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

[smash84]

so basically number of times = 1



But yeah, big fan of De Silva myself... Was awesome to watch him take it to Brett Lee in the 2003 WC..

there was another ton but i think one of the Ws was missing in it. The two that I remember. Also a number of times in ODIs as well

 

[Austerlitz]

Dravid more or less equal to miandad,both have played many match winning innings.I still rate miandad just a little ahead of dravid considering 2 factors.Dravid's recent decline and that dravid wasn't the premeir batsman of his team....he had one SRT with him taking the limelight and pressure...while miandad was the top batsman and was consequently under a little more pressure.
If u asked me 2 yrs ago i would say dravid=miandad but now miandad just ahead.If dravid performs in engalnd and australia i think we'll just have to make it equal again.Witholding decision until end of his career.

 

[smash84]

Dravid more or less equal to miandad,both have played many match winning innings.I still rate miandad just a little ahead of dravid considering 2 factors.Dravid's recent decline and that dravid wasn't the premeir batsman of his team....he had one SRT with him taking the limelight and pressure...while miandad was the top batsman and was consequently under a little more pressure.
If u asked me 2 yrs ago i would say dravid=miandad but now miandad just ahead.If dravid performs in engalnd and australia i think we'll just have to make it equal again.Witholding decision until end of his career.

True. Actually now that you mention it his slump has not helped his rating.

 

[hang on]

the premier batsman in a team facing most of the pressure 'argument' can be countered by the argument that miandad played in a team that had very good to superb bowling for large chunks of his career.

as an aside, this is one reason why i don't particulary agree with arguments that state that lara played in a really weak batting lineup and hence deserves more 'points' when being compared to his peers, tendulkar primarily; after all, he did have the relative luxury of walsh, ambrose and, for certain stints, bishop, to help with things.

 

[smash84]

had only Imran and qadir really........wasim emerged later on but for most of Miandad's career he was just a rookie.....nowhere near the force that he would be in the 90s

 

[hang on]

but what a rookie!

and an attack of imran and a rookie wasim backed up by qadir was not to be sneezed at.

what i am trying to say is that dravid has had the luxury of being part of a super strong batting lineup and a weakish bowling lineup while miandad had the luxury of being part of a decently strong (am particularly fond of abbas! though majid and co. were no mugs with the bat either) batting lineup and strong bowling lineups.

have no problem with miandad being ahead of dravid, just making my views of strong and weak batting lineups considered in isolation known.

 

[TumTum]

I can understand the advantages of being in a strong batting line-up, but can't see how the strength of your bowling would affect your performance (especially in Tests where scoreboard pressure is almost nonexistent).

 

[Howe_zat]

Of course scoreboard pressure exists in Tests.

A captain can bowl with more freedom, creativity and intent if his batsman give him a healthy score to bowl at. Conversely, a captain will have to be more cautious and defensive if he doesn't have enough runs on the board to work with.

Hence, batting after a good bowling performance, or especially when chasing a low total, is easier than if your team conceded a big score.

 

[Furball]

I can understand the advantages of being in a strong batting line-up, but can't see how the strength of your bowling would affect your performance (especially in Tests where scoreboard pressure is almost nonexistent).

The almost complete lack of any scoreboard pressure at Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney was a huge factor in England's batsmen being able to patiently pile on runs.

 

[hang on]

are u two, howzat and gingerfurball, agreeing with me about being a batsman in team with a world class bowling lineup 'cancels out' being a batsman in a world class batting lineup that has crap bowling to back it up?

not totally sure!

 

[Spark]

The almost complete lack of any scoreboard pressure at Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney was a huge factor in England's batsmen being able to patiently pile on runs.

This. Was so obvious especially in Sydney.

Although frankly given the attack at Adelaide England probably would've made 550+ anyway.

 

[Howe_zat]

are u two, howzat and gingerfurball, agreeing with me about being a batsman in team with a world class bowling lineup 'cancels out' being a batsman in a world class batting lineup that has crap bowling to back it up?

not totally sure!

I don't know if they're equivalent, but both will help a batsman, certainly. I was just disagreeing with TumTum when he said that scoreboard pressure doesn't exist in Tests.

 

[hang on]

ta for clearing that up.

 

[centurymaker]

Is Dravid one of India's top 6 batsmen?
Hell no

Maybe he's not even top 10 atm
Sehwag, Sachin, VVS, Gambhir, Dhoni, Vijay, Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Badrinath.

I'd play all those guys ahead of Dravid against a quality opposition.
He scored 120 runs in SA at an avg of 20.
Can't remember the last time he scored a 100 against a top side (aus, sa, eng).

 

[Borges]

Can't remember the last time he scored a 100 against a top side (aus, sa, eng).

In the same test which was the last time that Gambhir scored a century against a top side - Mohali, December 2008.

That is going by your definition of a 'top' side. If you include Sri Lanka too as a 'top' side (I would), curiously enough, again both Dravid and Gambhir scored their last century in the same game; Kanpur, November 2009.

 

[Austerlitz]

England series is make or break for the great wall.
But first let him score in the windies vs roach.

 

[honestbharani]

the premier batsman in a team facing most of the pressure 'argument' can be countered by the argument that miandad played in a team that had very good to superb bowling for large chunks of his career.

as an aside, this is one reason why i don't particulary agree with arguments that state that lara played in a really weak batting lineup and hence deserves more 'points' when being compared to his peers, tendulkar primarily; after all, he did have the relative luxury of walsh, ambrose and, for certain stints, bishop, to help with things.

they all retired or ceased to be the forces they were circa 97... Basically just about 6 years out of the 16 Lara played at the international level...

 

[vcs]

they all retired or ceased to be the forces they were circa 97... Basically just about 6 years out of the 16 Lara played at the international level...

Nah, both Ambrose and Walsh were good right upto the end of their careers (i.e. 2000). However, WI's batting lineup had become very weak by then.. overall I would say Lara definitely played in a weaker team than his contemporary ATGs.

 

[abmk]

Of course scoreboard pressure exists in Tests.

A captain can bowl with more freedom, creativity and intent if his batsman give him a healthy score to bowl at. Conversely, a captain will have to be more cautious and defensive if he doesn't have enough runs on the board to work with.

Hence, batting after a good bowling performance, or especially when chasing a low total, is easier than if your team conceded a big score.

can't believe this has to be explicitly stated

 

[abmk]

they all retired or ceased to be the forces they were circa 97... Basically just about 6 years out of the 16 Lara played at the international level...

from 98 to 2000

Walsh : Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Ambrose: Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo