.70 in 11 tests.

There is no excuse for such a horrible home record.

 

[Buffet]

Broad and Anderson is the most successful bowling pair in the last decade. Steyn, Philander, and Morkel is an ATG bowling attack in SA. Starc and Hazlewood is the best bowling pair across all formats in world cricket today.

Yes, overall these attacks were comparable to what Inzy faced in the 90s. Note that, I only included YK's innings in alien conditions.

Well, YK has played large number of matches against McGrath, Pollock, Steyn etc. Same bowlers bowled against Inzzy when he played. You can do a direct comparison rather than using an indirect one. Simply said, you can find many ATG bowlers in 90s and that's why INzzy averaged lower in 90s. YK also averaged lower when facing the same ATG bowlers of Aus/SA. There is some difference between ATG bowlers and simply good bowlers.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Well, YK has played large number of matches against McGrath, Pollock, Steyn etc. Same bowlers bowled against Inzzy when he played. You can do a direct comparison rather than using an indirect one. Simply said, you can find many ATG bowlers in 90s and that's why INzzy averaged lower in 90s. YK also averaged lower when facing the same ATG bowlers of Aus/SA. There is some difference between ATG bowlers and simply good bowlers.

Your comparison is invalid because you are comparing Inzy who debuted in 1992 and was a established batsman with Younis who debuted in 2000 and was a rookie batsman when he faced those ATG bowlers. It is like comparing Ponting of the 2000s with Waugh of the 90s.

All games considered (home and away) against Australia and SA.
Inzy = 1 hundred in 50 innings
Younis = 8 hundreds in 50 innings

 

[Buffet]

Your comparison is invalid because you are comparing Inzy who debuted in 1992 and was a established batsman with Younis who debuted in 2000 and was a rookie batsman when he faced those ATG bowlers. It is like comparing Ponting of the 2000s with Waugh of the 90s.

All games considered (home and away) against Australia and SA.
Inzy = 1 hundred in 50 innings
Younis = 8 hundreds in 50 innings

Point is valid one, but you are not taking account of fact that Inzzy had to face ATG bowlers more often.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Gow did this thread become Inzy vs YK? Its YK vs Sehwag and YK wins imo

 

[Savage]

They both were brilliant Test batsmen.

 

[New Yorker]

You seem to have convinced yourself that you can somehow 'objectively' declare Younis to be the better batsman using a set of hysterically random criteria. Won't wash. In fact, doesn't wash with the great bowlers of our times including Pollock. But by all means keep banging on.

what is "hysterically random" about performance records like batting average, number of career centuries, centuries scored per test? they are the most common benchmarks used. and they are objective, in so far as they are simply statements of fact. if you would like to suggest other objectively verifiable criteria, which are more important than these, please do, and we can talk about it. pollock may have his opinion, and you may value it very much, but in so far as it the opinion of one person, it is by definition not objective, but subjective. my argument is entirely transparent and grounded in evidence. the hysteria, i dare say, is yours.

 

[New Yorker]

Point is valid one, but you are not taking account of fact that Inzzy had to face ATG bowlers more often.

i'm not at all convinced. have we broken this down on a match per match basis. what form were these atg bowlers in, at the end of the careers? instead of indulging in this kind of empty speculation we could look at the records of many matches in which inzi and yk played alongside each other and see that yk often outperformed inzi against the same bowler, atg or not. i saw inzi bat often and always admired his languid grace, the time he seemed to have to play pace, but i don't remember him standing as tall as yk did, as often. the more i look at his record, the more skeptical i get of his greatness. with yk it is the other way around. he looked ungainly very often, in england one could be genuinely embarassed for him, but he got the job done far more often than inzi.

 

[Ab Fan]

Hard for me to choose so let's give another shot.

Who is a better batsman?

 

[jnaveen1980]

There is only one virus in history of cricket. Among openers Krish srikkanth is the close second. Occasionally Jayasuriya ,Greenidge, Haydos. Always aggressive is the motto for Viru.

 

[Josh]

You shouldn't have to chose between an opener and a middle order bat

 

[sweep_shot]

Younis Khan easily.

Sehwag was vulnerable against swinging deliveries.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Younis Khan is the better batsman but Sehwag has a big impact on the game too. He was a wonderful player

 

[sweep_shot]

Younis Khan is the better batsman but Sehwag has a big impact on the game too. He was a wonderful player

Sehwag was a home track bully pretty much. Feasted on flat pitches.

