Rahul Dravid - What would you do? Is he still one of India's 6 best batsman?

[Xuhaib]

maybe young batsman in India are encouraged to play a long innings right from an early age.don't think there is any massive difference in quality between your average FC trundlers in India and Pakistan.Its just at the very top end where Pakistan produces better fast bowlers then in India.

 

[Blaze 18]

Unfortunately for India, it is the "very top end" that matters.

 

[GIMH]

Whatever makes Jono happy makes me happy. Let him make this decision. WAG

 

[smash84]

The quality of the domestic bowlers?

This can be a factor but not all bowlers in Pakistan domestic cricket are good. Plenty of trundlers around. Speaking of trundlers what happened to Tanvir Ahmed???? He had a good series in Dubai and NZ. Now he is MIA.

And as for the the averages of current batsman,there are some pretty gun batsman around too in the domestic scene at the moment with somewhat justified averages.
Also India has always been better than pakistan at producing batsman,right from Vijay Hazare/Merchant days.

The difference in Indian and Pak batsman was not really that great until the 00s I think........

 

[hang on]

interesting riff about indian and pakistani batsmen. would be interested in knowing how people would rank the top ten batsmen from india and pakistan collectively.

my stab at it, from those i have watched:

tendulkar
gavaskar
dravid
miandad
sehwag
laxman
inzamam
abbas
vishwanath
yousuf

with apologies to azharuddin, younis, anwar

wouldn't know how to rate the great hazares and mohammeds and merchants since i did not watch them.

now, if one were to include the sri lankans, how would it go?

tendulkar
gavaskar
dravid
miandad
sangakkara
sehwag
jayawardene
inzamam
laxman
abbas

 

[smash84]

I would Miandad after Sachin and Gavaskar and before Dravid

 

[hang on]

fair dos.

 

[Howe_zat]

Laxman's better than Sehwag.

 

[Austerlitz]

Gavaskar.>miandad>dravid.
Jayawardene but no de silva?.............should have seen what he did to brett lee in his last international match.

 

[hang on]

i would have desilva out of the top 10. superb batsman, no doubt, but still marginally behind both sangakarra and jayawardene.

 

[Spark]

Laxman's better than Sehwag.

Inclined to agree.

 

[Cevno]

No Merchant and Hazare in that list?

 

[Spark]

wouldn't know how to rate the great hazares and mohammeds and merchants since i did not watch them.

.

 

[Xuhaib]

interesting riff about indian and pakistani batsmen. would be interested in knowing how people would rank the top ten batsmen from india and pakistan collectively.

my stab at it, from those i have watched:

tendulkar
gavaskar
dravid
miandad
sehwag
laxman
inzamam
abbas
vishwanath
yousuf

with apologies to azharuddin, younis, anwar

wouldn't know how to rate the great hazares and mohammeds and merchants since i did not watch them.

now, if one were to include the sri lankans, how would it go?

tendulkar
gavaskar
dravid
miandad
sangakkara
sehwag
jayawardene
inzamam
laxman
abbas

De Silva for Abbas rest looks fine.

Where is Tamim

 

[smash84]

i would have desilva out of the top 10. superb batsman, no doubt, but still marginally behind both sangakarra and jayawardene.

nah.......de silva trumps jayawardena.....de silva was one of the best SC batsmen against pace

 

[Teja.]

Sehwag's better than Laxman, IMO.

Laxman can play a specific sort of Innings on a difficult pitch which only very very few from his era can but players are products of their eras and can only be rated based on overall performance in their eras and considering about 90% of the 00s pitches are Sehwag friendly, Sehwag is a more valuable asset. Not very much in it though.

 

[honestbharani]

Sehwag's better than Laxman, IMO.

Laxman can play a specific sort of Innings on a difficult pitch which only very very few from his era can but players are products of their eras and can only be rated based on overall performance in their eras and considering about 90% of the 00s pitches are Sehwag friendly, Sehwag is a more valuable asset. Not very much in it though.

Again, you are confusing "who is the better batsman" with "who is better to have in your team"... The answer can be different to these two questions when comparing the same set of batsmen..

 

[Jono]

Sehwag's better than Laxman, IMO.

Laxman can play a specific sort of Innings on a difficult pitch which only very very few from his era can but players are products of their eras and can only be rated based on overall performance in their eras and considering about 90% of the 00s pitches are Sehwag friendly, Sehwag is a more valuable asset. Not very much in it though.

Fairly certain Laxman's stats and performances match up with Sehwag's if you counted Laxman from the time Sehwag debuted onwards.

 

[Howe_zat]

Fairly certain Laxman's stats and performances match up with Sehwag's if you counted Laxman from the time Sehwag debuted onwards.

Laxman averages 50.9 since Sehwag's debut. So still a few points off. But I stand by my opinion.

 

[Teja.]

Fairly certain Laxman's stats and performances match up with Sehwag's if you counted Laxman from the time Sehwag debuted onwards.

Yep, they certainly do. My main point is, On most modern day tracks, Sehwag can give you a huge advantage in the first Innings itself by scoring a big hundred fast, He has a very high 50 to 150 conversion rate. That is a huge gamebreaker IMO and he has been consistently doing it for a long while. It surely is close enough that it boils down to personal preference though. They both satisfy two completely different facets of a batting line-up in exceptional ways. India have been amazingly lucky to have both in the post-2000 era, The opener who scores the big hundreds and the No.5 who saves our arses every time and that's before we get started talking about our two best batsmen of the period.