Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[ramshorns]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   Even when asked to open he would be given a game against a tough opposition like a Walsh or Ambrose combo or a Waqar or Akram combo and once there were couple of failures he would be dropped against easier teams never giving him a chance to settle down.  That is when he made the call of sticking to what would be best course for his career based on what he does on a regular basis on the domestic scene.   A middle order slot.   And what a call it turned out to be.   Ever since he to date when he made that call from the end of 2000 bettered both Tendulkar and Dravid in that 9 year span with a higher average excluding minnows. 

One other thing of note is his first century came in as an opener with that 167 against McGrath and Lee in Australia in a team total of 260 odd.   That clearly shows it is the continuity with a spot that hampered VVS more than his batting order though it is no secret he relishes middle order slot in tests just like a Tendulkar or a Dravid would.

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

[sudzz]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   Even when asked to open he would be given a game against a tough opposition like a Walsh or Ambrose combo or a Waqar or Akram combo and once there were couple of failures he would be dropped against easier teams never giving him a chance to settle down.  That is when he made the call of sticking to what would be best course for his career based on what he does on a regular basis on the domestic scene.   A middle order slot.   And what a call it turned out to be.   Ever since he to date when he made that call from the end of 2000 bettered both Tendulkar and Dravid in that 9 year span with a higher average excluding minnows. 

One other thing of note is his first century came in as an opener with that 167 against McGrath and Lee in Australia in a team total of 260 odd.   That clearly shows it is the continuity with a spot that hampered VVS more than his batting order though it is no secret he relishes middle order slot in tests just like a Tendulkar or a Dravid would.

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

I will admit that as a cricket lover I have my share of favourites and some that I think should not have been allowed near a cricket ground to begin with. But whatever I may feel about any cricketer, once the player has played for India and if he has done well I don't try and figure out at whose cost did he do well. That happens in life all the time.

I just cannot understand such visceral hatred for one of India's and worlds most successful players based on the fact that someone else has been deprived (and that's just a perception). A player that has been acknowledged by the best in the business across all teams and and generations is being castigated for a lot of things while conveniently ignoring the merits of his achievement.

This against a backdrop where in some others being propped up for merely playing well in domestics etc.

Maybe there is something that we don't know which you are aware of about SRT and SMG which propels you to this level of dislike for them. Even the so called SG haters on this DG don't merely hate the guy without conceding that SG had a lot of good things to offer but in this case it seems like post after post spews only more venom on SRT in particular and occasionally on SMG as well.....

[ramshorns]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   Even when asked to open he would be given a game against a tough opposition like a Walsh or Ambrose combo or a Waqar or Akram combo and once there were couple of failures he would be dropped against easier teams never giving him a chance to settle down.  That is when he made the call of sticking to what would be best course for his career based on what he does on a regular basis on the domestic scene.   A middle order slot.   And what a call it turned out to be.   Ever since he to date when he made that call from the end of 2000 bettered both Tendulkar and Dravid in that 9 year span with a higher average excluding minnows. 

One other thing of note is his first century came in as an opener with that 167 against McGrath and Lee in Australia in a team total of 260 odd.   That clearly shows it is the continuity with a spot that hampered VVS more than his batting order though it is no secret he relishes middle order slot in tests just like a Tendulkar or a Dravid would.

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

I will admit that as a cricket lover I have my share of favourites and some that I think should not have been allowed near a cricket ground to begin with. But whatever I may feel about any cricketer, once the player has played for India and if he has done well I don't try and figure out at whose cost did he do well. That happens in life all the time.

I just cannot understand such visceral hatred for one of India's and worlds most successful players based on the fact that someone else has been deprived (and that's just a perception). A player that has been acknowledged by the best in the business across all teams and and generations is being castigated for a lot of things while conveniently ignoring the merits of his achievement.

Maybe there is something that we don't know which you are aware of about SRT and SMG which propels you to this level of dislike for them. Even the so called SG haters on this DG don't merely hate the guy without conceding that SG had a lot of good things to offer but in this case it seems like post after post spews only more venom on SRT in particular and occasionally on SMG as well.....

I understand the urge of the vast populous of cricket fans in India to worship couple of these players based on their records alone.  Anything said against them is viewed upon as hatred.   