Younis Khan scored a magnificent 200+ in England. That was legendary.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Sehwag was a home track bully pretty much. Feasted on flat pitches.

Younis Khan scored a magnificent 200+ in England. That was legendary.

Yeah overall Younis was much better.

But the way Sehwag played when conditions suited him was unique for test match at the time. I respect his bravery.

 

[ChennaiFan]

I would choose Virender Sehwag over Younis Khan in my Test XI for any Test on any ground. Sehwag is a match winner and Younis is a match saver.

 

[Buffet]

Sehwag was a home track bully pretty much.

He was the biggest Asian track bully. No one comes close.

Sehwag in Pak: Avg 91 & SR 80
Sehwag in SL : Avg 72 & SR 100
Sehwag in Ind: Avg 54 & SR 83

Many best bastmen from Asia don't have that kind of record even in ODI. Comfortably the best test batsman in world if games are in Asia.

Outside of Asia:

Sehwag in Aus - Avg 41 & SR 74
Sehwag in WI - Avg 51 & SR 84

He struggled in SA, NZ and Eng and averaged in 20s. Huge flaw in his game , a flawed genius.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

not even a comparison... Younis is way ahead in terms of consistency and reliability... who has a proper technique to play as a Test batter whereas Sehwag is more like a fluke to play Test cricket.. "Chal gya to chand tak... nahi chala to shaam tak"

 

[sweep_shot]

not even a comparison... Younis is way ahead in terms of consistency and reliability... who has a proper technique to play as a Test batter whereas Sehwag is more like a fluke to play Test cricket.. "Chal gya to chand tak... nahi chala to shaam tak"

Agree.

Sehwag had a footwork like Chris Martin. Sehwag primarily relied on hand eye coordination.

Younis Khan had a far superior technique. It is why he did better in SENA (including a great double century in England).

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Sehwag averages 49 in test cricket, consistency was hardly an issue for him.

I rate Khan a bit higher coz he was a better all format batsman but to say Sehwag was a flat track bully is totally unjust.

Sehwag had a great record in Aus and Wi, struggled in Sa,nz and eng.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Sehwag was a home track bully pretty much. Feasted on flat pitches.

Younis Khan scored a magnificent 200+ in England.

Sehwag was a bully in Asian conditions but how was he a flat track bully?

He was literally the best batsman against spin and his 200 at galle against Murali and Mendis on a spinning track is one for the ages.

He struggled against lateral movement but was legendary on spinning tracks and great on bouncy track, thats hardly a flat travk bully.

 

[charlie007]

Younis's weakness was not Sehwag's strength either. Can you recall any of Sehwag's inning against high quality swing and seam bowling?

His debut century versus South Africa in South Africa, his 195 at MCG on opening day when the team got bundled for 325 come to mind right away.

If I have a chance to win a Test, I would choose Sehwag and if I have to grind out a day to draw a Test I’d pick Younus Khan. Sehwag was among the biggest match winners and could turn a game on its head in the first session. Batting at an unheard of strike rate scoring 2 triple hundreds and many double hundreds is outrageous. And game changing!

 

[Local.Dada]

Younis was a good batsman. Sehwag was one of those cricketers who changed the way test cricket is played. That’s the difference. Stats don’t really matter here.

 

[Hikaru]

Sehwag any day. For all his technique talks, he still has far more quality knocks in testing conditions than YK.

 

[Ab Fan]

In Asian conditions, Sehwag is probably the best ever. Younis is also a top performer.

In Australia and Windies, Sehwag was good while Younis was average.

In England, New Zealand and South Africa, Sehwag was bad while Younis struggled but managed to produce pivotal/match winning knocks every now and then.

I think from a consistency point of view, Younis wins and is clearly a more all conditions batsman than Sehwag. Unfortunately, Younis never faced Ashwin/Jadeja duo in India. I think it would have been harder scoring against them in 2016-17 than what he did vs Kumble in 2005-07.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I would choose Virender Sehwag over Younis Khan in my Test XI for any Test on any ground. Sehwag is a match winner and Younis is a match saver.

