Sir Viv Richards vs Brian Lara
Printed From: Cricket World
Category: Letter To The Editor
Forum Name: Cricket World Ratings
Forum Discription: Who is the Most Valuable Player?
URL: http://www.cricketworld.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=708
Printed Date: 20 May 2013 at 5:52am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.71 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Sir Viv Richards vs Brian Lara
Posted By: qasi
Subject: Sir Viv Richards vs Brian Lara
Date Posted: 07 January 2006 at 5:14pm
| I believe whenever a legend goes that is the time for new legend to get in the game.In past no doubt there is no comparision of Richard in past and nowsame for Lara these days.Both are great |
Replies:
Posted By: vize
Date Posted: 07 January 2006 at 7:43pm
|
Two great players. You are right both are legendary players. As it is Lara made his debut the year before Richards retires. Only one major difference, Richards played most of his cricket for a winning team while Lara played most of his cricket for a losing team.
------------- |
Posted By: -JP-
Date Posted: 08 January 2006 at 12:51pm
| If you think he is such a legend, why do you continually spell his name wrong? |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 08 January 2006 at 1:01pm
|
thats an unfair question there both legends but im only gonna say lara because i've seen so much of him i've heard of how richards is great but lara for me because ive seen him play alot ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 08 January 2006 at 3:57pm
| I'd have to say Sir Viv purely for the pure intimidation his presence at the crease had on the other team nad when he was in the mood he was simply impossible to bowl to |
Posted By: capital_s
Date Posted: 08 January 2006 at 8:06pm
|
Both great players. As vizesaid lara played for the losing team. That is
harder, which in a way makes lara more legendary. ------------- My two favourite Batsmen: Jacques Kallis is a very solid but destructive batsmen and not to mention he can bowl as well. I also like Michael Clarke for his amazing batting talent at such a young age |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 09 January 2006 at 2:04am
Vivian Richards was 'The Intimidator'. 
Lara is 'The Prince' or whatever some people call him.
They are both outstanding batsman. I can't say that one is better than the other. ------------- Regulation without integration leads to suicide. |
Posted By: MiNiWaRnEy
Date Posted: 09 January 2006 at 2:42am
|
Lara has a great deal more pressure n him then Vivian did, if ypu think about it Viv with no pressure could play naturally and perform better. Lara is amazing. Statistically if u want to look at it that way then Lara is better. I will sqay Lara is a bettyer batmen because he has done so well in a losing team, Viv would not have been as successful if he played for WI nowadays. Both very skilled, great to wqatch and awesome. ------------- |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 09 January 2006 at 10:14am
|
Yea, I agree with you. Lara has played most of his game in a losing team. He has always had pressure on him while Vivian Richards played in a great team, and never had pressure on him, which made his game easier. ------------- Regulation without integration leads to suicide. |
Posted By: Clobber
Date Posted: 09 January 2006 at 10:34am
| On the contrary you might argue that being in a losing team Lara has had less pressure since it's not like he is ever going to get dropped is he? On the other hand Richards played when WI cricket was strong and there was always a new talent to come in and replace you if you didn't deliver the goods, plus taking the captaincy over from Clive Lloyd placed masses of responsiblity and pressure on his shoulders as he tried to keep their successes coming |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 09 January 2006 at 10:39am
|
Well, I guess you're also right. Then that levels it out. What MiNiWaRnEy said and what you said cancel each other out and its equal. ------------- Regulation without integration leads to suicide. |
Posted By: qasi
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 5:28am
| I saw richard playing cricket and i belive no one could be better as compared with Richard in right handers and same is the case with Lara no one can macth him being a left hander.Both have the qualities to destroy bowling attacks. |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 11:37am
|
i think you shouldnt be comparing lara and richards in this case there equal ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: Sledger
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 12:55pm
|
Totally different styles , both touched by genius , why compare them at all? ------------- Mental disintegration works for me !! |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 5:16pm
Because they're both great batsman, and people want to know who's better!?  ------------- Regulation without integration leads to suicide. |
Posted By: ANIL KUMBLE
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 5:22pm
|
both are the same i dont think you can say ones better then the other one most people would say lara for something like 12 double tons fair enough but id liked to think there equal ------------- Check out my blog http://crictopia.blogspot.com/ pretty bad though... |
Posted By: saadadvanced7
Date Posted: 26 January 2006 at 5:28pm
|
I am sure that Richards could've broken all batting records, he just didn't have that desire. ------------- Regulation without integration leads to suicide. |