Cricket: Yesterdays Heroes & Today's Greats ?

Question

Because of my Bajan heritage, I maybe somewhat biased in my nomination of yesterday's great players:

Viv Richards. Gordon Greenidge. Desmond Haynes. Malcolm Marshall. Michael Holding. Joel Garner... Brian Lara.

What awesome players! The West Indies of old, these selected Kings of the Caribbean, were masters of world cricket.

Today we know the Australians rule world cricket, even though the green and gold stars of the 1990s and 2000s are ageing and many more, (we breathe a sigh of relief), are bound to retire sooner rather than later.

In the same way that we remember the West Indian Magicians of leather and willow marvels, we will never forget the Australian condotierres of the game: Gilchrist and McGrath included.

The tendency is to draw comparisons between the greats of old and today's heroes. Yet, is it fair? After all, the legends of old never knew the bat technology that exists today. Nor did they earn the living possible today through generous contracts and resplendent sponsorships.

How would a genius such as Viv Richards have fared as a young uprising star in today's cricketing world? Would his abilities have been even more enhanced by the scientific training regimen of the players of now?

Would he have been equipped to perform even more amazing feats had he been equipped with today's computer-designed cricket bat?

Or would these things have had no difference?

What makes a player great-- and how can we compare yesterday's and today's stars?

Answer 1

Viv Richards was great and would have been in any era.

Answer 2

yes ofcourse viv would have been much better with all the technology, a great player is someone who has great determination and great natural and built up skill, they are gifted

Answer 3

Viv was a great player. But he was not consistently great. See the following performances in test matches:

1) 1974-75 Pak v Win: 2 matches, 3 innings, 17 runs.

2) 1986-87 Nzl v Win: 3 matches, 4 innings, 77 runs.

3) 1977-78 Win v Aus: 2 matches, 2 innings, 62 runs.

4) 1990-91 Win v Aus: 5 matches, 7 innings, 174 runs.

5) 1988-89 Win v Ind: 4 matches, 5 innings, 135 runs.

6) 1976-77 Win v Pak: 5 matches, 9 innings, 257 runs.

7) 1981-82 Aus v Win: 3 matches, 6 innings, 160 runs.

8) 1989-90 Win v Eng: 3 matches, 5 innings, 141 runs.

9) 1983-84 Ind v Win: 6 matches, 9 innings, 306 runs.

Out of 29 series he played, in 9 series, his performances were not good. In 9 series, his performances were outstanding. In 11 series, we can call his performances as just 'good'.

On the other hand, Lara's performances were far superior than Viv's. Lara played 39 test match series. Lara had one failure. In 17 series, his performances were outstanding and in the remaining 21 series, his performances are just 'good'. There was a rare series 2005-06 Nzl v Win series in which Lara played 3 matches and in 5 innings, he could score only 90 runs. But this was a low scoring series in which only 670 runs were scored per test match.

Considering the kind of sustained domination in the career, IMO, if Don Bradman was at 100 marks (1st rank), Viv was at 57.7 (37th rank) marks and Lara at 67.3 marks (4th rank). Viv was at the level of Hanif Mohd, Jacques Kallis, Richie Richardson, Rahul Dravid, Dave Houghton and Sachin Tendulkar. Lara is in the group of Don Bradman, George Headley, Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, RG Pollock and Wally Hammond.

Viv's greatest test match performance was in the 1976 Eng v Win series. In 4 test matches, in 7 innings, he scored 829 runs (Against John Snow, Bob Willis, Alan Ward, Derek Underwood, Chris Old, Mike Selvey, Mike Hendrick, Pat Pocock, Geoff Miller, Tony Greig, John Balderstone and Bob Woolmer). Lara's greatest performances were against the greatest spinner of all time Muttiah Muralitharan (2002-03 Win v SRL series of 2 matches, 2 innings, 299 runs; 2001-02 SRL v Win series: 3 matches, 6 innings, 688 runs) .  

Some perspective. Thanks for your patience.

Answer 4

Viv's biggest asset was his charisma. He held a presence on the field that I have not felt nor seen on any other player. I have been privileged to see him in action live and to me he is still today one of the hardest hitters of ball. Now was he as good a batsman as Lara or Tendulka? Doubtful. However, he was certainly more valuable as he could intimidate you with the bat and his on field presence.

It is difficult to compare eras, but you have to remember, Viv and Co had to combat Lillie and Thomo in full flight more often back then. West Indies in the mid 70's to late 80's came to Australia and faced hostilities far more often than they do now. So on that note Richards and his side were under the pump, so to speak, more often.

To me he is the greates player I have seen in my lifetime - that is saying soemthing as I have seen many of the greats from the mid 70's to now. Greats from all around the globe and locally grown hero's.

Answer 5

Its a good question.

Viv Richards would have rivalled Sachin Tendulkar for being the outstanding player if the 2000's and here's why.

Richards had amazing ability, his hand-eye co'ordinance was the best ive ever seen, he had immense power and timing and he could change a game in an instance.

Flatter pitches- These days, pitches in test matches and ODI's are more suited to the batsmen, its not un-common to a test match pitch giving no help to the bowlers, and even pitches that do help, are tame compared to yester-year.

Bigger bats and better technology- Tendulkar's bat is massive, his thick edges often go over slips and his top edges often go over the boundary. Sir Viv didnt have that luxury, surely with a bigger bat he could have achieved more. Also batsmen these days get more protection, most batsmen these days are compulsive pullers and hookers because of helmets, Viv would have loved the safety

Field restrictions and power-plays- Imagine Viv coming in the opening overs of an ODI, and see the carnage evolve.

He possibly could have been the 2nd greatest cricketer of all time (behind Bradman)

Answer 6

Viv Richards was one h**l of a player, who would have thrived in any era.

He also never wore a helmet, until quite late on in his career, after he had retired from international cricket.

Greatness comes from a player's ability to perform outstanding feats, over and above thos of his contemporaries, and from the impact his deeds have on the watching public.

It is impossible to compare players from different eras.

Answer 7

V. richard type talent would be shiny if hes playing in this age