And what did he say next and what did you say next?
you shud have slapped him, and should have told him to start watching baseball.
jokes apart,
I do agree to a fact that west indies batsmen of that era were not tested as much as other grt batsman. reoson being every team used to prepare flat tracks since they were scared of the great west indies bowlers. and still west indies bowlers used to rip apart these batting line ups.
Comment deleted by Article Creator
Comment deleted by Article Creator
Even if Richards didn't have to face the WIndies quicks he still faced more top-class bowlers than are around today. Lillee, Thomson, Hadlee, Imran, Willis, Botham, Kapil, Qadir, Underwood, Bedi. Plus he didn't bat on the sort of roads we've seen recently, didn't benefit from new bat technology or shorter boundaries and he never wore a helmet.
Viv was better than any current batsman IMO.
Comment deleted by Article Creator
Funny. I am 46 and know all about Viv Richards, who was an explosive and stunning batsman. There have been many of them before him though, and many since. The GOAT debate is undoubtedly, and unfortunately the most childish subject on ja606.
Now that I have said that, maybe I should have just ignored the thread then?
Comment deleted by Article Creator
Whilst Gilchrist can be a very explosive and exciting batsman at times there must be dozens and dozens of others in both test and one-day cricket who leave him way behind. Your friend should check out some stats first so he doesn't make daft statements like that.
If Viv Richards faced the quality of bowling and the fielding restrictions of the IPL, he would have outperformed all of the present day big hitters, including Gayle.
Damn, Seppi saves a couple of break points and holds 2:1. He is not going to give this to the GOAT is he?
hopeforthebest
I trust you're being sarcastic?
Hoggy, you don't think the bowling in the IPL is pants? I have to agree with hopefor here.
Ooops
Misread what hopefor wrote.
Apologies. I certainly agree that Viv would have marmalised IPL bowling
the best closer of a one day game was michael bevan.
the only reason for Gilchrist or Bevan for that matter to be placed above Richards is alphabetical order.
Viv Richards was an absolute joy to watch when he was batting for you, against you is a different story, but I still went and watched him whenever the West Indies rocked up, only a fool wouldn't.
The word genius is thrown around all too easily these days, in Viv's case it is not used often enough.
Those of you who haven't seen him, this is the 21st century, take a look at him wielding his bat like an extension of his own arm and enjoy the spectacle, we may never see his like again
i did see him. im still correct though(i believe) to say that bevan is the most accomplished closer in the history of the one day game.
viv was about his eye, power and timing, bevan was about placement and running between the wickets.
im not suggesting that bevan was more talented than viv - of course he wasnt, but it's difference horses for different courses.
in terms of a comparison between gilchrist and richards, in my opinion it needs to be considered that gilchrist's fitness level was generally much higer than viv's and that he is vastly more experienced in both the one day game and in modern day cricket.
I'm not in the habit of discussing how "fit" men are, but as you correctly say, this is horses for courses, Gilchrist had to be a very fit cricketer, he spent most of the time nurdling ones and twos. Viv had the effortless laconic way about him, enjoyed a pint and a cigar, and for one reason, when he needed runs he found one boundary after another.
Different players, differing skill sets, one winner for me, and by the proverbial country thingy
Batting is easier nowadays.
Mediocre bowlers, small pitches, flatter tracks.
Gilchrist was special, but Viv was better. No real contest.
I didnt realise viv played nearly 200 ODIs !
It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90.
"It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90"
Afridi's is 114...
Who would you rather watch batting - give me Viv every time.
Viv in ODI averaged 47 compared to Gilly's 35.
Bevan averaged 53 but SR of 74.
It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90"
Afridi's is 114...
just goes to show what a load of old tosh statistics are eh
Battered in quarters, hammered in semis and dominated in the finals yet champions league winners. No suprise that a Chelsea fan is having a dig at "stats".
