Sehwag or Watson?

[Value Added]

Sehwag at the moment. Watson has the potential to be better if he stays injury free and can continue his present form long term.

 

[The 747]

You cannot be serious.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Sehwag by daylight x1000000000000000000

 

[Ferris_rules]

Pound for pound, Sehwag by a mile.

Sehwag >>>Daylight >>> Watson.

Batting and fielding averages
Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 4s 6s Ct St
Tests 72 123 4 6248 319 52.50 7767 80.44 17 19 885 75 56 0
ODIs 219 213 8 7036 146 34.32 6802 103.44 12 35 971 116 82 0
T20Is 14 13 0 313 68 24.07 204 153.43 0 2 34 14 1 0
First-class 135 223 8 10735 319 49.93 31 37 115 0
List A 289 278 13 8989 146 33.92 13 52 106 0
Twenty20 52 51 4 1253 94* 26.65 792 158.20 0 8 149 49 8 0
Bowling averages
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
Tests 72 68 2551 1312 30 5/104 5/118 43.73 3.08 85.0 0 1 0
ODIs 219 134 4111 3623 88 3/25 3/25 41.17 5.28 46.7 0 0 0
T20Is 14 1 6 20 0 - - - 20.00 - 0 0 0
First-class 135 7182 3745 94 5/104 39.84 3.12 76.4 1 0
List A 289 5716 4916 134 4/17 4/17 36.68 5.16 42.6 2 0 0
Twenty20 52 17 258 370 16 3/14 3/14 23.12 8.60 16.1 0 0 0

Batting and fielding averages
Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 4s 6s Ct St
Tests 17 29 1 1106 120* 39.50 2169 50.99 1 8 151 5 13 0
ODIs 96 78 22 2276 136* 40.64 2741 83.03 4 10 218 37 26 0
T20Is 7 6 1 86 33 17.20 73 117.80 0 0 8 2 2 0
First-class 81 140 16 5799 203* 46.76 14 31 67 0
List A 159 138 30 4117 136* 38.12 5139 80.11 6 21 44 0
Twenty20 34 32 8 831 97* 34.62 573 145.02 0 7 77 33 10 0
Bowling averages
Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w 10
Tests 17 26 1750 883 27 4/42 5/84 32.70 3.02 64.8 1 0 0
ODIs 96 84 3553 2868 99 4/39 4/39 28.96 4.84 35.8 2 0 0
T20Is 7 5 75 108 3 1/17 1/17 36.00 8.64 25.0 0 0 0
First-class 81 7627 4313 148 7/69 29.14 3.39 51.5 3 1
List A 159 5343 4467 140 4/39 4/39 31.90 5.01 38.1 2 0 0
Twenty20 34 26 544 648 30 3/10 3/10 21.60 7.14 18.1 0 0 0

 

[DaRick]

If you were going on batting alone then clearly Sehwag. Bowling wise, Sehwag is actually pretty good, hes better than any of our spinners just India usually play 2 spinners so hes hardly used.

No, he isn't.

He's a reasonable part-timer who flights the ball reasonably well, gets some turn and may break a few partnerships, but his variety is altogether too limited for him to be a viable Test spinner. For instance, he doesn't seem to vary his flight and pace very much. He also bowls a bit of tripe, pitching it too short on occasion.

As for the OP, it's not a fair comparison. One is a specialist opening batsman who can be used in a partnership-breaking capacity, whereas the other is a moderately versatile batsman who is currently succeeding at opening, but can also get a few wickets per innings simply by bowling straight, getting some reverse swing and occasionally changing up his pace and length. Watson is a good fielder; Sehwag isn't.

As a batsman, Sehwag's obviously better, if that's what you mean.

 

[Sylvia Saint]

double post*

 

[Sylvia Saint]

Wasn't it only 2 summers ago when Sehwag couldn't get a gig in the Indian team? Some of the comments on here would lead you to believe that he is the best thing since sliced bread. Has he improved a heap since 07/08? Or were the Indian selectors nuts for leaving him out in the first place?