You can find many batsman in similar mould of Younis. But you can never find Sa Sehwag. He is one of a kind. Destroyed Murali and Herath in 2.5 sessions at the same time scoring 287 runs in that time. India thrashed SL despite them scoring fast enough. He wiped off the deficit in no time. Same way he did that to Steyn, Ntini at Chennai after SA posted a mammoth total. Scored 319 in no time thrashing them all over. This guys is a freak. Another one is 387 chase against Engalnd. England was confident of winning on day 5 pitch assuming India would not score much on the day 4 evening. Sehwag unleashed array of strokes on day 4 and put India well in front winning the man of the match. Then that Galle Test where even seasoned players had issues against spinners he made 201.

One of the reason Sehwag cannot be compared is he is an opener where he faces new ball. He plays high risk game. In South Africa they decided to set up ODI field set for Sehwag like Deep third man et al.

Virender Sehwag was a nightmare: Dale Steyn​

 

[jnaveen1980]

In Asian conditions, Sehwag is probably the best ever. Younis is also a top performer.

In Australia and Windies, Sehwag was good while Younis was average.

In England, New Zealand and South Africa, Sehwag was bad while Younis struggled but managed to produce match winning knocks every now and then.

I think from a consistency point of view, Younis wins and is clearly a more all conditions batsman than Sehwag. Unfortunately, Younis never faced Ashwin/Jadeja duo in India. I think it would have been harder scoring against them in 2016-17 than what he did vs Kumble in 2005-07.

If you bat like Sehwag's mindset It is hard to average even 30. This guy is averaging 49. That 195 at MCG. He could have scored 400 if he wanted. He kept taking risks and gifted his wicket to Katich.

 

[Ab Fan]

If you bat like Sehwag's mindset It is hard to average even 30. This guy is averaging 49. That 195 at MCG. He could have scored 400 if he wanted. He kept taking risks and gifted his wicket to Katich.

The problem with Sehwag is his average of 20s in SEN conditions. Even average of 33,35,36 etc would have been acceptable but when you average 27,20,27 in three countries, it is really poor. He needed to dig in and do better than this. Hayden, for example, was dominant in Asia and Australia but in SEN also, he averaged in 30s.

 

[jnaveen1980]

The problem with Sehwag is his average of 20s in SEN conditions. Even average of 33,35,36 etc would have been acceptable but when you average 27,20,27 in three countries, it is really poor. He needed to dig in and do better than this. Hayden, for example, was dominant in Asia and Australia but in SEN also, he averaged in 30s.

He had the license to go after bowling. So in those conditions it will be hit or miss. Back then South Africa and Australia were the only 2 challenging places. England was a poor team. So him not scoring had nothing to do with conditions. Same way NZ always offered roads. Him failing there is nothing to do with condtions. He just threw his wicket away to Vettori. He was allowed to play that way. Scoring in NZ was never a big deal. SA was a challenging place. Also during one of the tour he was in his worst form so much so that INdia was using DK and Jaffer as openers.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Younis Khan should be given credit here. Sehwag is a good batter but he ha his limitations in different conditions.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

BTW

Younis Khan has a total of 4 centuries in SENA which is similar to Sehwags tally of 4 centuries.

 

[jnaveen1980]

BTW

Younis Khan has a total of 4 centuries in SENA which is similar to Sehwags tally of 4 centuries.

Younis khan is the one who had limitations. He punched above his skill set. Sehwag was an out and out natural talent. From same standing position he can play through different areas with wrist adjustment. To bat like Sehwag you have to be born Sehwag. Most Indian fans would agree not even Sachin/Dravid can do what Sehwag is capable of. He is just a pure genius.

 

[Hikaru]

Sehwag was a batting equivalent of legendary Waqar Younis. Both were ordinary in certain conditions, but what they excelled in propelled them far ahead of ordinary hard-working greats like YK and Chaminda Vaas.

 

[Theanonymousone]

Sehwag & Younis Khan are good for comparison as YK mostly found himself coming on to the pitch in the first few overs of the innings. They are completely different players and are pure impact in their own regard. Sehwag for his hitting prowess and YK for his 2nd innings brilliance!

