Who is the greatest Indian batsman of all time?

[sachin200]

well, frankly, so many others also must have contributed in these matches that u have mentioned, bowlers as well as other batsmen...i guess, the point here is to see, who made the most important/ significant contribution that mattered the most...if i go one by one from the beginning, 1) Headingley: 2002 - both of them scored centuries, but Tendulkar's one came in comparatively easier condition, dravid played on the first day and the pitch was more difficult, i think u will agree that his 148 should considered more important than that of tendulkar's 193...if fact, i think, it was Dravid who got the man of match also...so his knock was more significant, though i am no way trying to demean the tons of ganguly and sachin..., 2) Adelaide: 2003 - was Dravid all the way...233 and 72*...hands down...3) Rawalpindi: 2004 - again, no questions...dravid scored 270, and the next best contribution was 77 by ganguly...4) Jamaica: 2006 - again, dravid all the way among the batsmen...his 81 and 68 were two highest scores in the entire match - from india and west indies...5) Perth: 2008 - this one is a bit close between sachin and dravid...u mentined it in both sachin's and dravid's list...which is fair enough, but again, the most important innings was Dravid's 93 in the first innings...tendulkar scored 71 in the first also, while laxman also made serious contributions...i think it's fair to say, that no one had that one significant contribution here, laxman scored most runs, and dravid's 93 in the first innings was the highest in the entire match among the two teams...but still, let's not give it to anybody6) Port of Spain: 2006 - this one goes to tendulkar, marginally, cos while tendulkar in two innings scored 117, dravid scored, 103...but think, tendulkar gets this one...7) Headingley: 2002 - already mentioned...8) Multan: 2004 - well, this one clearly goes to Sehwag...hands down, (if tendulkar is mentioned in this one, than dravid should have been mentined in that port of spain one also...9) Trent Bridge: 2007 - this one is again very very tight...i think u gave it to tendulkar because of that 91...dinesh karthik scored 99 runs in that match (77, 22), tendulkar scored 92 (91 and 01), jaffar scored 84 (62 and 22), not only that, laxman scored 79 in one innings and ganguly also scored 54...they didnt need to bat in the second...almost everyone contributed...let's not give it to anyone (like perth)...10) Perth: 2008 - this one has already been talked about...11) Hamilton: 2009 - this one belongs to tendulkar, hands down...and i think u have missed out the match in the recently concluded west indies series...which should have been the 12) Sabina Park: 2011 - this one, i think u will agree, dravid...

so i will say, most important contribution wise, the list should be

Dravid
Headingley 2002
Adelaide 2003
Rawalpindi 2004
Jamaica 2006
Jamaica 2011

Tendulkar
Port of Spain 2002
Hamilton 2009

so it's 5-2...headingley marginally to dravid, port of spain marginally to tendulkar...leave both of them, it's 4-1...

Agree with you 100%

But then Sachin played some awesome (Dravid has too) innings in the 90s that went down the drain due to inept batting and bowling of the rest of the side.

and Sachin has contributed to victories in India (more than Dravid I think) So that must be taken into account.

Then there are the ones (no explanantion needed) like 241* (2004) (not the best one to watch) and 146 (2011) that deserved a victory if captaincy, fielding or umpiring was supportive... Sachin basically lost out due to some bad luck as well

Dravid probably did too in 1997 (148 & 81) against SA.

Not clutching at straws but I still think Sachin was as good as Dravid away from Home and was better at home.

 

[sumantra]

Agree with you 100%

But then Sachin played some awesome (Dravid has too) innings in the 90s that went down the drain due to inept batting and bowling of the rest of the side.

and Sachin has contributed to victories in India (more than Dravid I think) So that must be taken into account.

Then there are the ones (no explanantion needed) like 241* (2004) (not the best one to watch) and 146 (2011) that deserved a victory if captaincy, fielding or umpiring was supportive... Sachin basically lost out due to some bad luck as well

Dravid probably did too in 1997 (148 & 81) against SA.

Not clutching at straws but I still think Sachin was as good as Dravid away from Home and was better at home.

yeah, no fights over it, both have been pillars of indian batting for almost 20 years now, no need to make one down to hold the other higher......in terms of going in drains, both have i guess equal amount, u can think of not only dravid's 148, 81 in S.A but also 190, 103* in N. Z, 118, 48 in Zim, 144 in west indies...all 3 centuries in england this time and many many more...tendulkar will also have equal numbers...there is no denying the fact that tendulkar has more contributions at home, in terms of winning matches, but dravid contributed more in overseas...and probably, the second one should be rated higher...for example, you also mentioned their overseas performances initially with that chart...dravid also contributed more when it comes to match saving innings i guess, both in india and overseas...only one thing, when it comes to most significant contribution in winning matches overseas, u gave it to tendulkar 6 to dravid 5, which i thought was not correct, in my list dravid had a 5-2 advantage...and with which u agreed 100%...i don't know how u can agree with me on that last post of mine 100% and at the same time say that sachin and dravid contributed equally overseas...lol...