It also shows your lack of following my posts throughout when you say I only spew venom on SRT or even go to the extent of saying that some of the SG critics here occasionally give him credit.   If you care to you would have actually found posts where I did credit Tendulkar but you did not do that is amplified with your post of this.  It does not bother me or niether do I care what you view upon me as.

Yes there are things in my view on Gavaskar and Tendulkar I feel about and I express them.  Why has that to be a visceral hatred.   It is not as if I knew these guys growing up and had any personal agendas or dislike for them.  Not everything should be or can be toeveryone's liking.   Atleast I take the time to explain things in detail and clearly spelt out my POV.

Here is the deal.  Instead of all this why don't you take my post #38 and get 4 such solo knocks played by SMG/SRT in their career where WE WON and explain them.   Again I am not saying that SMG/SRT are not darn good batsman without such knocks but atleast take the time to post cricket instead of taking aim at a fellow posters intent.

Since you chose my above post to quote I ask what exactly I said there is venemous.

This against a backdrop where in some others being propped up for merely playing well in domestics etc.

If you have a player or know of why don't you bring them into the forefront and let people take note.   I tell you it is easy to criticise or mock someone and say they are propping up someone.  Take up the onus of getting a player with a Rayadu like domestic season and show the DG what value they can add.   I will second that as I have done with Pujara or a Badri in the past and if you would have followed things again closely I have even had simliar threads opened for Badri as I did with Rayadu as I found time.   I am all for good cricketers instead of hung up on one or two or based on regional affinities.

[ganavk]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

Let me bold that once again. VVS himself has admitted he had a mental block ( his words) opening and if that is not uncomfortable I don't know what else is. I appreciate him for being honest with that opinion instead of hiding behind the concept of in depth analysis.
it matters that VVS idolized SMG because one would model and I also remember that interview where he mentioned that people used to call him "little Gavaskar" or something like that. 
Last word on Vishy Vs SMG. Vishy might be more talented and better batsman on his peak compared to Gavaskar  but it was SMG who utilized his talent to the maximum playing for his country and that's what matters in the end for me. The same situations applies to VVS and RD. VVS might be a better batsman ( not as per me) on his peak but RD has done better overall and has played more important innings for India from longer term. There is no comparison between SRT and VVS anyway.
if you apply the same logic every cricketer in India ( including SMG, RD, Vishy, VVS) have mentioned one time or the other that SRT is the best of all.

[ramshorns]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

Let me bold that once again. VVS himself has admitted he had a mental block ( his words) opening and if that is not uncomfortable I don't know what else is. I appreciate him for being honest with that opinion instead of hiding behind the concept of in depth analysis.

Ofcourse that is what you would expect someone to say when they started as a middle order bat and that is the spot they play for for their state side.  So what exactly are you trying to prove so hard here.  Yes my indepth analysis of VVS's nurturing has a lot of truth to it the way he was shunted up and down the order dropping him after a couple of failures etc etc needlessly meddling with his career.   Contrast the to Tendulkar's smooth transition when he was given his time and space from the get go where he started at No 6/7 and gradually brought up and I really support that.

it matters that VVS idolized SMG because one would model and I also remember that interview where he mentioned that people used to call him "little Gavaskar" or something like that. 

Says who?   You might also know that Gavaskar idolised Rohan Kanhai a graceful left hander.  And SMG batted right handed.   There is no contrast there.   Look all these idolising etc etc are all fine but one need to have the game first and foremost.   It is a bunch of boloney when someone says they want to model someone's game.   I got news for them.  Can't do it.   Even I tried to model after Vishy but to no avail.  All these idolising etc etc is a bit overrated anyways IMO.   There is something surely called mentoring where a junior or a newbie can see and learn from a veteran on how they prepare for games building an innings what exactly one's role could be in a team setting like Kapil did in 1977-1979 watching Vishy and talking to him the ultimate team man to go along with his god given talent.

And what in the world has people or neighbourhood kids calling VVS "Liitle Gavaskar" when he would not get out do anything with VVS's talent and game.  It is what it is.   Kids stuff.   Like I explained above I would not put too much stock into all these things.