If you look at the players in a vaccum, surely Sehwag is better for his destructiveness, but that really wouldn't do justice to the player YK was. Cricket is a team game and while Sehwag had the freedom to play his game with arguably stalwarts waiting behind him (Dravid, then Sachin, then Ganguly, and even Laxman), YK often had just one or two whom he had to bat with. YK has come big huge for Pakistan in rearguard efforts, come-from-behind series winning/leveling performances and was at least half the reason for stability in an otherwise subpar batting line-up. What stands out to me for YK is that he rarely failed across an entire series.

Overall Sehwag is a very close second for me, and I can see myself going either way depending mainly on the composition of the rest of the team. If my team is packed with superstars, I'd rather have Sehwag opening for me. If my team otherwise is not a star-studded lineup, surely I will go with YK!

Agree with this post!

 

[Theanonymousone]

My personal preference would be Sehwag if I have to chose 1 in my team.

Batsmen like YK are dime a dozen in India, a luxury that pakistan doesn't have.

For all the talk about technique, Sehwag is not a text book cricket player. He is unorthodox in his approach and yet he was one of the most successful aggressive opener in Test cricket.

People talking about swinging conditions, Sehwag is more exposed to it than YK, as the prior being an opener. Yet, YK doesnt have much significant record.

While I agree, I will bet on YK for saving a test match due to his style of play, the way test cricket is played has changed. Not its not about “not losing a match” which is why we used to have more draws in previous era. Its all about winning the test match, and Sehwag leads the way, even more so than the great Sachin tendulkar.

 

[ChennaiFan]

You can find many batsman in similar mould of Younis. But you can never find Sa Sehwag. He is one of a kind. Destroyed Murali and Herath in 2.5 sessions at the same time scoring 287 runs in that time. India thrashed SL despite them scoring fast enough. He wiped off the deficit in no time. Same way he did that to Steyn, Ntini at Chennai after SA posted a mammoth total. Scored 319 in no time thrashing them all over. This guys is a freak. Another one is 387 chase against Engalnd. England was confident of winning on day 5 pitch assuming India would not score much on the day 4 evening. Sehwag unleashed array of strokes on day 4 and put India well in front winning the man of the match. Then that Galle Test where even seasoned players had issues against spinners he made 201.

One of the reason Sehwag cannot be compared is he is an opener where he faces new ball. He plays high risk game. In South Africa they decided to set up ODI field set for Sehwag like Deep third man et al.

Virender Sehwag was a nightmare: Dale Steyn​

I agree. He was the forerunner of the bazball. Let us call it Wagball. The innings you mentioned are legendary. I also remember the MCG game where he scored 195, still India lost the match.

 

[ads101]

Sehwag. If we’re comparing Indian batsmen to Pakistani batsmen in tests ranked it’d probably go: Tendulkar, Dravid, Sehwag, YK, Yousuf, Kohli, Laxman, Inzi.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

BTW

Younis Khan has a total of 4 centuries in SENA which is similar to Sehwags tally of 4 centuries.

but overall YK has over 30 centuries which shows how great he was in Test format.

 

[FearlessRoar]

This comparison doesn't make sense, as both players have different styles. But yes, Younis Khan is far superior to him in terms of technique.

 

[Ab Fan]

Sehwag's 195 in Australia was a special knock because the Melbourne pitch had a lot more spice in it than Adelaide and Sydney one even though there was nothing much to write about that bowling attack.

However, that's the only knock he had worth mentioning outside Asia.

Younis has a 218 at Oval which was a series decider, 173 at Headingley in 2006 and a match winning 149 in Auckland. His exploits outside Asia were more match winning than Sehwag.

 

[AMSS]

Sehwag's 195 in Australia was a special knock because the Melbourne pitch had a lot more spice in it than Adelaide and Sydney one even though there was nothing much to write about that bowling attack.

Also scored a match saving 150 in adelaide in that bad tempered 2008 series.

The whole Indian line-up collapsed in 4th inning and if not for Sehwag, India was going to lose that test. A very special knock and maybe better than his Melbourne 195.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Also scored a match saving 150 in adelaide in that bad tempered 2008 series.

The whole Indian line-up collapsed in 4th inning and if not for Sehwag, India was going to lose that test. A very special knock and maybe better than his Melbourne 195.

Virendar Sehwag started his career in SA batting at 7. Made a debut 110 when he joined Tendulkar at 54 for 5 or something. THey both scored 100s. We have to remember Viru was not an opener by trade. He was a converted opener. He somehow owned that spot for a significant period finished with great numbers.