Who is the greatest Indian batsman of all time?

[Jono]

FFS Burgey, don't change what people said and paint everyone as a Sachin worshiper. Worst ****ing thing. No one said he had a good series. You said its lamentable, which is plain wrong and I called you out on it.

And Got Spin, you deadset offer nothing.

 

[centurymaker]

Haha, give over mate. Dravid scored consistently pretty well through the whole series, and you know it.

Is it sacrilege to suggest Tendulkar had a dud series?

Honestly mate, it's hilarious, the rushing to his defense with regards his performances this series. He wasn't alone, but he was dire. Dravid stood tall this series, the rest of the batting line up did not (Sehwag obviously coming in cold didn't help, but that was his own fault for prioritising the IPL over this series).

Why can't you just admit it? Does it make him a **** player? No.

Does it mean he had a **** series? Yes.

2 100s and 0 50's in 6 innings = consistently doing well. where was dravid in all the 2nd innings of the test series???

imagine if he hadn't been dropped on 40 in the 1st innings at lords...

 

[Jono]

No real need to have a go at Dravid centurymaker. Would have thought his batting is not exactly open to too much criticism

I do agree that writing off all runs scored in the 4th test because its a dead rubber is stupid though. India really didn't want to be whitewashed.

 

[Contra]

Yeah no need to bring down Dravid here.

I blame the Dravid Removal System for his poor second innings scores

 

[centurymaker]

No real need to have a go at Dravid centurymaker. Would have thought his batting is not exactly open to too much criticism

I do agree that writing off all runs scored in the 4th test because its a dead rubber is stupid though. India really didn't want to be whitewashed.

if i dont have a go at dravid, that guy wont understand what i am saying.

 

[centurymaker]

tbh laxman looked better than dravid in the 1st two tests but it was dravid who converted the 50s...
basically dravid's series went from good to great/godly only in the 4th test in which he was sublime.

 

[Sanz]

2 100s and 0 50's in 6 innings = consistently doing well. where was dravid in all the 2nd innings of the test series???

imagine if he hadn't been dropped on 40 in the 1st innings at lords...

That is laughable. 3 100s in 8 innings, carries his bat in the first inning, asked to play the role of an opener. In the second test again almost carries his bat...in the 3rd test gets out to an almost unplayable delivery, in the 4th test again carries his bat in the first inning...

Are you kidding me...Dravid outscored Tendulkar by almost 200 runs in the series.

 

[Jono]

if i dont have a go at dravid, that guy wont understand what i am saying.

Its stupid to try and criticise Dravid who played out of his skin, and many many times better than Sachin or any other Indian batsman.

Your point was to prove to Burgey that the 4th test runs should be counted. How is having a go at Dravid in the first 3 tests accomplishing that?

Its stupid.

 

[Burgey]

FFS Burgey, don't change what people said and paint everyone as a Sachin worshiper. Worst ****ing thing. No one said he had a good series. You said its lamentable, which is plain wrong and I called you out on it.

And Got Spin, you deadset offer nothing.

It was lamentable. His contribution, especially for so great a player, was very poor. To me that's lamentable. Averaging 34 in and of itself isn't lamentable, but when you put together a Dean Jones-like 90 odd in a dead rubber as your biggest contribution, that should be taken into account.

What you and I call lamentable may be twoo different things mate, but you can't "call someone out" on that.

 

[centurymaker]

That is laughable. 3 100s in 8 innings, carries his bat in the first inning, asked to play the role of an opener. In the second test again almost carries his bat...in the 3rd test gets out to an almost unplayable delivery, in the 4th test again carries his bat in the first inning...

Are you kidding me...Dravid outscored Tendulkar by almost 200 runs in the series.

we were loking at the first 3 tests.

it's easy to sympathize with anyone actually...

at lords sachin had fever. at TB- 1st innings he was looking good but played a bad cut shot, 2nd innings he got NO support. 3rd test 2nd innings, he was run out on 40.

instead if loking at those, you have to criticize him for miserably failing in ALL the 1st innings.

Its stupid to try and criticise Dravid who played out of his skin, and many many times better than Sachin or any other Indian batsman.

Your point was to prove to Burgey that the 4th test runs should be counted. How is having a go at Dravid in the first 3 tests accomplishing that?

Its stupid.

thats just my way of replying to rubbish posts.

 

[centurymaker]

without the 4th test, dravid wouldn't have gotten even half as much praise as now. thats how good he was at the oval!