Last word on Vishy Vs SMG. Vishy might be more talented and better batsman on his peak compared to Gavaskar  but it was SMG who utilized his talent to the maximum playing for his country and that's what matters in the end for me. The same situations applies to VVS and RD. VVS might be a better batsman ( not as per me) on his peak but RD has done better overall and has played more important innings for India from longer term. There is no comparison between SRT and VVS anyway.
if you apply the same logic every cricketer in India ( including SMG, RD, Vishy, VVS) have mentioned one time or the other that SRT is the best of all.

Who say's there is no comparision between SRT and VVS?   The Tendulkar fanactics.  I heard that before.  Instead of he said she said business let us get to the business at hand.   Pick your Tendulkar and Dravid all time top 10 Test knocks with a brief description of them as regards to the situation of the team, how important that knock was towards a win or a draw and how well that knock was executed and then I will do the same with VVS and let us see how it compares.   Until then this is all a hogwash saying that VVS will not compare with so and so or whatever to put him down.   Why don't we get down to business I say.

As for SMG vs Vishy I laid down a ton of material in the preceding posts and will leave it at that for now.

[CLR James]

Rams, Kanhai batted right handed.

[ganavk]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

Let me bold that once again. VVS himself has admitted he had a mental block ( his words) opening and if that is not uncomfortable I don't know what else is. I appreciate him for being honest with that opinion instead of hiding behind the concept of in depth analysis.

Ofcourse that is what you would expect someone to say when they started as a middle order bat and that is the spot they play for for their state side.  So what exactly are you trying to prove so hard here.  Yes my indepth analysis of VVS's nurturing has a lot of truth to it the way he was shunted up and down the order dropping him after a couple of failures etc etc needlessly meddling with his career.   Contrast the to Tendulkar's smooth transition when he was given his time and space from the get go where he started at No 6/7 and gradually brought up and I really support that.

it matters that VVS idolized SMG because one would model and I also remember that interview where he mentioned that people used to call him "little Gavaskar" or something like that. 

Says who?   You might also know that Gavaskar idolised Rohan Kanhai a graceful left hander.  And SMG batted right handed.   There is no contrast there.   Look all these idolising etc etc are all fine but one need to have the game first and foremost.   It is a bunch of boloney when someone says they want to model someone's game.   I got news for them.  Can't do it.   Even I tried to model after Vishy but to no avail.  All these idolising etc etc is a bit overrated anyways IMO.   There is something surely called mentoring where a junior or a newbie can see and learn from a veteran on how they prepare for games building an innings what exactly one's role could be in a team setting like Kapil did in 1977-1979 watching Vishy and talking to him the ultimate team man to go along with his god given talent.

And what in the world has people or neighbourhood kids calling VVS "Liitle Gavaskar" when he would not get out do anything with VVS's talent and game.  It is what it is.   Kids stuff.   Like I explained above I would not put too much stock into all these things.

Last word on Vishy Vs SMG. Vishy might be more talented and better batsman on his peak compared to Gavaskar  but it was SMG who utilized his talent to the maximum playing for his country and that's what matters in the end for me. The same situations applies to VVS and RD. VVS might be a better batsman ( not as per me) on his peak but RD has done better overall and has played more important innings for India from longer term. There is no comparison between SRT and VVS anyway.
if you apply the same logic every cricketer in India ( including SMG, RD, Vishy, VVS) have mentioned one time or the other that SRT is the best of all.

Who say's there is no comparision between SRT and VVS?   The Tendulkar fanactics.  I heard that before.  Instead of he said she said business let us get to the business at hand.   Pick your Tendulkar and Dravid all time top 10 Test knocks with a brief description of them as regards to the situation of the team, how important that knock was towards a win or a draw and how well that knock was executed and then I will do the same with VVS and let us see how it compares.   Until then this is all a hogwash saying that VVS will not compare with so and so or whatever to put him down.   Why don't we get down to business I say.

yeah..you obviously know more about VVS than VVS himself. May be you have to read that interview first before over analyzing stuff here.

I say so and there are many who clearly pick SRT to be better batsman than VVS including VVS himself.

[ramshorns]

Rams, Kanhai batted right handed.

