Kallis vs. Dravid

[GuyFromLancs]

Yes, I would take Kallis if they were both in poor form. If they are in poor form Kallis still has the brute physical strength to reach the boundary with poor shots.

Up until recently Dravid has had a bad couple of years. When out of touch he becomes uber-defensive, refusing even to put away bad balls. I am sure I saw him score a 30-odd ball 1 in a match.

Still, in form, my choice is Dravid.

 

[Uppercut]

I would definitely prefer Kallis in seaming conditions. So, so much more experience in them. I'd take Dravid every time if I needed someone to bat against the very top echelon of bowlers.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

I always thought Dravid was brilliant in green conditions, especially for an Indian, and perhaps ironically wasn't as accomplished against spin as some of his teamates in the earlier days.

 

[Jono]

^ Haha yeah, he was like the Bizzaro Indian batsman.

 

[Uppercut]

Completely agree. All relative though. No batsman has been anywhere near as successful in South Africa since readmission than Jacques Kallis (it's actually a complete joke how much better he is there than anyone else).

 

[Jono]

Awesome record, no doubt. But that's all relative when you're brought up on such pitches. Not every batsman does well in India. Clearly Indian batsman are better on those pitches because they're raised on them.

Interestingly enough, if you look at averages over say 10 innings in that list, after Kallis is Gayle, Ponting, Strauss and Prince.

Btw, Karthik averages 101 in South Africa. Dinesh

 

[Jono]

Interestingly enough, Dravid averages less than 50 in India. So that sort of counters my point on "raised in your own conditions", but shows he is a bizarro Indian.

Amla averages 102 over 6 matches lol.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah, Gayle's an interesting one. Not someone you'd expect to excel there but he's played some brutal innings in South Africa.

 

[Uppercut]

Interestingly enough, Dravid averages less than 50 in India. So that sort of counters my point on "raised in your own conditions", but shows he is a bizarro Indian.

Amla averages 102 over 6 matches lol.

Dravid averages over 50 in New Zealand, Pakistan, England, the West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and under 50 in Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and India. Which is perfectly normal. Sometimes people seem to suggest that there's something unnatural about scoring less runs against better bowlers .

 

[Pratters]

Dravid was excellent in NZ. He faced some tough bowling there over his career even though the bowlers may not have been that noted or famous.

 

[Pratters]

Just saw cricinfo.

Dravid in Nz -

in New Zealand 1998-2009 7 14 2 766 190 63.83 1753 43.69 2 5 1 117 1

India in New Zealand Test Series, 1998/99
2 4 1 321 190 107.00 573 56.02 2 0 1 52 0 26 Dec 1998 New Zealand

GREAT first series. Some of the best batting I have seen ever.

India in New Zealand Test Series, 2002/03
2 4 0 131 76 32.75 343 38.19 0 1 0 20 0 12 Dec 2002 New Zealand

To average 38 in that series on those pitches was as good as averaging around 55.

India in New Zealand Test Series, 2008/09
3 6 1 314 83 62.80 837 37.51 0 4 0 45 1 18 Mar 2009 India

Another successful series.

Truly remarkable in NZ.

 

[jeevan]

Dravid averages over 50 in New Zealand, Pakistan, England, the West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and under 50 in Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and India. Which is perfectly normal. Sometimes people seem to suggest that there's something unnatural about scoring less runs against better bowlers .

Darn that ICC World XI boondoggle, but for it he averages 52 in Australia, with it 49.

Indian batsmen (SRT and down) have sucked in SA. can't think of one who averages > 40 (yeah it's that bad). With that blanket excuse, Dravid the visitor, has a questionable record only in SL.

 

[jeevan]

I know we're talking real cricket here, but Kallis is being so massive in IPL right now that even the core Dravid constituency ought to equivocate, other than to note that BRC is a team that Dravid made in his own image (and boy, were people so wrong about them).

 

[Cevno]

Darn that ICC World XI boondoggle, but for it he averages 52 in Australia, with it 49.

Indian batsmen (SRT and down) have sucked in SA. can't think of one who averages > 40 (yeah it's that bad). With that blanket excuse, Dravid the visitor, has a questionable record only in SL.

SA have always gone a bit out of their way to prepare helpful seaming wickets against India.To counter India's lack of good pace bowlers.

It though backfired on them only once with Sreesanth at Johannesburg in the last tour.

 

[Cevno]

Completely agree. All relative though. No batsman has been anywhere near as successful in South Africa since readmission than Jacques Kallis (it's actually a complete joke how much better he is there than anyone else).

To be fair,South africa haven't really had any great batsmen over the last 15 years except him.

Of the overseas lot it is interesting to see Gilchrist at 65 and gayle at a average of 55.

 

[Cevno]

Dravid averages over 50 in New Zealand, Pakistan, England, the West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and under 50 in Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and India. Which is perfectly normal. Sometimes people seem to suggest that there's something unnatural about scoring less runs against better bowlers .

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

To be fair dravid's average has dropped considerably from nearly 60 in 2006 , to nearly 53 in 2009.

Before that he pretty much averaged 50 above everywhere except south africa.

This all coincided with him getting captaincy after the Greg Chappel -Ganguly fiasco.
The captaincy affected his batting big time.Specially his test form.

What furthermore affected him was that he sacrificed himself for the team cause and started to open the innings to accomodate Ganguly/Pathan into the team and compensate for lack of a quality opener.
Recently he has shown signs of revival ,and now not having the captaincy burden and in his best position ,let's see if he can revive his game like Sachin did after his slump.

If he gets back to anywhere near his best ,then now with good openers no batting line up in the world will come close to India's.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Darn that ICC World XI boondoggle, but for it he averages 52 in Australia, with it 49.

Indian batsmen (SRT and down) have sucked in SA. can't think of one who averages > 40 (yeah it's that bad). With that blanket excuse, Dravid the visitor, has a questionable record only in SL.

Laxman and Karthik

 

[wfdu_ben91]

To be fair,South africa haven't really had any great batsmen over the last 15 years except him.

South Africa produce as many quality cricketers as what India does, if not more, it's just allot harder to succeed in South African conditions. Smith, de Villiers, Amla, Prince, Kirsten etc have all averaged 45+ but all have lesser records at home.

 

[Uppercut]

Not many greats but they've had plenty of very, very good batsmen. Kallis just puts them to shame, especially at home.

 

[jeevan]

Laxman and Karthik

Ha ha, yes Laxman, how did I overlook. Averages 41 which hardly makes a counter point.
Karthik's Bradmanesque average in SA (which I was aware of) is based on one match.