Read
the Second exclusive Wisden 2008 extract | Third
Wisden extract I Atherton
on Warne
You don’t really want to remember great players like this: Brian Lara filling
his boots, not with runs but dollars, in the fledgeling Indian Cricket
League at a far-flung cricketing outpost on the outskirts of Chandigarh, the
surroundings of Panchkula more scrub than stadium.
Puffy-cheeked and short of inspiration is no way to remember the most
instinctive, attractive batsman of his era, so it was slightly appropriate
that he made a match-winning century for Trinidad & Tobago in an
attempted comeback a few weeks later. In any event, he was denied the grand
farewell to his international career that two other modern-day greats, Shane
Warne and Glenn McGrath, were accorded last year in Sydney, with the Ashes
in the bag and the public paying full homage. At the magnificently revamped
Kensington Oval, Lara had the setting all right, but not the script to
match.
Responding in turns to Marlon Samuels’s confused calls for a single, Lara
shuffled forwards, backwards and then finally towards the pavilion for the
last time. For once, he was at the mercy of events, rather than controlling
them.
Even now, at the end of his career, Lara could not escape the intrigue and
controversy that accompanied his cricket from the moment in Antigua in 1994
that he broke Sir Garfield Sobers’s world record for the highest score in
Tests. For some said Samuels had been disillusioned about the way Lara as
captain had treated him, and this was the ultimate payback. Others said the
cock-up confirmed the deep malaise within the West Indies team, that not
even the basics could be executed competently — a malaise, moreover, in
which Lara was deeply complicit. All this was a pity.
Quite how Lara could have come to evoke such visceral and conflicting
opinions, at a time when West Indies were not exactly flush with talent, is
one for West Indian cricket historians. For some in the Caribbean, those two
developments — Lara’s ascent to greatness and the decline of the West Indies
team — are interwoven; for others, he was simply unlucky with his timing,
and the fact that he was a great player in an undeniably shabby side merely
added lustre to his reputation. Some day, someone from inside the West
Indies dressing-room will write the definitive tale. It should be quite a
read, failure being more interesting than success.
Lara’s quixotic impact within the four walls of the West Indies dressing-room
is, anyhow, beyond the scope of this appreciation. Lara the batsman can be
assessed objectively on what we saw, rather than what we did not see. And
any fair-minded assessment could only conclude that he must be one of the
finest entertainers to have played in this or any other era.
For entertainment was the creed by which he lived as a batsman. Many talk the
talk but Lara, undeniably, walked the walk. Records and statistics must have
been important to him — how else does a batsman galvanise himself to score
501 in a county match against Durham? — but the means were never sacrificed
to the ends. “Did I entertain you?” he bellowed to the spectators in the
newly minted Kensington stand at the end of his last match. They cheered,
but not loudly enough. “Did I entertain you?” he asked again. And even those
in the anti-Lara camp could not deny it.
It is the West Indian way, of course. If, broadly, batsmanship can be split
into two schools — the roundheads and the cavaliers — then West Indies have
always specialised in the latter. It is the main reason why West Indies
cricket is so cherished beyond narrow international boundaries and why the
current decline is felt so deeply and so widely. Cricket, put simply, is
more fun played the West Indian way. It is to Lara’s great credit that,
whatever the circumstances, he stayed faithful to that particular creed.
Lara was in the tradition of great batsmen for whom the fundamentals were
essentially self-taught, for whom technique was always the servant and not
the master. His eye for the ball and his co-ordination were granted by
nature, and nurture in Trinidad did the rest. With his brothers and the
community of Cantaro in the Santa Cruz valley to sustain him, Lara’s
upbringing may not have been as solitary as Don Bradman’s, but his early
methods bring the Don to mind: for a stump and a golf ball substitute a
broomstick and a lime or a marble.
Such was his subsequent impact as a schoolboy batsman that Tony Cozier would
write in these pages \ of his record-breaking spree in 1994 that “there was
no real surprise among his countrymen — simply the feeling that his
inevitable date with destiny had arrived rather more suddenly than
expected”.