CLR: oops my mistake.  Thanks I mistook for Alvin Kallicharan in my hurry.   But still the batting styles of Rohan Kanhai and SMG are a stark contrast to say the least.   One a fluid player and another a grafter for most part.   Would you not agree.  Atleast I do from the footage I saw of Kanhai few times.   The calypso touch as I call it to Gavaskar's style which in its own right is good but Kanhai's was different altogether.

[ramshorns]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

Let me bold that once again. VVS himself has admitted he had a mental block ( his words) opening and if that is not uncomfortable I don't know what else is. I appreciate him for being honest with that opinion instead of hiding behind the concept of in depth analysis.

Ofcourse that is what you would expect someone to say when they started as a middle order bat and that is the spot they play for for their state side.  So what exactly are you trying to prove so hard here.  Yes my indepth analysis of VVS's nurturing has a lot of truth to it the way he was shunted up and down the order dropping him after a couple of failures etc etc needlessly meddling with his career.   Contrast the to Tendulkar's smooth transition when he was given his time and space from the get go where he started at No 6/7 and gradually brought up and I really support that.

it matters that VVS idolized SMG because one would model and I also remember that interview where he mentioned that people used to call him "little Gavaskar" or something like that. 

Says who?   You might also know that Gavaskar idolised Rohan Kanhai a graceful left hander.  And SMG batted right handed.   There is no contrast there.   Look all these idolising etc etc are all fine but one need to have the game first and foremost.   It is a bunch of boloney when someone says they want to model someone's game.   I got news for them.  Can't do it.   Even I tried to model after Vishy but to no avail.  All these idolising etc etc is a bit overrated anyways IMO.   There is something surely called mentoring where a junior or a newbie can see and learn from a veteran on how they prepare for games building an innings what exactly one's role could be in a team setting like Kapil did in 1977-1979 watching Vishy and talking to him the ultimate team man to go along with his god given talent.

And what in the world has people or neighbourhood kids calling VVS "Liitle Gavaskar" when he would not get out do anything with VVS's talent and game.  It is what it is.   Kids stuff.   Like I explained above I would not put too much stock into all these things.

Last word on Vishy Vs SMG. Vishy might be more talented and better batsman on his peak compared to Gavaskar  but it was SMG who utilized his talent to the maximum playing for his country and that's what matters in the end for me. The same situations applies to VVS and RD. VVS might be a better batsman ( not as per me) on his peak but RD has done better overall and has played more important innings for India from longer term. There is no comparison between SRT and VVS anyway.
if you apply the same logic every cricketer in India ( including SMG, RD, Vishy, VVS) have mentioned one time or the other that SRT is the best of all.

Who say's there is no comparision between SRT and VVS?   The Tendulkar fanactics.  I heard that before.  Instead of he said she said business let us get to the business at hand.   Pick your Tendulkar and Dravid all time top 10 Test knocks with a brief description of them as regards to the situation of the team, how important that knock was towards a win or a draw and how well that knock was executed and then I will do the same with VVS and let us see how it compares.   Until then this is all a hogwash saying that VVS will not compare with so and so or whatever to put him down.   Why don't we get down to business I say.

yeah..you obviously know more about VVS than VVS himself. May be you have to read that interview first before over analyzing stuff here.

I say so and there are many who clearly pick SRT to be better batsman than VVS including VVS himself.

You always have these one liners to counter a well detailed post.   oh I read the interview many a time.  Do not worry.   Don't be so hung up on one Tendulkar and as I said get down to business than he said she said stuff.  We will see why VVS will not compare with Tendulkar.  First compile the list than make statements in general.

[ganavk]

SMG was an opener, so him dropping himself down the order and promoting someone else to open does not compare with the same for a middle order batsman. Middle order batsmen do not usually enjoy opening.

Which also reminds me of Laxman. He is a fantastic batsman but he was uncomfortable and average as an opener when promoted to that role. On the other hand, Viru Sehwag made a century on debut in the middle order, was promoted as a makeshift opener, flourished and owns that spot. Adaptability and flexibility should also be a dimension of greatness: granted that not all players are subject to this harsh test, but the few who are display their ability along that dimension.

A small correction or amendment to that.  VVS never had issues with a role as a opener or a MO bat though he prefers MO because that he where he began.  The problem happended not because he was asked to open but because he was never given a spot or given a continous run.   

