We Appreciate The Memories, Sir Viv

Those stats are deceptive. They don't take into consideration World Series Cricket matches, in which Viv was regularly awesome (only the Chappell brothers and Barry Richards set those test games alight as much as Viv). As of several months ago, the ICC has now declared those matches "official".

Also, Richards played 3 or 4 years longer than he should have. He should have retired in 87 or 88. He played on till 91. So you have to add about 3 runs to all those averages to get a gauge of how good he was.

And note too that even though he had no big scores in his final years, Viv only got more aggressive as a batsman. He attacked and counter-attacked to the end. His strike rate was not only incredible for his era, but for our modern T20 era.

You can't compare Viv to Sars, man. Viv had 23 centuries and was averaging 53+ after 100 innings. He's also one of the few great batsmen to average 45+ in all innings, and he did this without the benefit of playing vs minnows and in an era of biased umpires.

He also counter-attacked the big bowlers of his era (Lillee, Botham, Hadlee, Imran, Thomson, Kapil, Willis etc). He liked to show off against other tough guys, his average be damned.

What Viv has going against him is this: he was the first prima donna WI batsman, and he was surrounded by great bowlers and surrounded by great batsmen. He had the luxury of being pampered. But when they failed, though, he often stepped up to the plate.

These are the Stats and Numbers Dont Lie

Look at ViV in NZ...c'mon  19.25 ??


as dilly point out , 16 tons, 30 fifties in 85 matches and HS 291 IS comparable to

Sarwan... .............15 tons, 31 fifties in 87 matches and HS 291.

Numbers Dont Lie.

You are being romantic like zacaroni !

Goog Lee pointed out that Kanhai and Kalli put them same guys to the sword

regularly with only a shirt Collar up 

Not the nicest of people, divided your people by his blatantly racist statement but, nonetheless, a very good batsman indeed.

I despise double standards, as he decried one oppressor and ushered in himself and his kind instead.

I have very little time for him.

I'm being romantic? In his biography, Lillee likens Viv to Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel.

Personally, I think Greg Chappell was a bit better than Viv in tests in that era. Where Viv surpasses his contemporaries is in his ODI record and in his ability to dominate.

Viv played only THREE games in New Zealand (2 innings of which he did not bat) and played them in 1987, when he was past his prime.

Statistics can be misleading. Gavaskar, for example, famously averages 65 vs the toughest team of his era: the West Indies. But Gavaskar always dodged WI's "four prong pacers". Whenever he did face WI's big guns, he failed.

Viv, meanwhile, averaged 55 vs the best bowlers in the world during the World Series games.

In tests, in that era, it was Greg Chappell and Viv above everyone else. Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock might have been better than both, but they didn't get the opportunity to play many international matches. Then you have Gavaskar, Miandad and Border.

Kanhai was a different era. He did face them a few times (he played Lillee only once I think), but not enough to warrant lumping him with the 70s/80s generation.


But Viv didn't have Zimbabwe and Bangladesh to jack up his stats.

During his Test career (1974 - 1991), Richards average of 45.73 against Australia, India, New Zealand and Pakistan ranks him fifth best among batsman with at least 50 matches played against these four countries. Javed Miandad tops the list with an average of 62.78, followed by Allan Border (55.18), Sunil Gavaskar (52.31) and Clive Lloyd (51.21).

Gower averaged 45.72, Greenidge 42.60, Gooch 42.42 and Haynes 39.54.

However, only Miandad (49.74) had a better overseas average against these four countries (Richards averaged 45.23).

The World Series Cricket stats that Trini referenced earlier in this thread.



Barry Richards really was on another level.

And again, that average is deceptive. Miandad famously failed against the big teams of is era - West Indies and Australia - even whilst always facing second string Aussie attacks. He averaged in the 30s against them. He was regarded as a poor away player, his runs largely coming off the Kiwis.

To Pakistanis, Zaheer Abbas was the guy playing key away innings vs the Aussies (vs Lillee and Thompson), yet his overall career average is only in the 40s.

Whenever you read cricket books about that era, Barry Richards is talked about like some kind of mythical creature. The Bradman who never was. That he and Pollock average in the 60s and 70s in international games, fuels this. But I think had they played more games, their overall stats would have echoed their First Class averages (50s). With the greats, First Class averages usually ultimately reflect international averages.

Barry, Pollock, Viv and Greg were undoubtedly the best of that era though. Greg had the consistency, Viv had the peaks and the flair, Barry and Pollock had the mystique. As an opener, Gavaskar was in his own little category.

Really now!!!  You do realize that Gavaskar is the only great batsman in that era who can say he faced all the big guns, right?  From WI 4 prong, to Ozzies, Pakistanis, NZ, England....and he was the master! 

Ask Andy Roberts, who said Gavaskar was the toughest batsman he has played against.

I suggest you carefully examine his numbers. 

How you think Viv would have done facing his own pacemen?

Any opener who averages 45+ is also in my "tough as hell book". To average 50+, like Gavaskar did, pretty much makes him the best opener ever. And yes, he was the only great batsman of the era forced to face all the other major bowling attacks. Viv had to be counselled by a psychiatrist during the Australian tour vs Lillee and Jeff Thomson. Gavaskar, in contrast, used to just knuckle down and eat some magic roti. He was used to being the underdog.

My point though, was to look beneath stats. Gavaskar dodged Lillee - arguably the best bowler of that era - for most of his career, and when he faced him, averaged only 19. Against another big bowler like Hadlee, Gavaskar only averaged 35.

Similarly, Gavaskar first played WI in 1971. He averaged an amazing 154. But during this series, the pacers Gavaskar faced (Keith Boyce, Grayson Shillingford, Vanburn Holder and Uton Dowe) were nobodies. West Indies sucked and were in transition.

He then played a home series against the WI in 1974. He struggled, scoring 108 runs at an average of 27. Here he first faces Andy Roberts (the other bowlers were Holder, Boyce and Bernard Julien).

He then played an away series vs West Indies in 1975. Here, West Indies are only now beginning to construct their pace battery. Michael Holding and Andy Roberts are playing, but SIT OUT for 2 games. Gavaskar averages 55.

He then faced West Indies in India in 78. Almost all games were draws and run fests. WI's main bowlers - Roberts, Garner, Croft, Holding etc - were off playing Packer tests and so didn't turn up. Instead, Gavaskar faced guys like Norbert Phillip and Sylvester Clarke and a bunch of spin. He averaged 91.

Gavaskar then played WI in 82. Here he finally faces WI's "four prong" for the first and only time. He averaged 30. Holding, Roberts, Garder and Marshall played.

Chappell, in comparison, faced the full West Indies pace attack (Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft) in 14 games in the Packer Super Tests and averaged about 56.

The point is, stats don't tell the full story. The stats say Gavaskar averaged 65 vs the best bowling attack of all time, but stats are misleading.