This schoolboy brilliance did not, it must be said, extend to the Youth World
Cup in Australia in 1988, when I first came across Lara as an opposing
captain. Word certainly had it that he was special, but a combination of
poor outback pitches and fierce heat (appropriately, James Boiling had a
good tournament for England) made batting far from easy. With just one
half-century in the tournament, Lara flopped. But within three years he was
captaining Trinidad and had become the owner of a maroon cap. Two years
later, he played his great innings of 277 at Sydney, described by Rohan
Kanhai, no stranger to instinct and individuality at the crease, as “one of
the greatest innings I have ever seen”.
There was no looking back after that — only a question of how far he would go
and how many records he would break. What, then, made him stand out? Four
things, I think. Barry Richards once said of Garry Sobers that he was the
only 360-degree player in the game. He was referring, I think, to his
backlift and follow-through, which routinely travelled through a full arc.
Lara might well be described so, too, not just for his backlift, which
reached the perpendicular when he was “on the go”, but also for where he
could hit the ball — if not quite 360 degrees, then as near as dammit. No
other contemporary player, save perhaps Mohammad Azharuddin, could deflect
the ball so finely and so powerfully with a turn of the blade and flick of
the wrists. Lara had subtlety in an age of power and brute force.
This unrestricted repertoire, the widest of arcs being open to him, and the
ability to hit good balls to the boundary made him uniquely feared by
opposing captains. You might worry about Adam Gilchrist, say, butchering an
attack and smashing a bowler to smithereens, but Lara made captains, not
bowlers, look silly.
If you knew you were going to die, you’d prefer a single bludgeoning blow to
the head, or a quick bullet to the brain, rather than death by a thousand
ever-so-precise cuts. Eleven fielders were never enough; there were always
gaps to plug. When he scored his 375 against my England team, I remember
moving first slip out when Lara had scored 291. He edged the very next ball
right where first slip had been. I’d love to know whether it was deliberate;
I always doubted it, simply on the basis that such a level of genius was
beyond my comprehension.
Thirdly, Lara was undoubtedly the best player of spin in his era, an era that
did not lack for world-class spinners. There might not have been such
abundance of quality as before, but in Anil Kumble, Muttiah Muralitharan and
Shane Warne, he came up against three of the greatest ever. No one has
played Murali better than Lara in Sri Lanka in 2001-02. He hit 688 runs at
114 and reduced the maestro to impotency (against everyone else Murali was
omnipotent, bowling Sri Lanka to a 3-0 win). It was no coincidence, perhaps,
that it was against Lara’s West Indies in 1999 that Warne was dropped for
the first and last time in his Test career.
That series saw Lara at the peak of his powers, and his unbeaten 153 to win
the Barbados Test is the fourth reason he stood out. Great batsmen play
great innings, and on that day Lara created, I believe, the best innings I
have seen either as player or observer of the game. England were watching in
Lahore, where we were preparing for the 1999 World Cup, and no other
contemporary batsman would have had the effect of keeping a bunch of
professional cricketers glued to the screen until the small hours of the
morning. It was a stunning innings. “Christ,” one of the team said to me, “I
wish you’d get as excited by some of our players.” Well, honesty always was
my downfall.
Only one reason prevents this observer from placing Lara at the apex of modern
West Indian batsmen. Against extreme pace he got hit too often, and he could
seem extraordinarily jumpy at the crease. I’ve often wondered what kind of
effect removing helmets would have on modern-day players, a hypothetical
that doesn’t apply to Vivian Richards.
Still, to hold both Test and first-class records for the highest innings, and
thrill a generation of watchers in the process, is something Lara can look
back on with a great deal of pride. Warne, assessing the cricketers he
played against, was once heard to say that Sachin Tendulkar came first,
daylight second and Lara third. That may be so. But who would you rather
watch? The answer is not in doubt: a Lara innings was always a thing of
beauty, no matter who the beholder.