These are serious questions BTW. I don't follow Indian cricket that closely.

ps. On current form Watson is one of the best cricketers in the world. Whether or not he stays fit and keeps his form up remains to be seen.

 

[alfy!]

Sehwag!

 

[Ferris_rules]

No, he isn't.

He's a reasonable part-timer who flights the ball reasonably well, gets some turn and may break a few partnerships, but his variety is altogether too limited for him to be a viable Test spinner. For instance, he doesn't seem to vary his flight and pace very much. He also bowls a bit of tripe, pitching it too short on occasion.

As for the OP, it's not a fair comparison. One is a specialist opening batsman who can be used in a partnership-breaking capacity, whereas the other is a moderately versatile batsman who is currently succeeding at opening, but can also get a few wickets per innings simply by bowling straight, getting some reverse swing and occasionally changing up his pace and length. Watson is a good fielder; Sehwag isn't.

As a batsman, Sehwag's obviously better, if that's what you mean.

Actually you will find that Sehwag is more than a useful bowler and has even won a MOM for his bowling alone.

Bowling wise they are about on par IMO. Its just that Sehwag is not used very often.

 

[DaRick]

Wasn't it only 2 summers ago when Sehwag couldn't get a gig in the Indian team? Some of the comments on here would lead you to believe that he is the best thing since sliced bread. Has he improved a heap since 07/08? Or were the Indian selectors nuts for leaving him out in the first place?

These are serious questions BTW. I don't follow Indian cricket that closely.

ps. On current form Watson is one of the best cricketers in the world. Whether or not he stays fit and keeps his form up remains to be seen.

A few points:

1) Sehwag's form was generally dire from after his 254 in Lahore in 2005/06 to 2007/08 (although he did score one century against WI).

2) He's in his prime right now.

3) The selectors did err in leaving him out - Wasim Jaffer was often found wanting against high quality pace bowling, particularly in decks with some life.

 

[Ferris_rules]

A few points:

1) Sehwag's form was generally dire from after his 254 in Lahore in 2005/06 to 2007/08 (although he did score one century against WI).

2) He's in his prime right now.

3) The selectors did err in leaving him out - Wasim Jaffer was often found wanting against high quality pace bowling, particularly in decks with some life.

Incredibly he could have a scored a 400 in Test match cricket with a little bit of patience. He reaches 300 so quickly that he would not have been drained as most players that score a 300 given the time and balls it takes him to reach it.

 

[DaRick]

Actually you will find that Sehwag is more than a useful bowler and has even won a MOM for his bowling alone.

Well, you'll note that the 5/104 in Delhi was on a track which suited his slow, loopy brand of offspin. Aside from that, he is (correctly) used to break partnerships or take a few key wickets quickly if possible. In other words, he's used like...well, a useful part-timer, in the mould of a Simon Katich (except perhaps a touch inferior).

aussie1st erred in likening him to a specialist spinner. He isn't - his variety and control aren't really up to that standard.

Bowling wise they are about on par IMO. Its just that Sehwag is not used very often.

Disagree (if it is even possible to properly compare spinners and pacers). Watson wouldn't make it in the team based on his bowling, but he does have enough tricks up his sleeve to make him a credible support bowler, rather than just a part-timer.

 

[DaRick]

Incredibly he could have a scored a 400 in Test match cricket with a little bit of patience. He reaches 300 so quickly that he would not have been drained as most players that score a 300 given the time and balls it takes him to reach it.

Probably true.

 

[Ferris_rules]

Well, you'll note that the 5/104 in Delhi was on a track which suited his slow, loopy brand of offspin. Aside from that, he is (correctly) used to break partnerships or take a few key wickets quickly if possible. In other words, he's used like...well, a useful part-timer, in the mould of a Simon Katich (except perhaps a touch inferior).

aussie1st erred in likening him to a specialist spinner. He isn't - his variety and control aren't really up to that standard.



