WHY GAVASKAR IS GREATER THAN TENDULKAR AS A BATSMAN

WHY GAVASKAR IS GREATER THAN TENDULKAR AS A BATSMAN 

INTRODUCTION 

To me Gavaskar as a batsman and as an individual is ahead of Tendulkar by miles. The quality of pace attack which Gavaskar faced was far superior to what Tendulkar ever had to deal with. The fearsome West Indian pace battery was at its ferocious best when Gavaskar had to deal with it. It was the strongest pace attack in Test cricket history. Vivian Richards is on record having said that because of the ease with each Gavaskar played the likes of Roberts, Holding, Garner and Marshall -- to name only four of the battery -- and the phenomenal number of centuries (13+1) he made against them, a feat that stood in singular greatness in that era when a game's great in Greg Chappell dared not extend his playing career beyond where it stood, in order to avoid facing the mighty attack in the West Indies in 1983, Gavaskar at 5 ft 4 in stood tallest among the greatest batsmen the game has thrown up in history. He and he alone succeeded thus against this fearsome pace battery, a feat which must rank him above all the other batting greats whose portraits adorned the walls of the Long Room at Lord's.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QhGJynR-BVs&feature=share

HELMET AND THE HIT

Gavaskar never wore the modern helmet. Towards the end of his playing career he wore the skull cap after being hit on the head by a Malcolm Marshall bouncer. That was the only time in his life that he was ever hit on his head whereas Tendulkar has been hit on his helmet umpteen number of times. That much for judgement of line and length as a batsman. 

THE MARSHALL CASE

In his twilight years in the 1992 World Cup Malcolm Marshall was a shadow of his former self as a speedster. But Tendulkar struggled against him, by his own admission. On the contrary Gavaskar handled him with consummate ease when Marshall was in his prime, picking no less than (7+1) centuries off his bowling. Alan Davidson has something to testify to this effect in relation to the Bicentennial Lord's 5-day International in 1987 when Gavaskar scored an immaculate 188 off Marshall, Hadlee and company in the Mecca of Cricket. Marshall was carted all over the park at the Feroz Shah Kotla ground in Delhi by Gavaskar during his 94-ball century which equalled Don Bradman's 29 Test centuries. Marshall was not to be clobbered thus with sixes hooked by the Little Master off his bowling. He bounced back into reckoning getting Gavaskar cheaply in the following innings before the batting maestro decided to go down the order at number 4 for the Madras Test. In the very first over, however, Marshall had sent back Siddhu and Vengsarkar back to the pavillion and there was the Little Master at the crease waiting to receive a Marshall delivery in the fifth ball of the first over with the score reading 0/2. Viv Richards jokingly remarked from the slip cordon that wherever Gavaskar placed himself in the batting order the Indian team score would still read 0 ! The rest is history. When the Indian innings was declared closed Gavaskar stood at 236 not out. That much for the comparison thus far.

Gavaskar went to the West Indies one final time and scored 147 not out at Georgetown to save the Test match, battling against the fire-power of Marshall, Holding, Garner and company. His deal with the Windies was not yet done. He dealt the coup de grace to his career in the Lord's Bicentennial International by alone standing tall against Marshall with his immaculate 188 before he bade 'farewell to cricket' for the final time.

FOURTH INNINGS AND THE WORN WICKET

Gavaskar's fourth innings average in Test matches is the highest in India and his track record on wearing and worn wickets is unmatched by anybody else in India. He leaves Tendulkar way behind him in negotiating the kicking ball off a cracked wicket. The feather-bed wickets of modern-day Test cricket facilitated Tendulkar's run scoring and that too against relatively easier attacks while being armed to the teeth in terms of attire, helmet, leg guards, well-cushioned gloves et al. Gavaskar had none of these facilities. Today's technology and commercial compulsions make it mandatory for groundsmen to produce batting paradises where even triple centuries flow. During Gavaskar's time the wickets were far less favoured to the batsmen. And yet he scored the way he did.