Life of Brian
— Brian Charles Lara was born on May 2, 1969, in Trinidad, the tenth of 11
children
— Made his Test debut in 1990 against Pakistan
— In 1994 he recorded the highest Test innings at the time, 375 v England in
Antigua, and the highest first-class score, 501* for Warwickshire v Durham
— Appointed West Indies captain in 1997 for the first time
— Having lost his record Test score to Matthew Hayden, he regained it in 2004
with 400* v England, again in Antigua
— Led one-day team to victory in 2004 Champions Trophy
— In November 2005 became most prolific run-scorer in Tests. His tally of
11,953 is still the record
— Played 131 Tests, average 52.88, and 299 one-day internationals, average
40.48, before retiring after being run out in final match in World Cup last
year
Mike Atherton will be taking over the reins as The Times's Chief Cricket
Correspondent at the start of next month. Christopher Martin-Jenkins will
continue to contribute on a regular basis.
i love brian lara because he provided hope and inspiration to a team falling more into the hole everyday tendulkar doesnt have the flair and playing style of Lara but thats comparing 2 different eras and 2 diff teams, 1 with spread talent, one with the Wizard. Lara simply is more fun to watch. He is THE Entertainer of Cricket. Period.
Faiyaz, Burnaby,
It is correct that lara didn't have 100s Vs Donald, Wasim, Waqar in tests. In ODIs things were different. What i remember is correct, why South Africa eliminated from woldcup when they had best chances, thanks to lara's super 100s on two occasions. Whereas sachin played well against Zimbawye, Bnagladesh, Namibia, Bermuda, Kenya, Sree Lanka and Australia(If no Mcgrath plays).
Nobody (saves M.Crowe) was dominant aginst Wasim.
Then against India, Lara was average. But i like one innings (90 in Mohali,1994). He played only 3 tests in India!!!. He was very careless against average bowlers.Also he was always a victm of Bad Outs.
I bet Sachin would play, if you could provide him one decent pitch, no worry about target, bowling is not great and if the other batsmen also in good touch. For lara nobody knows his time and 'd never got support from team mates, ...
One more, Sachin's records are accumulated ones (Allan Border also had similar records), wheras lara's instantaneous!!!!!!!
Sinoj, Bangalore, India
Mr. Mohanlal from Kerala, you clearly haven't seen enough of Lara sir.... What a joke. Lara has won more test matches than Sachin and that too scoring hundred after hundred in a losing team. Anyone who saw that 153 in Barbados will change their mind. I saw it live and boy wasn't I thrilled. It's one of the great moments of my life to see such an enthralling innings. All of Sachin's great exploits (barring 155 against Shane Warne only Aussie Attack in Chennai) are in one-day cricket. If you take one-day cricket Lara has scored against all opposition and tearing them to bits... Please Sachin is a great in his own right, great technique, great human being and a great team man. Entertainment and sheer brilliance... only one name.... BRIAN CHARLES LARA
D. ANDREW SAM, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu, India
GOD first created Brian Lara.
That was for practice.
Then he created Sachin Tendulkar.
Ali, Bandra,
Glen McGrath said B.C Lara was more difficult to bowl to and had more fear to see Lara at the crease than Sachin. Lara made 277 against McGrath and company yet they say Lara cant play fast bowling? Please explain
Jamie Nash, Christchurch, Newzeland
Lara..a great entertainer..a little more dominating when on song..all right.But to me Sachin is the best.2 things clearly stand out in Sachin's favour.He has got much varied very good 100's against quality attacks(i mean great bowling combinations of the world).Lara lags behind in this
aspect .He do not have a 100 against Waqar-Wasim duo, Donald-Pollock duo&Kumble-who ever be duo in India in tests.These pairs along with Walsh-Ambrose& Mcgrath-Warne pairs could unquestionably be considered as the great bowling pairs in Sachin-Lara era..Sachin has quality 100s against all except Walsh-Ambi pair.To me Lara was a more dominant player against average bowling while Sachin was a much prolific scorer(not always dominant) against strong great varied bowling attacks.And I value the second quality a bit more.2ndly Sachin could handle pressure much better than Lara.He really had 1 flaw to correct to silence his critics..a 100 vs Aus in Aus in final in 2nd inns.And he did it in style vs Lee & co
mohanlal, kerala, India
Lara,like Atherton said has the ability to hit good balls for four or six,and Sachin is good at hitting bad balls,reverse sweep is not played against good balls..Sachin will not give his icket away.If Lara opened in one dayers he would of made a lot more runs with the early field restrictions.