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

I know you are a dravid fan but comeon... Sachin not in Top 3 ???

I'd roughly rate Indian batsmen as:

Sunny,


Dravid,
Merchant,
Tendulkar,




Hazare


Sunny is clearly no. 1 for mine and there isn't much to seperate nos. 2 through 4. The prolific Hazare a few leagues below them.

Tendulkar is obviously a great batsman and like Sumantra, I agree that he and Dravid have been the bedrock of modern Indian batting. Sumantra already countered your points well and that needs no repetition. Suffice to say that it boils down to individual's preferences.

There's just one thing I'd like to say. The two Vijays - Merchant and Hazare and Jimmy Amarnath are criminally underrated among all-time Indian batsmen.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

haha....really? Who are your top 3 indian batsmen?

In the post just prior to this.

 

[sumantra]

I'd roughly rate Indian batsmen as:

Sunny,


Dravid,
Merchant,
Tendulkar,




Hazare


Sunny is clearly no. 1 for mine and there isn't much to seperate nos. 2 through 4. The prolific Hazare a few leagues below them.

Tendulkar is obviously a great batsman and like Sumantra, I agree that he and Dravid have been the bedrock of modern Indian batting. Sumantra already countered your points well and that needs no repetition. Suffice to say that it boils down to individual's preferences.

There's just one thing I'd like to say. The two Vijays - Merchant and Hazare and Jimmy Amarnath are criminally underrated among all-time Indian batsmen.

oh yes, so sadly agreed, and also the selectors did some crime as well...can't believe that he (mohinder) played 60 odd tests in 20 years...should have played every single one of them...it's not official, i mean the number, but i heard he made 19 comebacks in the indian side including tests and ODIs...i will have mohinder in my top 5, and that's the only difference...mine will be (if gaps are considered)

gavaskar


dravid
sachin
merchant

mohinder

 

[Bun]

wow, sachin haters proclaiming sachin supporters are claiming that sachin critics calling out any support to sachin against sachin critics' replies to sachin supporters' posts, as fanboyism. i've seen it all.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

oh yes, so sadly agreed, and also the selectors did some crime as well...can't believe that he played 60 odd tests in 20 years...

He was born the wrong man's son, bro. Having Amarnath as your last name didn't exactly go down well with th egotistical selectors of that time*. That apart his bull-headedness (some people would call courage; whilst others foolhardy) towards approaching fast, short-pitched stuff didn't win him many favours.



* Indian cricket establishment had a huge issue with Lala's "attitude" since the 1930s.

 

[sachin200]

yeah, no fights over it, both have been pillars of indian batting for almost 20 years now, no need to make one down to hold the other higher......in terms of going in drains, both have i guess equal amount, u can think of not only dravid's 148, 81 in S.A but also 190, 103* in N. Z, 118, 48 in Zim, 144 in west indies...all 3 centuries in england this time and many many more...tendulkar will also have equal numbers...there is no denying the fact that tendulkar has more contributions at home, in terms of winning matches, but dravid contributed more in overseas...and probably, the second one should be rated higher...for example, you also mentioned their overseas performances initially with that chart...dravid also contributed more when it comes to match saving innings i guess, both in india and overseas...only one thing, when it comes to most significant contribution in winning matches overseas, u gave it to tendulkar 6 to dravid 5, which i thought was not correct, in my list dravid had a 5-2 advantage...and with which u agreed 100%...i don't know how u can agree with me on that last post of mine 100% and at the same time say that sachin and dravid contributed equally overseas...lol...

what i meant by that is Sachin and Dravid equally good is overseas overall and not if u count victorious matches.

I dont understand the fascination with the victories. Victory or draw is a team thing, not an individual thing so performance of batting or bowling should not be judged on victories alone. yes the victorious performances is one criteria. but thats not he only one.

For example the team lost in the current tour but Dravid's performances should not be discounted just because the team lost.

or to put it in a better way Sachin batted better in Aus (as an example only) than Dravid. But the victories in 03 (Adelaide) & 08 (Perth), Dravid contributed but that doesn't mean he has been a better batsman in Australia.

