The Greatest ODI Batsman: Tendulkar vs Richards

[Dare]

My take on this. I`ve never seen Sir. Viv bat live but looking at archival footage and going by opinions, he is a legend of the game. Tendulkar has lasted 2 entire decades and is still scoring with the same consistency. If anything, Tendulkar at his prime (the 90s) faced way better bowling attacks than now and probable attacks which were on par with the ones which Sir. Viv faced. In the 90s we had, Wasim, Waqar, Aquib Javed, Saqlain, Mushy, Azhar Mahmood (with Akhtar debuting in the late 90s) and Co playing for Pakistan, all at their prime. Sri Lanka had Pushpakumara, Vaas (at his prime), Murali along with support bowlers like Dharmasena. SA had Donald, Klusener, Pollack, MacMillan, Fannie De Villiers, Symcox (very useful ODI bowler). Australia as always had Warne, McGrath, Damien Fleming, Kaspa. NZ had Shane O Connor, Simon Doull, Danny Morrison, Geoff Allot, Vettori and Co. West Indies had Ambrose, Walsh, Dillon, Bishop in their attack.

Wow half those bowlers ae average at best.

 

[rahuldravidfan]

The funny thing about this thread was that it got 2 Indians and a Pakistani arguing for the same cause. Not something you see that often in online discussion boards.:banana2

Yeah, kudos to that . How unlike Youtube

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Viv's SR for the era is probably the biggest problem for me to decide upon.

On one hand, he was killing attacks in a way no other batsman was for that time which suggests he might have dominated even further in this day and age where even more emphasis is put on on attacking.

However a SR of 90 is about the limit of sensible attacking that anyone's been able to find, he never broke through to some untouchable statistical goal like bradman did, so it is very difficult to decide if he was playing like a good modern batsman would play surrounded by people way behind the times, or if he really was someone that would always be miles ahead of the competition.

 

[Robelinda]

If Viv was in full flow was he better to watch than Sachin? I think so, he was brutal.

 

[shravi]

They are both the best of their eras. Let's leave it at that. There are various arguments in favor of both batsmen but their importance cannot be quantified when comparing players in the highest tier.

 

[Robelinda]

I'm not sure Sachin has been the best ODI batsman of his era, not even close. The last 2 years maybe, and in the late 90's, but not all 20 years. Viv was the best for pretty much all his career.

 

[ballers101]

I'm not sure Sachin has been the best ODI batsman of his era, not even close. The last 2 years maybe, and in the late 90's, but not all 20 years. Viv was the best for pretty much all his career.

....I don't know what your smoking but to say he has not been the best ODI batsmen of his era is a debatable statement but to say that he is "not even close" is totally wrong. I still think that the best ODI batsmen of his era is wrong as well even though its my opinion I have tons of facts to back it up. He has one of the best averages of all time 45, which is amazing even if you played only 100 matches. He has played 442 for one player to play that well for that many matches is amazing for anyone. The fact that he has scored by far the most centuries in ODI history is another reason why he is the best batsmen of his era and btw, if he isn't the best batsmen who is?

 

[drainpipe32]

It's silly, because we have two biased parties arguing here.

 

[AkshayS]

I'm not sure Sachin has been the best ODI batsman of his era, not even close. The last 2 years maybe, and in the late 90's, but not all 20 years. Viv was the best for pretty much all his career.

What to say now, probably Viv was more brutal than Sachin, but Sachin has more days named on himself than Viv, dude your statement does all. Not even close.:doh

All are saying that Viv was brutal than Sachin in ODI's, I also used to think so, but not after seeing his current form.
One thing more, Hasn't anybody of you see Sachin batting in T20's and IPL.

 

[aditya123]

It's silly, because we have two biased parties arguing here.

At least you agreed to the fact that you have been biased all this while.
How someone can even say that Tendulkar is`nt even the best ODI batsman in this era is beyond me. Really not worth discussing with such bias. From the 90s to now, I don`t think anyone has been as prolific as regularly in ODI cricket bar a blip or two around 2007 and 2006 (when he did`nt play much cricket). I would agree to the fact that comparing Tendulkar and Viv is tough as they played in two different eras but to say that Tendulkar is`nt even the best ODI batsman in his era is something which I cannot agree with.

 

[AkshayS]

How someone can even say that Tendulkar is`nt even the best ODI batsman in this era is beyond me.

beyond me too.

 

[aditya123]

....I don't know what your smoking but to say he has not been the best ODI batsmen of his era is a debatable statement but to say that he is "not even close" is totally wrong. I still think that the best ODI batsmen of his era is wrong as well even though its my opinion I have tons of facts to back it up. He has one of the best averages of all time 45, which is amazing even if you played only 100 matches. He has played 442 for one player to play that well for that many matches is amazing for anyone. The fact that he has scored by far the most centuries in ODI history is another reason why he is the best batsmen of his era and btw, if he isn't the best batsmen who is?

To add to that, he averages 45 batting at the top and not No.6 or 7 like an MS Dhoni or a Bevan.

 

[drainpipe32]

So what you're saying is that no batsman has been better than Tendulkar this decade?

 

[AkshayS]

So what you're saying is that no batsman has been better than Tendulkar this decade?

Do you think about any.

 

[surendar]

It's neither of these two. It should be Chris Martin or Muralitharan. I am still wondering the use/purpose of this thread.:sarcasm