The number of Test matches Gavaskar saved almost singlehandedly, so to say, for batting ever involves partnerships, remains singular in India's cricketing history. A Test match saved thus was no less than a Test match won and deserves no less credit, especially, when it happened to be ever a singular monumental effort on the part of the Little Master. Coming in to bat in the fourth innings one hour after tea on the third day and facing a monumental total of 600 plus to win, Gavaskar batted till one hour after tea on the fifth day to save the match, and this on a couple of occasions at least.

The last innings Gavaskar played was in the Bangalore Test against Pakistan in 1987. On a treacherous pitch in the fourth innings chasing 215 for a win India buoyed by Gavaskar's lifeline innings of 96 fell short by just a handful of runs. The master's dismissal was dubious but, nonetheless, he had played yet another innings of his life with the ball awkwardly coming off the wicket at all possible angles that left all others in disarray. But not this modern master who was playing his swansong innings in a manner that reminded old-timers of Hobbs and Sutcliffe battling with the stopping and the kicking ball on sticky English wickets. That was, Monsieur, Gavaskar for you, not for the kids of today who have no conception of anything beyond the hubbub and din of the thronging crowd at one-day and T20 bashes whose misnomer is also cricket.

BAT, BALL, BOUNDARY, BOUNCER, THE COVERED WICKET AND THE SUPERSOPPED OUTFIELD

The cricket gear has significantly changed today, aiding the batsman. Most significant, though, has been the increase in the size of the cricket bat, its thickness at the middle adding power to strokes and its thickness at the edges reducing the chances of a close-in catch, say, in the slips or in the gloves of the keeper. Where in earlier eras batsmen had to muster all their physical strength to power their strokes, now the slightest caress sends the ball careering to the fence. This means that runs are now more easily scored than before and, naturally, more prolifically so. Consequently, the number of double and triple centuries scored today are far more frequent. Added to this, as mentioned earlier, are the feather-bed wickets that the groundsmen invariably produce under instructions from the authorities that are punctuated by commercial compulsions. This gives a fairly unfair advantage to the bat over the ball. Boundaries have but been kept at 65 yards despite the added advantage of the heavier bat pounding the ball far more easily to the fence. Bouncers are limited to two despite the fact helmets are there to protect the skull. Where in days of yore a batsman's life was at stake when facing the short-pitched fast ball, now they are hooked with impunity for fours and sixes, fearlessly and with carefree abandon. Where technique saved the batsman earlier from certain physical harm  and often did not do so despite it, now the gear protects him from any harm and emboldens him to clobber the bowler for daring to challenge him with the short ball. The result has geen the decline in the quality of fast bowling and that of technical perfection in batting that would equip one to face up to genuine pace. No less a cricketing authority than Don Bradman has testified to the decline of fast bowling in recent times. How much would Tendulkar have scored against the fearsome West Indian pace attack of the 70s and the 80s without his armoury of helmet and superior gear on the fast wickets with no bowling restrictions coming to his aid? Well, Gavaskar did it all. And there lies the difference in technique, judgement, concentration, intelligence and pure batting skill. The intelligent will now discern, not the dull.

Wickets were left uncovered in days of yore which produced the fabled 'sticky wicket' post a shower that made batting an impossible proposition. Hobbs and Sutcliffe were masters on such sticky wickets and even put up century opening partnerships but Bradman struggled on such. George Headley performed better but the English opening duo were the best on such worst of wickets, primarily, though, on account of the English maritime climate consistently producing the 'sticky dog' after a heavy shower when the sun came out and dried up the pitch to a disconcerting and disastrous effect. Batsmen simply had to learn to cope for sheer survival against the stopping and the kicking ball and who better than Hobbs and Sutcliffe ever did so? Gavaskar was spared this ordeal as wickets had begun to be covered worldwide from the late sixties. But wickets were still underprepared often and were not so consistently good as in later years when Tendulkar prospered. Imagine what Bradman would have averaged had he the advantages of the modern game!

The entire playing field during rainfall has remained covered during much of Tendulkar's time as a player unlike that of Gavaskar. This has kept the outfield dry and not slowed down the ball after a shower. Boundaries have thus flown more easy unlike earlier when the softer outfield after rain has slowed down the stroked ball and allowed less runs to be scored. 

