Greg Chappell Vs Rahul Dravid - who was the better test match batsman?

[Top_Cat]

I'm sorry but it's a ridiculous thing to say in relation to Ponting that people say he was better because he was attacking. He isn't regarded as a great because he was attacking, he's regarded that way because he was attacking and scored a shitload of runs doing it and won Australia a shitload of Tests. You think he developed that instinct by playing for a strong team at Shield level?

Plenty of guys try to Ponting their way into a number 3 spot, fail and get dropped. Literally noone has said here that aggressive number 3's are inherently better.

 

[trundler]

AB at #5 actually; attack or play normally or defend as the situation demands. The Real McCoy; not the lesser AB.

Yeah De Villiers potentially had more gears than anyone I've seen. Maybe one of those 'you had to be there' types.

 

[harsh.ag]

As opposed to the 10,500 runs at 55+ he scored batting elsewhere.

Well done Einstein.

No one drops down from a position despite averaging 47 unless they want to. Face it, Burgs, Border got the jitters at #3.

 

[cnerd123]

. Literally noone has said here that aggressive number 3's are inherently better.

"Guys who counter-attack with all the mental responsibility of batting 3 are rare"

You made it sound like this is some rare positive trait only possessed by the best to have done it. That's just not true. Plenty of **** batsmen counterattack at three as well, they just do it because they suck and can't handle the mental responsibility

Ponting is great because he's great, to attribute it to some great mental strength that enabled him to counterattack is a bad path to go down. Just because you're an aggressive number three doesn't mean you're mentally stronger than others. It could just be your comfort zone.

 

[trundler]

With 2 batsmen of similar quality, I'll take the more aggressive one to be my #3.

 

[Borges]

With 2 batsmen of similar quality, I'll take the more aggressive one to be my #anything.

 

[trundler]

With 2 batsmen of similar quality, I'll take the more aggressive one to be my #anything.

I dunno. A defensive opener sounds better in theory. So hypothetically, who would you pick between Boycott and Greenidge?

 

[cnerd123]

With 2 batsmen of similar quality, I'll take the more aggressive one to be my #anything.

Yea obviously if two batsmen are equally good at batting and will score the same amount of runs you'll want the guy who scored them quicker - except when you're selecting one player for a weaker side whose objective is to bat long in order to take time out of the game, thus increasing the odds of a draw

And I'd argue the latter kind of batting takes a lot more mental effort, concentration and discipline than just going out there and playing your natural game.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

It all changes (doesn't matter) when ur partner runs you out for a diamond duck.

 

[Borges]

I dunno. A defensive opener sounds better in theory. So hypothetically, who would you pick between Boycott and Greenidge?

They are not of similar quality. Playing an equal number of games, Boycott scored more runs for a weaker team, against better attacks than what Greenidge had to face.

 

[trundler]

Not letting a head start slide must take a lot of concentration too. What makes a Ponting better than a Mark Waugh. It's where weak teams get exposed often. Batting out a draw definitely harder though.

 

[trundler]

They are not of similar quality. Playing an equal number of games, Boycott scored more runs for a weaker team, against better attacks than what Greenidge had to face.

Never saw either so all I had to go by were their averages. Not many great attacking openers to compare with. Sehwag an HTB and Trumper's ancient. How about Glenn Turner and Greenidge? Still, you get what I'm trying to say.

 

[Borges]

I really do not find much to prefer between an attacking opener + a defensive number three and a defensive opener + an attacking number three.

 

[trundler]

Fair enough. Not much to choose when put that way. I suppose it has to do with the perception of the roles greatly. Logically, nothing between he 2 combos.

 

[Coronis]

Not letting a head start slide must take a lot of concentration too. What makes a Ponting better than a Mark Waugh. It's where weak teams get exposed often. Batting out a draw definitely harder though.

Perhaps Barrington is underrated then? His natural game was fast scoring iirc but he was dropped early in his test career, and changed his style to become one of the greatest stonewallers.

 

[Burgey]

No one drops down from a position despite averaging 47 unless they want to. Face it, Burgs, Border got the jitters at #3.

Yeah he didn’t like batting there and his record wasn’t as good as it was in other spots. Which is why I said he batted there to limited effect.

We will never know, of course, how Tendulkar would have gone batting there as he refused to even have a crack at it because he’s a selfish ****

 

[Red]

Border never really needed to bat at 3. Most of his innings at 3 were really early in his career in decimated sides, when Chappell was playing WSC.

After that, Chappell batted there, then later on in the mid 80s Wessells and Jones were better suited there for a while, before Boon became the regular at 3 for ages.

Border could, and did, go to 3, when required, and he succeeded there. It was more the fact that other guys were well suited to opening/3 rather than the middle/lower order, and Border was very good coming in and controlling the innings from 4/5/6.

 

[Burgey]

I recall in the mid-80s it was a common tactic when the WI toured for us to play three openers. Unfortunately the blokes aren’t very good

 

[trundler]

So in practice Border still had to open even with 3 openers.

 

[h_hurricane]

AB at #5 actually; attack or play normally or defend as the situation demands. The Real McCoy; not the lesser AB.

The real AB did not need the help of so many not outs to average 50+.