Sign in if you want to comment
Who
Page 1 of 2
posted on 18/5/12
And what did he say next and what did you say next?
posted on 18/5/12
you shud have slapped him, and should have told him to start watching baseball.
jokes apart,
I do agree to a fact that west indies batsmen of that era were not tested as much as other grt batsman. reoson being every team used to prepare flat tracks since they were scared of the great west indies bowlers. and still west indies bowlers used to rip apart these batting line ups.
posted on 18/5/12
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 18/5/12
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 18/5/12
Even if Richards didn't have to face the WIndies quicks he still faced more top-class bowlers than are around today. Lillee, Thomson, Hadlee, Imran, Willis, Botham, Kapil, Qadir, Underwood, Bedi. Plus he didn't bat on the sort of roads we've seen recently, didn't benefit from new bat technology or shorter boundaries and he never wore a helmet.
Viv was better than any current batsman IMO.
posted on 18/5/12
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 18/5/12
Funny. I am 46 and know all about Viv Richards, who was an explosive and stunning batsman. There have been many of them before him though, and many since. The GOAT debate is undoubtedly, and unfortunately the most childish subject on ja606.
Now that I have said that, maybe I should have just ignored the thread then?
posted on 18/5/12
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 18/5/12
Whilst Gilchrist can be a very explosive and exciting batsman at times there must be dozens and dozens of others in both test and one-day cricket who leave him way behind. Your friend should check out some stats first so he doesn't make daft statements like that.
posted on 18/5/12
If Viv Richards faced the quality of bowling and the fielding restrictions of the IPL, he would have outperformed all of the present day big hitters, including Gayle.
posted on 18/5/12
Damn, Seppi saves a couple of break points and holds 2:1. He is not going to give this to the GOAT is he?
posted on 18/5/12
hopeforthebest
I trust you're being sarcastic?
posted on 18/5/12
Hoggy, you don't think the bowling in the IPL is pants? I have to agree with hopefor here.
posted on 19/5/12
Ooops
Misread what hopefor wrote.
Apologies. I certainly agree that Viv would have marmalised IPL bowling
posted on 19/5/12
the best closer of a one day game was michael bevan.
posted on 19/5/12
the only reason for Gilchrist or Bevan for that matter to be placed above Richards is alphabetical order.
Viv Richards was an absolute joy to watch when he was batting for you, against you is a different story, but I still went and watched him whenever the West Indies rocked up, only a fool wouldn't.
The word genius is thrown around all too easily these days, in Viv's case it is not used often enough.
Those of you who haven't seen him, this is the 21st century, take a look at him wielding his bat like an extension of his own arm and enjoy the spectacle, we may never see his like again
posted on 19/5/12
i did see him. im still correct though(i believe) to say that bevan is the most accomplished closer in the history of the one day game.
viv was about his eye, power and timing, bevan was about placement and running between the wickets.
im not suggesting that bevan was more talented than viv - of course he wasnt, but it's difference horses for different courses.
in terms of a comparison between gilchrist and richards, in my opinion it needs to be considered that gilchrist's fitness level was generally much higer than viv's and that he is vastly more experienced in both the one day game and in modern day cricket.
posted on 19/5/12
I'm not in the habit of discussing how "fit" men are, but as you correctly say, this is horses for courses, Gilchrist had to be a very fit cricketer, he spent most of the time nurdling ones and twos. Viv had the effortless laconic way about him, enjoyed a pint and a cigar, and for one reason, when he needed runs he found one boundary after another.
Different players, differing skill sets, one winner for me, and by the proverbial country thingy
posted on 19/5/12
Batting is easier nowadays.
Mediocre bowlers, small pitches, flatter tracks.
Gilchrist was special, but Viv was better. No real contest.
posted on 19/5/12
I didnt realise viv played nearly 200 ODIs !
It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90.
posted on 19/5/12
"It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90"
Afridi's is 114...
posted on 19/5/12
Who would you rather watch batting - give me Viv every time.
posted on 19/5/12
Viv in ODI averaged 47 compared to Gilly's 35.
Bevan averaged 53 but SR of 74.
posted on 20/5/12
It's interesting though that gilchrist's strike rate in ODIs was 97 compared to Viv's 90"
Afridi's is 114...
just goes to show what a load of old tosh statistics are eh
posted on 20/5/12
Battered in quarters, hammered in semis and dominated in the finals yet champions league winners. No suprise that a Chelsea fan is having a dig at "stats".
Page 1 of 2