Checkmate
School Boy/Girl Captain
Agree with him, unfortunately.
Can see Steyn and co having the current Dravid for breakfast. It''d be a steep learning curve, but I think Pujara should be given the chance.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Rahul Dravid - What would you do? Is he still one of India's 6 best batsman?
- Thread starter Jono
- Start date
Can see Steyn and co having the current Dravid for breakfast. It''d be a steep learning curve, but I think Pujara should be given the chance.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
I am normally a fan of Chappelli, but I cannot express how much I disagree with that article. He is so way off the mark.
It's fine for saying Pujara should have been played, but to say that the Dravid knock counted for nothing is ludicrous. Additionally saying we should play Pujara because Dravid bats slow, well **** me dead Dravid has been batting this slow since 2007.
It's fine for saying Pujara should have been played, but to say that the Dravid knock counted for nothing is ludicrous. Additionally saying we should play Pujara because Dravid bats slow, well **** me dead Dravid has been batting this slow since 2007.
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well, it's no surprise that Chappell holds that opinion. Dravid's style doesn't really fit in with his "cricketing philosophy". I sort of half-agree with his sentiment, but Dravid's knock was a good one and has cemented his place for the time being. Raina's place might come under more scrutiny if he has a couple more failures in this series.
tooextracool
International Coach
Im actually with Chappell on this one. I think in terms of experience, a tour of SA could very well be a career making tour for the likes of Pujara. When you have the best batting attack in the world, it strikes me as a bit gutless to take such a conservative approach. I am a huge fan of Dravid but when you have greats like Sehwag, Tendulkar and Laxman to cover up, you can afford to take a risk or two in the hope of digging a diamond.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Hopefully this is the "Sachin mirror" article for Dravid and we would get similar results.. 
smash84
The Tiger King
With you on this one.
pup11
International Coach
For me Dravid is right up there with India's best batsman right now, his form might be slightly patchy, but then that's something that can happen to any player.
In terms of technique, temperament and consistentcy he's one of the very best batsmen, India has ever produced, and no Pujaras, Badrinaths or Sharmas can ever fill his shoes.
Its just sad, that when a player like Dravid, goes through a low, his place is instantly questioned, just because he is not as aesthetically pleasing or charsmatic as a Sehwag, Tendulkar or Laxman, but that doesn't mean, he is any lesser than any of these players.
In terms of technique, temperament and consistentcy he's one of the very best batsmen, India has ever produced, and no Pujaras, Badrinaths or Sharmas can ever fill his shoes.
Its just sad, that when a player like Dravid, goes through a low, his place is instantly questioned, just because he is not as aesthetically pleasing or charsmatic as a Sehwag, Tendulkar or Laxman, but that doesn't mean, he is any lesser than any of these players.
Xuhaib
International Coach
yup, though I will risk with Kohli the boy will be a star.
smash84
The Tiger King
Looking at Gambhir playing these days I might classify him as a walking wicket too. He seems to be in terrible touch.
deeps
International 12th Man
When an older player is out of form, too often the question arises... "is he past it?"
However, if a player at 27 was producing the exact same results, they would just say 'Yeah, he's out of form"
I feel this to be unfair on the older players. As the old saying goes, form is temporary, class is permanent. Now, obviously players can't keep playing till they're 60 years old, but I feel players are being pushed out the door too early sometimes, when they have alot more to offer.
Yes, Dravid is out of form. But he has shown enough to prove he can come back. First innings he made a hundred. It wasn't fluent or convincing, but he managed it. A player that is past it, would not have been able to produce a century in international cricket against a good side.
He has the runs on the board to deserve at least another 4-5 test matches to try find some form. Fair enough, if at the end of the 4-5 test matches, he can't find form, then drop him. If he finds his form, leave him in.
It wasn't all that long ago that Tendulkar looked like he was coming to the end of his career, and now look at him. Better than ever (though the quality of bowling has something to do with this)
People write off the oldies far too quickly, and don't give them the opportunity that a younger batsman may be given. Dravid is a fit cricketer, who will not have any problems playing for a few more years if his form comes back. I have no doubt that it will.
However, if a player at 27 was producing the exact same results, they would just say 'Yeah, he's out of form"
I feel this to be unfair on the older players. As the old saying goes, form is temporary, class is permanent. Now, obviously players can't keep playing till they're 60 years old, but I feel players are being pushed out the door too early sometimes, when they have alot more to offer.
Yes, Dravid is out of form. But he has shown enough to prove he can come back. First innings he made a hundred. It wasn't fluent or convincing, but he managed it. A player that is past it, would not have been able to produce a century in international cricket against a good side.
He has the runs on the board to deserve at least another 4-5 test matches to try find some form. Fair enough, if at the end of the 4-5 test matches, he can't find form, then drop him. If he finds his form, leave him in.
It wasn't all that long ago that Tendulkar looked like he was coming to the end of his career, and now look at him. Better than ever (though the quality of bowling has something to do with this)
People write off the oldies far too quickly, and don't give them the opportunity that a younger batsman may be given. Dravid is a fit cricketer, who will not have any problems playing for a few more years if his form comes back. I have no doubt that it will.
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
I share the same views...
I have always maintained that for a player like Dravid who plays more out of discipline and application (like Miandad) than out of instinct (unlike Ponting or Viv), anything less than 40 years isn't too old for test cricket.
Last edited:
tooextracool
International Coach
There are 4 faults with this logic:
a) Even if Dravid does return to form, how much more is he going to offer? another year? at best. Is it worth persisting through months of mediocrity to eventually get another year?
b) Its all fine and good to allow Dravid to continue if the quality of back up players weren't any good. But when you have prodigies lying in wait, it seems illogical to keep someone with not much of a future in the side.
c) Now is the best time to groom some of your younger players. While Sachin, Sehwag and Laxman are still playing at their top level. Throwing them into the deep end when all these 3(or 2/3) retire is a recipe for disaster.
d) Some of the younger players may miss out on the primes of their careers. Someone like Badrinath never got a shot at the international level, and given his age he probably wont get a shot either.
weldone
Hall of Fame Member
a) Maybe another 2-3 years, maybe till the end of the inaugural test championship in 2013 or whatever that is. I back both Tendulkar and Dravid to play till that time.
b) Same as a
c) Test cricket is not for grooming cricketers.
d) The only time I felt Badrinath deserved a go was after Ganguly retired and Yuvraj was persisted with for a little too long. That was a mistake the selectors made at that time. However, that story has zero correlation with the debate at hand.
Last edited:
tooextracool
International Coach
a/b) Think Dravid playing till 40 is a huge stretch, given how many batsmen have been able to do it over the last couple of decades. Its clearly obvious when you look at his record over the past 4 years that hes far from his best. Averaging 40 in the next 3 years in itself will be an accomplishment, and the odds are that Pujara or Kohli could very well at least match that.
c) If you think players just show up and start averaging 50 then you are quite clearly mistaken. Most players start off as good players, but it takes time for them to develop and really hit their straps.
d) The point on Badrinath is that there are players out there who like Badrinath could potentially be great players but are being sacrificed to persist with the mediocrity of Dravid over the next few years. Like I said earlier persisting with Dravid is a 'safe, conservative' approach. Sometimes you have to take risks to be the undisputed best team in the world and India arent doing themselves any favors because whenever the likes of Pujara, Kohli and Vijay come into the side they are going to be a side in transition rather than continue to maintain their number 1 ranking.