E C Joseph, oshawa, ontario
Let us celebrate this extraordinary cricketer the Great Brian Charles Lara the best batsmen of the last fifty years after the Don it is The Prince of Trinidad. Thanks Athers for this great article
Paul Martin, London, Ontario, Canada
Can someone tell me if they dont enjoy watching Sachin on his toes cutting the ball, gliding a perfect bouncer over the slip for 4, smacking the ball just a few inches past the stumps at the bowlers end (on either side), the trade mark upper cut, leg glance, paddle sweep and what not. I dont think there is any shot in the world Sachin cant play. I cant say the same about Lara. I like watching Lara but Mike is crazy if he thinks Tendulkar is a lesser delight to behold. The recent Test series and ODIs in Aus was a case in point. In the ODI finals his reverse sweep shot left people speechless. To me they are both great but Tendulkar is better esp. if u consider cricket as both Tests & ODIs and not just Tests.
Jean, Brisbane, Aus
Oh, I'd much rather behold Sachin Tendulkar, thank you.
Nik, Vancouver,
Michael Atherton's last comment that a Lara's innings was a thing of beauty no matter who the beholder, is a great line!There was almost an objective beauty and grandeur to Lara's performances and prowess, like Sir Viv Richards. Lara for me possessed all the virtues of batting greatness. Technique that looked so natural yet was so perfect. Amazing poise in relation to the ball bowled, constituting the picture perfect form of of Lara, in stroke. Only Richards matched those magical qualities. Both articulating absolute grace in their batting strokes yet terrific power, that seem to hail from another world, as their eyesight must have done.Richards has on it on raw power and uber godliness with his raffish attitude that relates to Atherton's comments about Richards being undeterred by raking pace. Whilst Lara jumped around the crease unhappily sometimes,Sir Viv was really a monumental figure and presence at the wicket.No one messed with him or his style! Lara is at his shoulder however.
Adam Sales, Bristol, England
Nicely written Article by Athers....He makes a very good point with Lara being jumpy against real good pace bowling..I have always felt that too..except for McGarth he hasnt played any good pace bowlers of merit really well..Wasim,Waqar,Donald,DeVelliers and SA of old..Srinath(good bowler against lefties)..and for obvious reasons didnt face Bishop,Walsh and Ambrose...Basically a genius against medium pace and spin bowlers but average to good against real pace..
chucker, Somerset, NJ
I would like to thank Michael Atherton for another excellent, thoughtfully written and most importantly balanced article. This is without a doubt the best literature on Brian Lara I've ever read. Personally I'm always a little puzzled when people continue to ask Warne who was better, Lara or Tendulkar, after all they both thrashed him. Glenn McGrath troubled them both and the battles were much more close. To many (including myself) Tendulkar is the perfect batsman, as perfect technique as you could want, no discernable weaknesses, the ability to attack or defend to suit the situation, good under pressure. However as Michael Atherton says cricket is more fun played the Carribean way and Lara embodies WI cricket perhaps more than any other player. He had phenomenal flare, the ability to flourish in the face of ridiculous odds (Barbados), however he was also the essence of WI dysfunction and was a divisive force. Thanks Athers for the dose of reasoned perspective, an Indian fan.
Tej, Bangalore, India
I think Lara has more English fans and SRT has more aussie fans.SA's/PAK are split on their views and so are indians! I had a WI-ian in my team and he said it is difficult to shake Sobers from his heart.The King of this cricket Jungle will always be Viv.The Don of the cricket mafia will always be bradman.When cricket is watched for one man,you know they have created something special,something superhuman. That is enough!!!