IN THE EYE OF EXPERTS

Don Bradman famously likened Tendulkar's style of batting to his own. The Indian batsman's compactness, balance and stroke-production particularly caught the Don's eye and he thought that he must played in much the same manner. Bradman said that he had not watched himself play -- a very pertinent physical and spiritual observation -- but he felt that he must have done so. He called his wife, Jessie, to watch Tendulkar on television then and there during the famous Sharjah one-day international that was going on and see if his own observation was correct, and Jessie Bradman corroborated it. This remark of Bradman has gained ground and heightened estimation of Tendulkar even more in the cricketing world.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HAjg0IbAsmc

In India's tour of Australia in 1999-2000 Neil Harvey was critical of Tendulkar's getting out to rash strokes when well past the half century mark and scorned the idea of comparing him with Bradman who seldom missed a big score once he was set. Harvey said, "This Tendulkar never seems to be quite set and keeps making mistakes way ahead into his innings. How can people possibly compare him to the Don?" In a subsequent series of India Down Under when Tendulkar's exploits and reputation had significantly grown, Neil Harvey lauded the Indian batting maestro but never compared him with the Don. To Harvey who had been the youngest member of Bradman's Invincibles of 1948 and who had scored a Test century alongside the Don on that trip in England, Bradman remained the ultimate in batting perfection and was nonpareil in his wizardry with the willow.

Richie Benaud was asked about his opinion on Tendulkar in relation to Bradman and he said to Ravi Shastri and Wasim Akram that he considered Tendulkar the best batsman since Bradman. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vthfSPF_LCw

Umpire Ghatoskar who had officiated in 14 Test matches including the one at Firoz Shah Kotla, Delhi, in 1983, one in which Sunil Gavaskar carted Marshall, Holding and company all over the park to knotch up his 94-ball 29th Test century that equalled Sir Donald Bradman's record, was unequivocal in stating that while Tendulkar was no doubt a great batsman, Gavaskar was the greatest of them all for he had faced the most lethal pace attack in history with aplomb like none else.

https://m.timesofindia.com/sports/cricket/news/gavaskar-not-tendulkar-the-greatest-former-umpire-gothoskar/articleshow/83658668.cms#:~:text=In%20a%20career%20spanning%2011,Test%20centuries%20by%20various%20batsmen.&text=%22Tendulkar%2C%20no%20doubt%2C%20was,any%20era%2C%22%20he%20said.

At the beginning of this essay I have written about what Vivian Richards said about Gavaskar to Tony Cozier sitting in the Long Room of Lord's. Viv apologised to the greats whose portraits were hanging in the Long Room before calling Gavaskar the greatest batsman of all time for the stated reasons. Period.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QhGJynR-BVs&feature=share

Madhav Apte, former opening batsman of India and CCI President from 1985-92 was asked by Nasser Hussain as to which one was the better batsman -- Tendulkar or Gavaskar. Apte said that both approached near technical perfection in batting but while Gavaskar was of a defensive mode in batting, Tendulkar was naturally more aggressive. He did not clearly say who was better but was quite effusive about Tendulkar's special gift in batsmanship. On the other hand, a Mumbai cricket journalist and author called Makarand Waingankar was categorical in his affirmation that Gavaskar was the better batsman as he had faced the fearsome West Indian pace attack with consummate ease and piled up runs against them. These West Indian speedsters were the greatest in the history of the game and Gavaskar's monumental achievements against them ranks him clearly ahead of Tendulkar. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7JqL8NJFYAQ

Alan Davidson testified to Gavaskar's technical preeminence among all the batsmen he had seen since his retirement. He especially mentioned Gavaskar's mastery of Marshall in the 1987 Lord's Bicentennial International when all others in the team -- no lame ducks otherwise -- were hopping around, disconcerted by Marshall's pace and wily work with the ball. Gavaskar, Davidson said, played each and every ball of Marshall and did not let a single one go through to the keeper, was not once beaten or was in any difficulty whatsoever. Well, Gavaskar did score 188 in the end to prove in his final innings at Lord's who in cricketing history would in the final reckoning be considered the greatest player of pace and who in consequence would today be deemed the greater of the two -- Tendulkar or Gavaskar. Dear friends, the answer is as clear as broad daylight unless, of course, you are born blind indeed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OB58v5Vr7Vs&feature=share