A small correction on that. I clearly remember VVS talking about having mental block as opener especially since he was young at that time. Of course he also told that he got dropped after few failures as opener.
Ironically VVS himself said in the same interview that he idolized SMG when growing up

That is where the lack of proper caring with in the team the way the likes of Tendulkar were nurtured from No 6 to whatever he became later on could have helped VVS even if opening for him was a viable option.   That he was confused with needless dropping and shunting up and down the order is what he was talking about with a feeling of not being wanted.   I could only imagine how terrible VVS would have felt.   So no there is no correction if one were to do an indepth analysis beyond the interview.

On another note it hardly matters who VVS idolised.  It would not really matter if one does not have the talent.  Plus I never dismissed Gavaskar as some kind of an outlaw.  I only happen to think Vishy as a better batsman which Gavaskar himself admitted to many a time.

Let me bold that once again. VVS himself has admitted he had a mental block ( his words) opening and if that is not uncomfortable I don't know what else is. I appreciate him for being honest with that opinion instead of hiding behind the concept of in depth analysis.

Ofcourse that is what you would expect someone to say when they started as a middle order bat and that is the spot they play for for their state side.  So what exactly are you trying to prove so hard here.  Yes my indepth analysis of VVS's nurturing has a lot of truth to it the way he was shunted up and down the order dropping him after a couple of failures etc etc needlessly meddling with his career.   Contrast the to Tendulkar's smooth transition when he was given his time and space from the get go where he started at No 6/7 and gradually brought up and I really support that.

it matters that VVS idolized SMG because one would model and I also remember that interview where he mentioned that people used to call him "little Gavaskar" or something like that. 

Says who?   You might also know that Gavaskar idolised Rohan Kanhai a graceful left hander.  And SMG batted right handed.   There is no contrast there.   Look all these idolising etc etc are all fine but one need to have the game first and foremost.   It is a bunch of boloney when someone says they want to model someone's game.   I got news for them.  Can't do it.   Even I tried to model after Vishy but to no avail.  All these idolising etc etc is a bit overrated anyways IMO.   There is something surely called mentoring where a junior or a newbie can see and learn from a veteran on how they prepare for games building an innings what exactly one's role could be in a team setting like Kapil did in 1977-1979 watching Vishy and talking to him the ultimate team man to go along with his god given talent.

And what in the world has people or neighbourhood kids calling VVS "Liitle Gavaskar" when he would not get out do anything with VVS's talent and game.  It is what it is.   Kids stuff.   Like I explained above I would not put too much stock into all these things.

Last word on Vishy Vs SMG. Vishy might be more talented and better batsman on his peak compared to Gavaskar  but it was SMG who utilized his talent to the maximum playing for his country and that's what matters in the end for me. The same situations applies to VVS and RD. VVS might be a better batsman ( not as per me) on his peak but RD has done better overall and has played more important innings for India from longer term. There is no comparison between SRT and VVS anyway.
if you apply the same logic every cricketer in India ( including SMG, RD, Vishy, VVS) have mentioned one time or the other that SRT is the best of all.

Who say's there is no comparision between SRT and VVS?   The Tendulkar fanactics.  I heard that before.  Instead of he said she said business let us get to the business at hand.   Pick your Tendulkar and Dravid all time top 10 Test knocks with a brief description of them as regards to the situation of the team, how important that knock was towards a win or a draw and how well that knock was executed and then I will do the same with VVS and let us see how it compares.   Until then this is all a hogwash saying that VVS will not compare with so and so or whatever to put him down.   Why don't we get down to business I say.

yeah..you obviously know more about VVS than VVS himself. May be you have to read that interview first before over analyzing stuff here.

I say so and there are many who clearly pick SRT to be better batsman than VVS including VVS himself.

You always have these one liners to counter a well detailed post.   oh I read the interview many a time.  Do not worry.   Don't be so hung up on one Tendulkar and as I said get down to business than he said she said stuff.  We will see why VVS will not compare with Tendulkar.  First compile the list than make statements in general.

I don't have to know your views to know that SRT is far greater than VVS as a cricketer/batsman when all things considered.

[CLR James]

Rams, Kanhai batted right handed.