 

[Burgey]

we were loking at the first 3 tests.

it's easy to sympathize with anyone actually...

at lords sachin had fever. at TB- 1st innings he was looking good but played a bad cut shot, 2nd innings he got NO support. 3rd test 2nd innings, he was run out on 40.

instead if loking at those, you have to criticize him for miserably failing in ALL the 1st innings.




thats just my way of replying to rubbish posts.

You're right mate. He had a great series. Just had no luck. Should have been MOTS, obviously.

 

[Sanz]

I'm no comparing Gavaskar to Sehwag. I think he was better than Sehwag.

But I think his average in Australia is inflated for the reasons given. It's one of the reasons I'd have Boycott or Hutton ahead of him as an AT opening batsman. He was a great player, but I cannot help but be influenced by what I saw of him.

I'd have Tendulkar and Dravid ahead of him as Indian batsmen, but certainly there can be no disputing he'd open the batting in an AT Indian XI, and belongs in the argument as an ATG opener too.

While you have the right to form your opinion on Gavaskar or any other cricketer, I believe you are massively underrating Gavaskar's batting in Australia, merely on the basis on one series where he faced Lillee, Pascoe and Hogg. It must be noted that Gavaskar was unlucky in couple of innings, in one inning he was unlucky to be bowled off Pascoe and in another one out lbw to a close call against Lillee.

I am not making excuses, but merely suggesting that those two innings Gavaskar played the Aussie fast bowlers remarkably well despite being continuously targeted and attacked by 3 fearsome fast bowlers. Statistically his series may not look great and it wasn't but in at least two innings he showed how good he was. It just seems unfair making a judgement about his batting based on 4 innings against one of the best pace attacks of all time.

 

[Burgey]

While you have the right to form your opinion on Gavaskar or any other cricketer, I believe you are massively underrating Gavaskar's batting in Australia, merely on the basis on one series where he faced Lillee, Pascoe and Hogg. It must be noted that Gavaskar was unlucky in couple of innings, in one inning he was unlucky to be bowled off Pascoe and in another one out lbw to a close call against Lillee.

I am not making excuses, but merely suggesting that those two innings Gavaskar played the Aussie fast bowlers remarkably well despite being continuously targeted and attacked by 3 fearsome fast bowlers. Statistically his series may not look great and it wasn't but in at least two innings he showed how good he was. It just seems unfair making a judgement about his batting based on 4 innings against one of the best pace attacks of all time.

Yeah that's fair comment. Again, I don't say he is anything other than a great player. Had ridiculous courage, other attributes aside. I suppose you get to this level and it's splitting hairs one way or the other.

 

[Sanz]

we were loking at the first 3 tests.

it's easy to sympathize with anyone actually...

at lords sachin had fever. at TB- 1st innings he was looking good but played a bad cut shot, 2nd innings he got NO support. 3rd test 2nd innings, he was run out on 40.

Dravid played bad shots in at least two innings and was out to an unplayable delivery in another. I am not really sure on what more Dravid needed to do in the series. He needed to score 100 in every inning ?

thats just my way of replying to rubbish posts.

??? So you want to criticize and attack Dravid because someone criticized Tendulkar's performance in the series, when you yourself were the leader in Tendulkar name calling during the entire series ?

 

[Jono]

It was lamentable. His contribution, especially for so great a player, was very poor. To me that's lamentable. Averaging 34 in and of itself isn't lamentable, but when you put together a Dean Jones-like 90 odd in a dead rubber as your biggest contribution, that should be taken into account.

What you and I call lamentable may be twoo different things mate, but you can't "call someone out" on that.

Fine, I'll call you out on your bad sense of fashion.

 

[Jono]

thats just my way of replying to rubbish posts.

By having a go at a guy who has bled for Indian cricket for 15+ years?

Bit ****.

 

[centurymaker]

Dravid played bad shots in at least two innings and was out to an unplayable delivery in another. I am not really sure on what more Dravid needed to do in the series. He needed to score 100 in every inning ?



??? So you want to criticize and attack Dravid because someone criticized Tendulkar's performance in the series, when you yourself were the leader in Tendulkar name calling during the entire series ?

he's the 100th + person who i have seen trying to pull tendulkar down to praise dravid.

literally im sick of those sort of comments.

 

[Jono]

Then either rebut them properly or ignore them. Don't try and make it look like Dravid's overall first 3 tests weren't very good.

 

[Burgey]

he's the 100th + person who i have seen trying to pull tendulkar down to praise dravid.

literally im sick of those sort of comments.

I'm doing no such thing.