Kallis vs. Dravid

[Zinzan]

I'd give it to Dravid as far as batting goes, only because Kallis has that South African touch of arrogance about him. For this reason I don't want to talk about them as cricketers overall, as I'd have to give it to Kallis

Well, you can't be fairer than that

 

[Son Of Coco]

Well, you can't be fairer than that

 

[archie mac]

To watch I would take Dravid, and for a period I think he was better, but Kallis is a fine act

I remember when Kallis first came to Australia he said he though he was a good enough batsman to finish with a Test average of 60. I thought he was kidding himself, but he has given it a fair shake

 

[bagapath]

Today could be the day where Kallis gets his first double ton.

no such luck, mate

JH Kallis c Collingwood b Anderson 120 306 225 16 1 53.33

if he cant get a double hundred in 14 years, he doesnt deserve one

between dravid and kallis i choose dravid coz he is capable of building monuments. kallis builds bathrooms all the time.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Kallis has scored more hundreds (in less tests) and averages more. Surely that would denote he is the better batsman?

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Kallis by a hair's width only because of the two horrible years Dravid had recently. I don't really care about him having no double - most doubles and triples come on pancake flat pitches anyway.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Well maybe in ODIs, but i was more talking about tests where such an ability of course is irrelevant.

Are you kidding, man? There's this thing called a declaration..

 

[bagapath]

most doubles and triples come on pancake flat pitches anyway.

assuming this is true, it is not - but lets assume it is true, do you think kallis has never played on flat wickets in his entire career or do you think he is not good enough to exploit those conditions to score a double?

 

[ret]

It's a close one but if I had to pick one then it would be Dravid, who in his peak was an absolute wall. Can't forget when he got 190 odd on a seamer friendly pitch in Eng, a double at Adelaide (Ind won these games) .... Also he is very good at supporting the other guy who is doing well be it VVS Laxman at Kol and tons of times when Sehwag is on fire. Also can't forget that record 400 runs opening partnership that he had with Sehwag (on what looked like Pak was going to put pressure on Ind after putting on a big total, these two took that pressure off in no time)

 

[bagapath]

it's a close one but if i had to pick one then it would be dravid, who in his peak was an absolute wall. can't forget when he got 190 odd on a seamer friendly pitch in eng, a double at adelaide (ind won these games) ....

148 iirc

 

[Uppercut]

Its also about when they score their runs, rather than just how many. Dravid is the better test batsman for me. Obviously Kallis the better cricketer.

Hmm. I think they're both the type of player that are usually moreso appreciated by fans of their team. Kallis digs South Africa out of a lot of holes too.

 

[ret]

148 iirc

yep, it was Sachin who got 190 odd in that game

 

[0RI0N]

Inb4 KingKallis
Guy wins Test matches and saves em.Remember that Boxing day Bore in '97? He frustrated Warne and associates.
Kallis batting slightly > Dravid
Kallis bowling > Dravid
ODI's: Kallis all day everyday.
20 M.0.M awards in 131 Tests and
7 M.O.S awards.
He contributes more in Test victories.
Sorry Dravid fans facts are facts.

 

[Uppercut]

If he is a better batsman it's nothing to assert so aggressively.

20 MOM awards in 131 tests is pretty sick though.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

assuming this is true, it is not - but lets assume it is true, do you think kallis has never played on flat wickets in his entire career or do you think he is not good enough to exploit those conditions to score a double?

I am not saying that Kallis has never played on a flat pitch. But I think most would agree that a lot of doubles and almost all triples come on very flat pitches. I don't hold it against Kallis that he hasn't scored a double. Guys like Gillespie and Akram have scored doubles, are they better ? It's hard to split Kallis and Dravid as batsmen, but for me, Kallis just about takes it.

 

[bagapath]

I am not saying that Kallis has never played on a flat pitch. But I think most would agree that a lot of doubles and almost all triples come on very flat pitches. I don't hold it against Kallis that he hasn't scored a double. Guys like Gillespie and Akram have scored doubles, are they better ? It's hard to split Kallis and Dravid as batsmen, but for me, Kallis just about takes it.

so you are saying he is not good enough to exploit flat wicket conditions?

mate, it is okay to not consider the double hundred as an important element in judging a player's ability. it is also okay to choose kallis over dravid. but you dont have to pooh-pooh double hundreds altogether. they require amazing powers of concentration, all round ability to dominate and defend at various times of the day, mastering all the bowlers in the opposition - as opposed to taking it out on one bowler in cameos. it is the bed rock of so many test victories. laxman's 281 is not just about the time spent at the wicket it is also about the volume of runs scored there. and it is every batsman's dream. kallis would love to have one. ask him.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

so you are saying he is not good enough to exploit flat wicket conditions?

mate, it is okay to not consider the double hundred as an important element in judging a player's ability. it is also okay to choose kallis over dravid. but you dont have to pooh-pooh double hundreds altogether. they require amazing powers of concentration, all round ability to dominate and defend at various times of the day, mastering all the bowlers in the opposition - as opposed to taking it out on one bowler in cameos. it is the bed rock of so many test victories. laxman's 281 is not just about the time spent at the wicket it is also about the volume of runs scored there. and it is every batsman's dream. kallis would love to have one. ask him.

It is definitely better to have a double hundred than not have one. But like I said, it isn't a significant measure - not for me at least. It pales in comparison to the fact that Kallis has 4 centuries more in 15 innings less.....Guys like Attapatu have more doubles than Ponting and Tendulkar....

Have a look at this.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[bagapath]

It is definitely better to have a double hundred than not have one. But like I said, it isn't a significant measure - not for me at least. It pales in comparison to the fact that Kallis has 4 centuries more in 15 innings less.....

thats a telling stat, i agree. kallis can be considered a better bat than dravid for various reasons. this is one of them. similarly dravid can be considered a better bat than jacquees for certain reasons; the double hundred stat can be one of them.

my question to you is why do you think he hasnt scored even one? it may not be important to you. that is fine. i just want to hear your thoughts on why he has not crossed 200 even once.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

thats a telling stat, i agree. kallis can be considered a better bat than dravid for various reasons. this is one of them. similarly dravid can be considered a better bat than jacquees for certain reasons; the double hundred stat can be one of them.

my question to you is why do you think he hasnt scored even one? it may not be important to you. that is fine. i just want to hear your thoughts on why he has not crossed 200 even once.

I really have no answer tbh. One possible reason could be that he hasn't been allowed to go on after his 100. His average after getting a hundred is higher than Dravid's.....

 

[Avada Kedavra]

It is just like asking why Tendulkar and Ponting haven't got a triple yet when so many lesser batsmen like Sehwag, Jayawardene, Younis, Jayasuriya, Inzamam etc have