CLR: oops my mistake.  Thanks I mistook for Alvin Kallicharan in my hurry.   But still the batting styles of Rohan Kanhai and SMG are a stark contrast to say the least.   One a fluid player and another a grafter for most part.   Would you not agree.  Atleast I do from the footage I saw of Kanhai few times.   The calypso touch as I call it to Gavaskar's style which in its own right is good but Kanhai's was different altogether.

Kalicharan was rightly called the left handed Vishwanath. In my utopia, there will be a 300 run partnership between Kali and Vishy. How would that be?

[ramshorns]

Rams, Kanhai batted right handed.

CLR: oops my mistake.  Thanks I mistook for Alvin Kallicharan in my hurry.   But still the batting styles of Rohan Kanhai and SMG are a stark contrast to say the least.   One a fluid player and another a grafter for most part.   Would you not agree.  Atleast I do from the footage I saw of Kanhai few times.   The calypso touch as I call it to Gavaskar's style which in its own right is good but Kanhai's was different altogether.

Kalicharan was rightly called the left handed Vishwanath. In my utopia, there will be a 300 run partnership between Kali and Vishy. How would that be?

That would make for the ultimate highlight reel ever to have been made.  That will work.   The only time SMG said he felt real good was standing in between Vishy and Kalli where in he would gain couple of inches.   Kalli being 5'3" is the shortest and SMG a little over 5'5" or a tiny bit over is the tallest and Vishy falling somewhere in between that.

[Poochandi]

UP or Down
VVS is the middle

but
East or West
I don't meddle

[ramshorns]

UP or Down
VVS is the middle

but
East or West
I don't meddle

I admit I liked that.

[pzd]

Interesting comment in one of the blogs by a person called srini.. I too have observed this many a time in the last 4-5 years.

"When was the last time that Sachin fielded a complete innings when we bat first? I have a very strong feeling that Sachin’s batting average when India bats first in an ODI is much higher than when India is chasing. Ponting was true when he said that Sachin can probably play much longer since he plays only half matches!"

[Poochandi]

Now, S.T. kar wants 25 per innings in ODI, so he can play only 1/4th of the match, seldom he plays more than 25 overs.

[keep-it-cool]

Interesting comment in one of the blogs by a person called srini.. I too have observed this many a time in the last 4-5 years.

"When was the last time that Sachin fielded a complete innings when we bat first? I have a very strong feeling that Sachin’s batting average when India bats first in an ODI is much higher than when India is chasing. Ponting was true when he said that Sachin can probably play much longer since he plays only half matches!"

that is a fair comment

[ramshorns]

Interesting comment in one of the blogs by a person called srini.. I too have observed this many a time in the last 4-5 years.

"When was the last time that Sachin fielded a complete innings when we bat first? I have a very strong feeling that Sachin’s batting average when India bats first in an ODI is much higher than when India is chasing. Ponting was true when he said that Sachin can probably play much longer since he plays only half matches!"

Though Srini's POV on SRT's performances  for most part warrant merit I am not sure or never come across any reports when RP made such comments on SRT.   I will be very surprised if someone can find and post those comments by RP here on this DG.  In such a case I want to read the entire context of those quotes.

[dhruvdeepak]

Interesting comment in one of the blogs by a person called srini.. I too have observed this many a time in the last 4-5 years.

"When was the last time that Sachin fielded a complete innings when we bat first? I have a very strong feeling that Sachin’s batting average when India bats first in an ODI is much higher than when India is chasing. Ponting was true when he said that Sachin can probably play much longer since he plays only half matches!"

Though Srini's POV on SRT's performances while chasing for most part warrant merit I am not sure or never come across any reports when RP made such comments on SRT.   I will be very surprised if someone can find and post those comments by RP here on this DG.  In such a case I want to read the entire context of those quotes.

nothing excites you like tendulkar bashing

[WicketView]

I think I have often seen Tendulkar skip fielding after playing a long innings batting first. Is this common when he gets out quickly too? How frequently is this done by others? I certainly recall non-captain batsmen not coming in after a really long inning.

Along with the Smith-Strauss incident, I think this is one place where ICC needs to think if they  should clarify rules. Should they try to bar such batsmen ... the logic being they are not fit to play the game by themselves? At least without thinking too much, this seems to be fairly logical. Alternatively, make the rule clear across the board if there are severe consequences that I am missing out.