Print

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

[suraj]

SMG has to take be born again to be in the same class as VVS ? 


Hmmm

I am sure SMG stays up at nights envying VVS' class

[pieterSAN]

SMG has to take be born again to be in the same class as VVS ? 


Hmmm

I am sure SMG stays up at nights envying VVS' class

He probably envies VVS having to fight Kaif for a place in the side. (OUCH! That HURT!) 

[ramshorns]

SMG has to take be born again to be in the same class as VVS ? 


Hmmm

Instead of rolling those eyes may be it would be worth taking sometime reading all those posts and the context of the post.  May be that would help. 

 

[ramshorns]

Anyway to put the thread back to its sense I am going to re-post the entire response of mine before it turned into a series of meaningless exchanges and eye-rollings.

[ramshorns]

But during SMG's career lot of times it was just HIM- maybe we won less but u just had to see him play and fighting alone. first Vishy, then Vengsarkar and Amarnath were his allies but at different times. There was some selfishness in him but the guy was truly a master batsman- and I loved to watch his rolly polly superfast running between the wkts

SRT later on held the mantle for a while to an even greater extent of carrying the team alone

Not really.  It is not accurate to say that SMG waged a lone battle while others failed.  If anyone did that it was Vishy when the chips were down.  It happended many a time.  Not to say he did  not score runs.  He scored tons of them. 

Also on top of being having a reputation for being selfish and putting his interests ahead of the team he also finished many a career in favor of less deserving players from his Zone particularly Mumbai.  He fits well in the Mulayam Singh Cabinet.

The series I remember Vishy most for was the 74 series v W Indies (which was my first exposure to cricket), when he literally carried us, brought us back from an 0-2 deficit to 2-2 tie against Clive Lloyd's West Indians before we lost the final game in Bombay. The 97 run gem vs Roberts & Co. in Madras, was in that series. After that, while there were good games- I don't really remember him carrying us for entire series. The guy was beautiful to watch. He could score a beautiful 75 on a wretched pitch. On the other side of the coin, he could score a pretty 30 or 40 and not convert it to a big one. If I needed a guy to score seventy on a real dog of a pitch, and the score was 10 for 2, Vishwanath was the guy. But if I wanted a guy to bat it out for a big score all day- Gavaskar was the guy. With Gavaskar, I never felt like he left anything on the table- a bowler had to earn his wicket. Vishy was an artist- but blood and guts type stuff was not his thing. Because the two were different, they complemented each other well. For the long time they played together- I don't think there were a whole lot of big Gavaskar- Vishwanath partnerships. It wasn't that often that both came big in the same game. As far as I can remember, Vishwanath was a great player through '79. In the early '80s, however, he struggled a lot. 

For a guy who has been projected in the above post as only a class act and a great strokeplayer here is a link to that compilation of mine of some of the single handed batting displays of Vishy that we won.  Sure his 30-40's  are any day better than Gavaskar's boring knocks that turned potential wins into draws.  But let us also remember why he is a better matchwinner than Gavaskar.
Here is the link to that post.
http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=2527.msg36679#msg36679


Also below a admission from the horse's mouth a few years ago as to who is better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunny hooks Lillee in sledge-festAdd to Clippings
PRADEEP VIJAYAKAR

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2003 11:15:57 PM ]

MUMBAI: Little Master Sunil Gavaskar warned that players might come to blows if personal abuse on the field was not stopped immediately.

Breaking his silence on the fallout of his stirring Lord Cowdrey Spirit of Cricket Lecture at Lord’s last month, Gavaskar reiterated that sledging has become a dangerous monster. ‘‘I have seen even schoolboys in Kenya behave shockingly on the field,’’ he told this reporter in an exclusive interview on Tuesday.

The former India captain’s labelling of Aussies as masters of sledging (during the lecture), however, raised a new storm. It prompted his old enemy, Dennis Lillee, to even belittle him as an ordinary player.

 Gavaskar, the highest century-maker in Tests, had no hesitation in agreeing that his brother-in-law Gundappa Visha-wanath was a better batsman than he was. ‘‘I agree with Lillee that Vishy was better. In fact, I am on record about this and I repeat that Vishy was the best batsman of my generation because of the quality of the bowling that he faced and the conditions under which he made runs.’’