I personally loved to watch lara play spin.But found him so jumpy against fast bowlers that i seldom watched him bat in test matches.I remember how donald and mcgrath troubled him.He slashes the ball much to my dislike,but a lot of fans love that.
I have always loved SRT's balance.While his technique and shots are copy book that attracted purists he contradicted them with his grip.Only SRT can be just above 5ft and have a bottom handed grip and play the best cover drives in the game!
I think if you put ODI and test combined SRT has many more memorable knocks!
Paul gasco, burmingham, England
Lara's simply the best batsman of his generation. Nobody's ever carried the burden like Lara's carried. I mean, once you are on the ground it's not the millions of people count but your ten team mates. You play for your team and not the country in reality when you are on the ground. In that Lara had no support at all. Tendulkar had a ganguly, shewag, dravid, Azhar, Sidhu, Jadeja. Can you mention one west Indian bastmen except for Chanderpaul filling the boots of these six indian comrades of sachin? Lara had to struggle all the way, all the way. Richards never struggled because he threw his wicket when someone troubled him. He just wanted to keep his reputation of master blaster but Lara when needed got into a shell for the team and broke the shell with gusto. Can you imagine Richards scoring 153 and the preivious 213 of 1999. Richards might have gone for a stylish 50 or 70. Lara's the best batsman since bradman.
Faruk, Trichirapalli, India
Speak for yourself, Mike......some "beholders" would beg to differ.
That said, Lara and Tendulkar are equally great and their games are equally aesthetic, at least in my book.
Brandon Gilchrist, Sydney, Australia
I wouldnt agree with Shane Warne saying Tendulkar first daylight second and Lara third(even though Shane has lots of experience in these matters than myself!!) because the genius of Lara is there to see, and it would always be a see saw battle when you compare Tendulkar and Lara. I would also not agree with Atherton saying that somebody would prefer Lara than Tendulkar. i dont think Tendulkar is that bad to watch.... So quit comparing these two and just enjoy their batting...
Ramakrishnan, chennai, India
Dear Mike:
Thank you for a very well written article on the "Great Brian Charles Lara" career in cricket.
It is rather sad to know that he was not given the recognition that should have accord him in Barbados, at Kensington Oval on the very last day of his test career.
West Indies Cricket Board should be ashamed of themselves for not honouring him for all his years of service to West Indian Cricket, and also his recognition as the greatest batsman who ever played the game of cricket. As a fellow West Indian who grew up playing, and watching the game of cricket, there were the 3.W's. Sir viv Richards, Sir Garfield Sobers, and the great Rohan Kanhai, who incidently was a beautiful batsman to watch, but none of them match the artistry,technique,and beauty of Brian Lara. West indies cricket would never be the same again. Only once in a life time comes along a Brian Lara.
Jeffrey Churchill, Pierrefonds, Quebec.CANADA
Abhijoy- who cares what the Indians think about Lara? Ask anybody who's ever held a proper bat and knows a bit about cricket will say that they'll rather watch Lara than Tendulkar..just having a billion of your own countrymen supporting and idolising you doesn't mean that you are the best...Lara is THE BEST.
Mike Atherton- this was a really good article like all of yours {except that you still don't want to rate him higher than Sachin, you always hold back a little and with every praise about lara you add a flaw, which is good writing but not what I as a die-hard fan would like to hear:) }..and your commentary (TV) is excellent as well..you seem measured & neutral & well-spoken unlike most of the other ex-players who just knows how to criticise..
Shafeen Husain, Minneapolis, MN, USA
I think Atherton has Colonial hangover. His Oxbridge education has taught him that. That's why he never gives his dues to Asians apart from Wasim, and then he speaks about tampering indirectly. Face it ASIA produces the BEST. The best ASIAN batsman of all time is better than the greatest Englishman. There is no one in England that can be compared to Tendulkar ,Miandad, Inzi etc. The Asian (Pakistani) bowlers are the greatest of all time; Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Aaqib, Kapil, Kumble, Mustaq, Qadir, Saqlain and Muralithran and Shoaib. Face it if Pakistan were around during Bradman era, his stumps would have been demolished. Pakistan bowling would turn his 99 average to 29.