Disagree (if it is even possible to properly compare spinners and pacers). Watson wouldn't make it in the team based on his bowling, but he does have enough tricks up his sleeve to make him a credible support bowler, rather than just a part-timer.

good constructive disagreement here.

I was basing Sehwag bowling proven ability ie. he has had some descent bowling performances versus Watson,hence IMO on par. Sehwag has bowled less in recent years due to shoulder problems.

I dont rate Watson, but then again that maybe because he is a tool. Which is a personal bias. Then again I wasnt a fan of Sehwag saying that Bangladesh are effectively a crap team. Over a period of time Sehwag has produced decent bowling spells, Watson has really only been around for about 5 minutes, too unreliable and prone to breaking down.

That would be factored into any equation if you had to choose one or the other. ie. Watson being injury prone. Watson really has not done that much with bat or ball neither here or there. His efforts are that of an all-rounder. But IMO he is selected in the team for his batting performance above all else.

Bottom line is Sehwag is chosen easily.

 

[DaRick]

good constructive disagreement here.

Yeah, you too (assuming that you weren't being sarcastic).

I was basing Sehwag bowling proven ability ie. he has had some descent bowling performances versus Watson,hence IMO on par. Sehwag has bowled less in recent years due to shoulder problems.

They've both taken the same amount of wickets, but this is because, like you say, Watson hasn't been around for that long. Given the nature of the two, I'd say that Watson should end up having a better bowling record, fitness willing. But we'll see.

I dont rate Watson, but then again that maybe because he is a tool. Which is a personal bias. Then again I wasnt a fan of Sehwag saying that Bangladesh are effectively a crap team. Over a period of time Sehwag has produced decent bowling spells, Watson has really only been around for about 5 minutes, too unreliable and prone to breaking down.

Sehwag was wrong to make those comments - Bangladesh have enough talent and 'scare ability' to ensure that they can give good sides a fright when in the mood.

But whilst they're verging on being Test-class, they're not quite there yet. I suspect that the problem is more psychological (i.e - lacking a winning culture) than anything else. Infrastructure is a problem, but that's only really begun to affect the likes of Pakistan recently, as their quality of talent has diminished, particularly in the batting stocks.

I don't believe that Watson is unreliable whilst on the field, but getting there has been a mighty achievement for him, unfortunately. We can only hope that he'll remain fit - he's done so for the past 9 months, which must be some sort of record for him - but it'll take a leap of faith.

That would be factored into any equation if you had to choose one or the other. ie. Watson being injury prone. Watson really has not done that much with bat or ball neither here or there. His efforts are that of an all-rounder. But IMO he is selected in the team for his batting performance above all else.

This is true, but I still don't think he's really comparable to Sehwag. Sehwag is a specialist opening batsman who bowls useful offspin in a part-time capacity. Watson, like you say, is more of an allround cricketer who is probably versatile enough to bat down the order, but who has currently shone after a gamble which saw him open. It's not really a straightforward comparison.

Maybe we should have these sorts of discussions many years from now, when both players will have surely wrapped up their careers. It just seems like the wrong time to make such comparisons, because Watson's Test career is just starting to kick on and so judging him requires lots of speculation about his fitness and the like. The same can't be said about Sehwag.

As ODI players, Watson is easily better than Sehwag, FWIW.

 

[Wish Wellingtons]

Incredibly he could have a scored a 400 in Test match cricket with a little bit of patience. He reaches 300 so quickly that he would not have been drained as most players that score a 300 given the time and balls it takes him to reach it.

I could have scored a test 400 if i had a bit more patience... and talent.

Hypotheticals such as these are stupid.

Sehwag averages 52 with the bat over a pretty long career. He has played some incredible innings, astounding innings, but he has also dished up plenty of crap in his time, let's not forget that. He has gone out for plenty of rubbish scores, he has chalked up many ducks.