Garry Sobers held Gavaskar in high regard. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KrQme4BD11E&feature=share

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UC2Ik-Et1d0&feature=share

Kapil Dev was categorical in stating that Gavaskar was above Tendulkar as a batsman for his sheer handling of express pace bowling, the best that ever played the game in the last hundred years. And this was not merely the West Indian speedsters he was referring to but that of Pakistan, New Zealand, England and Australia as well. Kapil's assessment thus has been consistent over the years when in other interviews he has maintained the same stance. And he clarified that he did not say so because he had played with Gavaskar, that he was his compatriot which impelled him to rate him higher than Tendulkar but that he simply thought what Gavaskar was clearly above Tendulkar, Dravid and Kohli, qualifying his statement, though, that Virat Kohli was still playing and he cannot possibly be ranked as yet alongside the other greats as such. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zTn-KtgHjEw&feature=share

Here is an assessment made of Tendulkar by Gavaskar himself where he says that a day may come when even Gavaskar may be forgotten by the sheer glory that Tendulkar is likely to be. This is by way of his reply to Prannoy Roy's question whether Tendulkar would was due for becoming India's next Gavaskar. Gavaskar here makes uncannily accurate prophesies about Tendulkar's prospective career and says that the boy is a tremendous prospect for Indian cricket. Given below is the relevant video link.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7E8U6KzR2cs&feature=share

Imran Khan rates Gavaskar as better than Tendulkar purely because of his prolific run scoring against the mighty West Indian pace attack, the best combination of fast bowlers ever in the history of the game. According to him, Tendulkar never had to play such an attack and one must therefore judge Gavaskar as the better of the two based on that. 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=D1Iy0dbM0SA&feature=share

Here Imran categorically affirms about Gavaskar's superiority over Tendulkar. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XA7L8U_XlwQ&feature=share

Wasim Akram considered Gavaskar's scalp as the ultimate prize for him. Why so? What are his views on Gavaskar? Hear him out.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jpgf-wWvorU&feature=share

Inzamam-ul-Haq said that in today's conditions with vastly improved gear, heavier, broadened bat and flatter wickets, Gavaskar 10000 plus runs would have been 15000 of 16000 plus runs today. Believable? Watch and judge.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oSj_bXo76z0&feature=share

When Gavaskar surpassed Sir Donald Bradman's record of 29 Test centuries, he was compared to the great Australian legend. But Gavaskar cut the comparison short by stating that no such comparison could stand in the face of Sir Don's record of 29 centuries in 52 Tests as against his 29 centuries in almost twice as many Tests. Gavaskar had then famously said that unless a batsman of the future scored 30 centuries in 51 Tests, he could not be said to have been better than Sir Don. This candid declaration of Gavaskar has been in sharp contrast to what Tendulkar said when compared to Sir Don. He evaded the comparison and deflected discussion to some other aspect, that of serving the game which both Sir Don and he had done to their best ability, a digression totally extraneous to the contentious question thrown at him by an ABC journalist. Herein lies the difference between Gavaskar and Tendulkar as well, that of honesty, truthfulness, simplicity and genuine humility as opposed to a put-on one.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PEuoqAjgN_U&feature=share

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=th_s3LWzyCM&feature=share

Ravi Shastri was batting alongside Gavaskar. Hear him out and judge for yourselves how great a batsman Gavaskar was.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nMiLRgF6sjo&feature=share

Milind Rege was a Ranji Trophy player, comrade to Gavaskar in the Bombay team. Friend and associate of Gavaskar, this is what he had to say. View it for yourself and arrive at your own considered judgement. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=taJWwMILe3Y&feature=share

Ian Chappell, former Australian captain, commentator, keen observer and analyst of the game -- what does he say about Gavaskar?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r0Sj2gLW0v4&feature=share

John Arlott introduces this video. Watch it and come to terms with its appreciation of Gavaskar. 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=aMJUG7-Nvk8&feature=share

Written by Sugata Bose