Personally believe
(Ignoring zim & ban)


Dravid batted better in (to sachin)

England, West Indies, Pakistan

Sachin batted better in

Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka


New Zealand 50-50

--------------------------------------------------------
Sachin

Dravid

Personally believe Dravid has been poor in SA and Aus (best team of his generation) (if u discount the 03/04 series because the bowling was 2nd grade)

Dravid's record in Aus (if you discount 03/04 series)

The reason why I dont rate Dravid as the best Indian batsman of his generation is simply this. He should have done better than this considering his technique, temperament etc. how can you be the best batsman if you cannot lead the team (batting wise) from the front against the best.

 

[sumantra]

He was born the wrong man's son, bro. Having Amarnath as your last name didn't exactly go down well with th egotistical selectors of that time*. That apart his bull-headedness (some people would call courage; whilst others foolhardy) towards approaching fast, short-pitched stuff didn't win him many favours.



* Indian cricket establishment had a huge issue with Lala's "attitude" since the 1930s.

yes, very true

 

[Sanz]

wow, sachin haters proclaiming sachin supporters are claiming that sachin critics calling out any support to sachin against sachin critics' replies to sachin supporters' posts, as fanboyism. i've seen it all.

Why do you have to go back few pages and bring back the same thing when the discussion is back to the thread topic ?

 

[fredfertang]

He was born the wrong man's son, bro. Having Amarnath as your last name didn't exactly go down well with th egotistical selectors of that time*. That apart his bull-headedness (some people would call courage; whilst others foolhardy) towards approaching fast, short-pitched stuff didn't win him many favours.



* Indian cricket establishment had a huge issue with Lala's "attitude" since the 1930s.

Surely that was all forgiven and forgotten? - he was India's skipper after Pataudi snr

 

[Sanz]

I'd roughly rate Indian batsmen as:

Sunny,


Dravid,
Merchant,
Tendulkar,




Hazare


Sunny is clearly no. 1 for mine and there isn't much to seperate nos. 2 through 4. The prolific Hazare a few leagues below them.

Tendulkar is obviously a great batsman and like Sumantra, I agree that he and Dravid have been the bedrock of modern Indian batting. Sumantra already countered your points well and that needs no repetition. Suffice to say that it boils down to individual's preferences.

There's just one thing I'd like to say. The two Vijays - Merchant and Hazare and Jimmy Amarnath are criminally underrated among all-time Indian batsmen.

Clearly agree with this except that I will have Sachin as No. 2, Dravid No. 3, Merchant no. 4. But like you all will be in my top 4.

Also agreed 100% on Amarnath.

 

[miscer]

so many of sachins brilliant hundreds have been in draws and/or defeats because of bad luck and external circumstances.

241* in australia (captain didn't enforce follow-on).
136 in india in the fourth innings (team couldn't score 12 more runs)
110ish in england in the third innings (team couldn't bowl out england in a 200-odd chase)
110ish in NZ in the third innings (team couldn't bowl out NZ, 3 wickets remained).

and these are just the ones I personally know. im sure there are more. and 3/4 are in the 90s... sucks for sachin that he was out of form from 03-07 where india began to build a more decent team.

Since regaining form:

160 in NZ in the 3rd innings
214 in India in the 2nd innings (out of 470odd)
103* in the fourth innings in India

 

[Sanz]

Surely that was all forgiven and forgotten? - he was India's skipper after Pataudi snr

He was made India's skipper and also was made a chief selector. Unfortunately, some of his decisions as skipper and later as selector didn't sit well with some and his sons had to bear those grudges for most of their careers.

 

[Bun]

Why do you have to go back few pages and bring back the same thing when the discussion is back to the thread topic ?

i was just pointing out an observation. i am aligning with no sides here. chillax.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Surely that was all forgiven and forgotten? - he was India's skipper after Pataudi snr

It was patched up for a while (and I believe merely externally), but there were people in the establishment who held deep grudges against the audacious Lala.

Even though Indian cricket had moved far ahead from the days of Vizzy, nepotism and blind obeisance towards the blue-blooded ones was very much part of the establishment mindset.

Lalaji's stint as a commentator and his brash opinions on some issues didn't help either. It added to the mess the man had made as a skipper and later as a selector. Surinder and particularly, Mohinder did pay a heavy price for that. Independent kings and Nawabs still exercised a lot of authority (whether direct or otherwise) over the selectors and administrators and it took a few more years to change all that.

 

[sumantra]

what i meant by that is Sachin and Dravid equally good is overseas overall and not if u count victorious matches.

I dont understand the fascination with the victories. Victory or draw is a team thing, not an individual thing so performance of batting or bowling should not be judged on victories alone. yes the victorious performances is one criteria. but thats not he only one.