To me it seems Sehwag is very much an On or Off player, he is either going to grab a run a ball 200 or dismiss himself in the stupidest fashion.

Watson is pretty bloody reliable for chalking up a solid fifty at the beginning of an innings, and really this is what openers are employed to do, Watson just seems to lack Sehwag's ability to kick on and score a huge one. I think in time it would not be unthinkable for Watson to be considered a better player, but at the moment Sehwag's 6 double and 3 triple centuries have him firmly ahead.

And people saying his bowling is better than Watson's are kidding themselves, he averages mid forties and is a dead set pie chucker.

 

[Tambaran]

"Watson is a tool".

Let me guess, you liked Shane Warne though?

 

[aussie1st]

No, he isn't.

He's a reasonable part-timer who flights the ball reasonably well, gets some turn and may break a few partnerships, but his variety is altogether too limited for him to be a viable Test spinner. For instance, he doesn't seem to vary his flight and pace very much. He also bowls a bit of tripe, pitching it too short on occasion.

As for the OP, it's not a fair comparison. One is a specialist opening batsman who can be used in a partnership-breaking capacity, whereas the other is a moderately versatile batsman who is currently succeeding at opening, but can also get a few wickets per innings simply by bowling straight, getting some reverse swing and occasionally changing up his pace and length. Watson is a good fielder; Sehwag isn't.

As a batsman, Sehwag's obviously better, if that's what you mean.

Bar Hauritz who exactly from Australia would be better than Sehwag and his part timers? What you described if Krezja in a nut shell but Krejza went for a hell of a lot more runs than Sehwag has.

 

[The_Reaper]

Bar Hauritz who exactly from Australia would be better than Sehwag and his part timers? What you described if Krezja in a nut shell but Krejza went for a hell of a lot more runs than Sehwag has.

Hint: He is also an opening bat

 

[DaRick]

Bar Hauritz who exactly from Australia would be better than Sehwag and his part timers? What you described if Krezja in a nut shell but Krejza went for a hell of a lot more runs than Sehwag has.

Well, you said that he was better than all our spinners, for one thing.

You're right about Krejza, but I'm inclined to believe that Hauritz is comfortably better right now. I'd also place Katich in front of Sehwag, because he has more variety, gets some turn and doesn't have terrible control.

 

[aussie1st]

Sehwag isn't that bad control wise, his economy in Test is just over 3 which is decent enough especially for a part timer. Admitley the main spell I saw from him was his 5 fer against us but I liked what I saw there.

 

[Wish Wellingtons]

Sehwag doesn't bowl much as he is an absolute pie chucker.

Marcus North or Simon Katich would be better bowling options.

 

[King Elvis]

Hayden > Sehwag.

 

[Damon_3388]

Wasn't it only 2 summers ago when Sehwag couldn't get a gig in the Indian team? Some of the comments on here would lead you to believe that he is the best thing since sliced bread. Has he improved a heap since 07/08? Or were the Indian selectors nuts for leaving him out in the first place?

These are serious questions BTW. I don't follow Indian cricket that closely.

ps. On current form Watson is one of the best cricketers in the world. Whether or not he stays fit and keeps his form up remains to be seen.

To be fair, his 293 off 254 balls (40 fours, 7 sixes) against Sri Lanka back in December was pretty darn God-like

 

[DaRick]

Sehwag isn't that bad control wise, his economy in Test is just over 3 which is decent enough especially for a part timer. Admitley the main spell I saw from him was his 5 fer against us but I liked what I saw there.

ER rate in Tests can be misleading. A bowler's Test ER could be low simply because the batsmen refuses to play at many wider deliveries. Mitchell Johnson did benefit from this when he first started.

His ODI ER is 5.28 - too high by any standard. I tend to think that a bowler's ER in ODI's is a fairer indication of their control - you are far more likely to get smashed for bowling tripe in ODI's than in Test matches.