Mohammad Khan, Karachi, Pakistan
I think its best to celebrate the genius of Lara and Sachin than compare the two.I always loved watching both of them and i have never been able to say who was the better player.And the 153 at Bridgetown is probably the best test innings I have seen.However to me the mark of a great test batsmen would always be when and where he got the runs.And on this count I rate Rahul Dravid,Steve Waugh and Inzamam as greats ahead of these two batsmen.And i am not looking at this through Indian tinted glasses as someone earlier mentioned!
Venkat Reddy, Chennai, India
ATHERTON is remembered for his boring batting and in particular his BATTLE with ALLAN DONALD. WELL ALLAN DONALD 'White lightning' said the greatest batsman of all time was Sachin Tendulkar. Allan Donald was arguably the greatest bowler of his era. If he played more matches and South Africa were admitted into Cricket earlier i.e 80s then he would be right up there amongst highest wicket takers EVER. Allan Donald is an all time Great.
Mr. Smith, Johannesburg, South Africa
Lara was a geat player no doubt but to say that you will watch him bat to anyone else in modern cricket is your opinion of course.After all most of his big runs ( 375 & 400 )have been scored against England and to get into Wisden you have to score runs against England. I dont think the Indians hold him in too high regard is because he has not scored much against them ( Ave : 34.55 ). As most bowlers( apart from the English of course) say with Lara you always had a chance even when he was going great guns but against Tendulkar it is much more difficult.
abhijoy, Telford, UK
I do not think that any other topic has been discussed so passionately amongst the public and also the players as to who is the greatest batsman of the last 15 years. Despite Ricky Ponting's overage of almost close to 60 I do not believe that he is in the same ball park as the other two. But Lara and Tendulkar are very close in quality , albeit very different in their technique and style. Overall I reckon Tendulkar was a better player ( although currently he is a shadow of his former self and even as a shadow he had a successful tour of Australia) and I also found him to be more enjoyable to watch. However , I do think that the difference is marginal. Both are easily in my Top 3 batsmen of the last 30 years (Viv Richards being number 1).
Salman Khan, Canberra, ACT
Michael, firstly congrats on your new role - great to see an old MGS boy doing so well - captaining England is only a distant second to replacing CMJ. Years ago, I used to read your competitor rag just for CMJ's articles and more recently just for your's, so now i can finally stick to just one paper!
On Lara - i agree that he was the most exciting and gifted bastmen of his age, and if you compare him to tendulkar, he scaled greater heights, but also plumbed greater depths - it is in the inherent nature of the entertainer and flawed genius that defines Lara's batting - would he have achieved so much if he had restrained himself in the way Tendulkar often does? I aliken them to two sine waves - similar average level, but lara had a greater amplitude, which heightened the thrill. Nothing is more intoxicating than watching an exotic player who is capable of greatness or self destruction at the blink of an eye.
Oh, and on Viv - the King.
Vaseem, London, UK
Can't disagree with your wonderful assessment of Lara as genius and was stunned to see that you could actually write an article without taking an unnecessary potshot at Tendulkar -- the man you said was just "now just a comic hero" a year ago and the man whose motives you questioned rather crudely. And then we get to the last paragraph and you couldn't resist. Perhaps you think your view is more legitimate than Shane Warne's and that's your prerogative, but you really shouldn't claim to speak for everyone. I'd rather watch both Lara and Tendulkar than you, though.
A.S., Nassau,
I am an Indian and any given day I prefer watching LARA than others inCluding SACHIN.