For example the team lost in the current tour but Dravid's performances should not be discounted just because the team lost.

or to put it in a better way Sachin batted better in Aus (as an example only) than Dravid. But the victories in 03 (Adelaide) & 08 (Perth), Dravid contributed but that doesn't mean he has been a better batsman in Australia.

Personally believe
(Ignoring zim & ban)


Dravid batted better in (to sachin)

England, West Indies, Pakistan

Sachin batted better in

Australia, South Africa, Sri Lanka


New Zealand 50-50

--------------------------------------------------------
Sachin

Dravid

Personally believe Dravid has been poor in SA and Aus (best team of his generation) (if u discount the 03/04 series because the bowling was 2nd grade)

Dravid's record in Aus (if you discount 03/04 series)

The reason why I dont rate Dravid as the best Indian batsman of his generation is simply this. He should have done better than this considering his technique, temperament etc. how can you be the best batsman if you cannot lead the team (batting wise) from the front against the best.

1) you started it by pulling out match winning performances of dravid and tendulkar in overseas tests...that i guess we have dealt upon, since u agreed with me 100%... then in the second post, performance in india and performance that went in drains became important for you, and by the time the third post comes, u don't even know what is fascinating about match winning performances at all ( "I dont understand the fascination with the victories"), and now since match winning performances don't seem to matter to u anymore, u have pulled up the old trusted hand of stats...well, as i can see from the stats that u have provided, sachin has higher average than dravid in india, bangladesh, sri lanka, australia and south africa...dravid has higher in west indies, pakistan, england, new zealand and zimbabwe...i don't know what one is suppose to read from there, our earlier discussions meant more sense to me though...and by the way, it's never about numbers, does dravid have more than 50 ODI century? No...does dravid have 99 internatonal tons? No, does dravid have almost 30000 international runs? No, more than 15000 ODI runs? No...

2) why did u leave dravid's performance in australia 2003? because he played well that time? should i also count tendulkar's away average leaving out his heroics in Bangladesh??? u know mate, this is the biggest problem with numbers, one can do magic with them in order to prove one's point (supress, ignore and sometimes even manipulate them), hope we will agree, that one needs to know the limit of stats while applying, for example, while sachin's 193 was bigger in terms of number than dravid's 148 in headingley, dravid's 148 was much bigger in terms of value...guess, we both agreed on that...

3) one interesting thing to note, u r also not saying anything about the match saving innings that they have played...

anyway, i have a fear, that it's getting spoiled a bit right now, and chances are, it will be more...so, let's call it a day

 

[Burgey]

wow, sachin haters proclaiming sachin supporters are claiming that sachin critics calling out any support to sachin against sachin critics' replies to sachin supporters' posts, as fanboyism. i've seen it all.

Should read the whole thread, not just the parts that suit you.

Sanz and O@P, where do the two of you rate Gundappa Viswanath and Vengsarkar among indian batsmen? Always thought the latter a very stylish, fine player and the former a very courageous player against the quicks.

 

[Sanz]

Should read the whole thread, not just the parts that suit you.

Sanz and O@P, where do the two of you rate Gundappa Viswanath and Vengsarkar among indian batsmen? Always thought the latter a very stylish, fine player and the former a very courageous player against the quicks.

I rate both of them very highly. Gundappa did in his time what VVS does now a days, with similar grace and style. There are just too many similarities between the two as cricketers and as individuals both.

Vengsarkar was someone who I believe didn't fullfill his potential as a batsman, but he was sort of a batsman who would have flourished in the 90s onward era. The way he batted during the 1986-87 season, I expected him to get much closure to Sunny's record, unfortunately his decline was way to fast, still I would not hesitate to put him among the top 10 batsmen from India.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Should read the whole thread, not just the parts that suit you.

Sanz and O@P, where do the two of you rate Gundappa Viswanath and Vengsarkar among indian batsmen? Always thought the latter a very stylish, fine player and the former a very courageous player against the quicks.

Should mention perhaps that I didn't see them play live and most of my knowledge is based on reliable second-hand info (and old footage, of course).

I'd rate Viswanath much higher as a batsman. It's Sunny, Vishy, Mohinder Amarnath for me as far as batsmen of that generation are concerned. Vishy was perhaps the classiest player produced by India post her independence with those silky, sublime wrists and superb footwork dazzling millions. A crisis-man to the core who never went for easy runs and that may explain his somewhat inferior average.

Vengsarkar was a fine batsman, but I felt he had his limitations - genuine pace on lively decks being the main one. He had a superb time in England, but on the whole, I'd agree with Sanz that he underachieved. Always felt that playing against medium-paced movement brought out the best facet of his game.

On the whole, I'd without hesitation call Vishy a great batsman while Colonel was a very fine player!