 Gavaskar, however, was quick to return to the issue of sledging. Pointing out that sledging was short for sledgehammer in the Australian vocabulary, he said: ‘‘obviously, it can’t be very subtle.’’

 ‘‘Those who are defending sledging are (in fact) those who practise it,’’ he charged. ‘‘If personal abuse is part of the game it is a different game that I have played. ‘‘The West Indian players never did it. Courtney Walsh, the world’s highest wicket-taker, never uttered a word. They may have indulged in eyeball-to-eyeball tussles but that’s not the same as personal abuse. That’s not what the fans want to see,’’ he added.

Responding to Lillee’s taunt about his walkout from the pitch in 1981, Gavaskar explained: ‘‘It was triggered by personal abuse on Lillee’s part. If you look at the video, I am walking towards the pavilion. I turned back only on hearing the abuse and then took (Chetan) Chauhan away. Had there been no abuse I would have vented my anger out in the dressing room,’’ he said, adding, ‘‘I expressed regret about the incident then itself, and again during the Cowdrey lecture.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion:We can all have who we want as our hero's or favorites.  But the above facts and admissions should count for something.

[kban1]

rams:

I did read the post in context (and I suspect so did suraj).

If you notice, I did not bring Vishy in the picture. But when you say SMG has to be born again to be in VVS class, then rolling eyes is likely to be the response from a lot of people.

While you dismiss SMG's batting style as boring and slow, and SMG the batsman overall based on your negative impression of SMG the man, it is actually worth keeping in mind that SMG did in fact have every stroke in the book and played them with significant eye pleasing artistry (his artistry might have paled next to Vishy's wristiness but he was pleasing to watch anyday). It also bears to keep in mind the fact that he was an attacking bat who completely changed his game given the brittleness of the Indian batting order and the fact that he has played numerous attacking and classy innings too in times of India's need.

And what you so disdainfully term as played innings which enabled India to draw tests they should have won is more accurately remembered by yours truly (and I suspect several others) as innings which enabled India to draw instead of losing.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of opinion.

You like Vishy and VVS.

So do I. But liking A or B does not have to be at the cost of sacrificing C's legacy or contributions --thats the point here.

[ramshorns]

rams:

I did read the post in context (and I suspect so did suraj).

If you notice, I did not bring Vishy in the picture. But when you say SMG has to be born again to be in VVS class, then rolling eyes is likely to be the response from a lot of people.

While you dismiss SMG's batting style as boring and slow, and SMG the batsman overall based on your negative impression of SMG the man, it is actually worth keeping in mind that SMG did in fact have every stroke in the book and played them with significant eye pleasing artistry (his artistry might have paled next to Vishy's wristiness but he was pleasing to watch anyday). It also bears to keep in mind the fact that he was an attacking bat who completely changed his game given the brittleness of the Indian batting order and the fact that he has played numerous attacking and classy innings too in times of India's need.

And what you so disdainfully term as played innings which enabled India to draw tests they should have won is more accurately remembered by yours truly (and I suspect several others) as innings which enabled India to draw instead of losing.

At the end of the day, it is a matter of opinion.

You like Vishy and VVS.

So do I. But liking A or B does not have to be at the cost of sacrificing C's legacy or contributions --thats the point here.

Kban:Not getting into he said she said, you are right it is a matter of opinion.  I am glad you like VVS and Vishy as well.   Any cricket loving fan would, given their class and entertainment they provide on top of many great knocks both played that helped INDIA win.

Sorry I know times where Sunil played for records where a quick declaration could have put opposition under pressure.  Not many would admit in public, but a lot felt about Sunil privately that way.  All said and done I view Sunil as a player who put his interests ahead of the team and I know you do not feel that way.  Nothing personal there but again my observation of the man in the middle.  Again I think we will disagree there.

Ofcourse as a batsman overall I would rate him very good with a great technique.  The best opening batsman the country ever produced.  I will it leave it there.