MELKODI, KUNDAPUR, INDIA
I dont agree with the author that Lara was more pleasing to watch. I think Sachin has grace, elegance and power. He can play all types of games and is such a delight to watch. I love Lara too but I dont think Atherton is right in saying that people would rather watch Lara than Sachin. I totally beg to differ. As some one pointed out Lara plays attacking cricket when he is in the mood and gets out if he thinks he has to graft to get runs or if he's struggling against a specific bowler. Thats why it looks like he has an attacking style of play. To me Sachin innovates and yet at the same time appears technically near perfect. So i would prefer to watch Sachin's genius over Lara's flamboyance anytime. Again this is not to say Lara is not great. I love his style too but its just to refute the author's last point which i thought was unnecessary.
Paul, Hamilton, NZ
The comment that he could have been better still and didn't fulfill his potential speaks volume of the man's ability. After such a wonderful career, people still say he was an under-achiever; can you imagine the genius??
And Mike after your praise for Lara, be prepared for a bombartment of Indians' comments trying to prove Tendulkar is better than Lara. Only if they could take Indian-tinted glasses off to see the genius in flow.
Cheers!!
Noman Yousuf, Karachi, Pakistan
Lara was a genius and enetertainer no doubt. However, one must also mention that he has scored a lot of runs in dead rubber matches (almost 2000 at an average of 80) particularly in the latter half of his career e.g. his 400 against England and his double century at Adelaide. In both series he failed when it really mattered at the start of the series.
Nonetheless I wish he he was still playing test cricket.
Satya Dash, Cambridge,
you can argue for days about who is better, lara or tendulkar, but really, does it matter? at the end of the day they are both champions who enriched the game and should both be immortalised,
john boon, Townsville, Australia
Mr.Adil,
Though you might be correct regarding the glide, you have forgotten that mosterous straight drive in the WC opener of Nitini who at that time was bowling over 90 mph...
Again as Artherton put it Lara's range and angle of strokes were extreme and in the history of the game only Sir Gary is equal to him.
Mike is also right in saying the role of the helmet in assisting the modern day greats like Lara, Sachin, Ponting (?) to scale such hights which luxury the old greats like Sir Gary,Richards( Vivian & Barry) never had...
Ram, Dubai,
I have not seen any of Lara's innings live, but undoubtedly, the man was simply a master of entertainment, and after all, that is what it's really about. The only batsman i will say came close was Vivian Richards. I was fortunate to see his 291 at the oval; "What an innings" !
Kelvin, Yardley, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kelvin Nurse, Yardley, Pa. USA
Actually,as the "beholder" I'd rather watch Tendulkar.
Lara was the supreme cutter.
Tendulkar ,however,was better at practically every other stroke.
When did you last see Lara hit a four straight past the bowler off the back foot anyway?
Or for that matter, a glide over slips of an express delivery with perfect control.
Can't " quite remember"?
Figures.
Adil, Ghor, India
As the "beholder" I'd rather watch Tendulkar.
Lara was the supreme cutter.
Tendulkar was better at just about every other stroke.
When was the last time you saw Lara hit a four straight past the bowler on the back foot anyway?
Or ,for that matter, glide an express delivery over slips with perfect control.
Don't "quite remember"?
Thought so.
Adil, Ghor, India
The 360-degree attribute applied to Sobers would, I think, refer to his ability to 'pierce the field' at will.
I remember seeing him at Lords, coming in when the Windies were under pressure. The first ball was hit for four and "not a man move".
Mike, Malaga, Spain
As good as those figures are you always felt that they could have been better.
West Indies cricket was a shambles on and off the park and I saw too many matches and innings where Lara simply did not look bothered, he would scamper a quck 20-30-40 and then lose interest once the field was set defensively and the bowlers bowled a negative line.
With other great batsmen - Ponting, Tendulkar, Richards etc that would be a sign to change tack a little and start to work the ball into the gaps, when Lara was in the mood and had the motivation this he'd do, but all too often he'd hole out.
A great player who could have been greater, what I think he really lacked was a couple of good batsmen at the top of the order with him who could provide a foil to his genius. If only the West Indies had a Dravid to his Tendulkar then I'm certain his average would be 5-10 runs higher and he'd have another 2,000 or so Test runs.
Test cricket is a poorer place without Lara.
Offspinner, Freiburg,