Jacques Kallis vs Rahul Dravid vs Kumar Sangakkara

[Gob]

Three absolute giants of the generation I grew up in. Each one had a one or two countries to spoil otherwise a perfect away record. Personally I'm decided on the order to rate these 3 and open to change my mind on how others rank them and why

EDIT since we place greater emphasis on away performances, I'm going to attach their away records here for references

Sangakkara


Dravid


Kallis

 

[CricAddict]

Kallis>Sangakkara>Dravid

1. While Sanga averages more than Kallis, Sanga played more on tracks favorable to batting than Kallis. Dravid averages much lower than both
2. Kallis had to do a lot of bowling as well while Sanga gave up the gloves when he went into beast mode. Dravid didn't do either
3. While all 3 were not HTBs, Kallis was slightly less so than the others

 

[harsh.ag]

Overall record - Kallis > Sanga > Dravid

Peak - Sanga > Kallis > Dravid

Technique - Dravid > Kallis > Sanga

Destructive - Sanga > Dravid > Kallis

Bat for life - Dravid > Kallis > Sanga

Watchability - Dravid > Sanga > Kallis (I know most people loved watching Sanga bat and this is a minority opinion)

Averages notwithstanding, there is nothing really separating these guys, except maybe for Sanga's great run towards the end.

 

[Teja.]

Sangakkara is the best among those.

 

[Coronis]

Based on batting alone, Sanga > Kallis >>
Dravid.

Love Dravid but he ain’t in the same tier as Sanga and Kallis imo.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sanga>Kallis>Dravid

Dont agree one bit that he's not the same tier though.

 

[honestbharani]

Just on batting, Sanga > Dravid > Kallis.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Tests
Sanga > Kallis > Dravid

ODIs
Sanga >> Dravid > Kallis

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Dravid won Wisden poll of greatest Indian batsman, beating Sunny and Sachin.
I dont think any other test batsman can win a poll against Sachin, not even Bradman.

 

[subshakerz]

Kallis was technically the most superior of these bats, but comparatively has fewer standout knocks in his career, only two double tons in 166 matches, and was notorious in the 2000s for taking his pedal off the gas when the team needed to up the ante.

Dravid is similar to Kallis but his batting conservatively was more understandable given that his role was the batting anchor. He has quite a few standout innings resulting in landmark victories.

Sangakarra definitely benefited the most from batting-friendly conditions, but IMO was much more dominant than either Kallis or Dravid and has enough quality innings in SENA to demonstrate his class. Just to compare, he has 11 double hundreds in 134 games, more than double Kallis and Dravid who played much more.

I usually opt for the more aggressive batsman, all other factors equal, because I feel that higher quality bowlers prefer to bowl to guys like Dravid and Kallis who allow them to set the terms. I definitely see Sanga coming at no.3 as a more intimidating proposition for the opposing team. In fact, I feel Sanga is closer to Ponting than the others.

Sanga > Dravid > Kallis

 

[Gob]

Kallis was technically the most superior of these bats, but comparatively has fewer standout knocks in his career, only two double tons in 166 matches, and was notorious in the 2000s for taking his pedal off the gas when the team needed to up the ante.

Dravid is similar to Kallis but his batting conservatively was more understandable given that his role was the batting anchor. He has quite a few standout innings resulting in landmark victories.

Sangakarra definitely benefited the most from batting-friendly conditions, but IMO was much more dominant than either Kallis or Dravid and has enough quality innings in SENA to demonstrate his class. Just to compare, he has 11 double hundreds in 134 games, more than double Kallis and Dravid who played much more.

I usually opt for the more aggressive batsman, all other factors equal, because I feel that higher quality bowlers prefer to bowl to guys like Dravid and Kallis who allow them to set the terms. I definitely see Sanga coming at no.3 as a more intimidating proposition for the opposing team. In fact, I feel Sanga is closer to Ponting than the others.

Sanga > Dravid > Kallis

I was thinking about the best batsmen in my time of watching the game the other day and these 3 were the hardest to be rated as whenever I leaned towards one, I found aspects in the other two's game which were superior but I see the general consensus now is towards Sanga which is perfectly fine although at the time they were active, it wasn't the case IIRC

As someone who grew up in the 90s, I have Tendulkar and Lara at the summit with Ponting behind by a margin which is bigger than the margin he is ahead of these 3 although Ponting probably has the worst stats. And I'm also undecided where SR Waugh sits

 

[Flem274*]

It's a but silly to criticise Kallis for batting too slow then forgive Dravid because he was an anchor.

So was Kallis. Dravid got away with being more one dimensional because he had 2 aggressive ATGs to bat with.

 

[subshakerz]

It's a but silly to criticise Kallis for batting too slow then forgive Dravid because he was an anchor.

So was Kallis. Dravid got away with being more one dimensional because he had 2 aggressive ATGs to bat with.

Well that is precisely the point. In Dravid's case, his team needed him to be the backbone of the innings so he could afford to bat slow.

In SA's case, his critique was that once he settled down he didn't up the tempo, and that conservative style of batting didn't help SA especially in the 2000s before AB and Amla peaked.

 

[subshakerz]

A good example was Sydney 2005, when Kallis batted slow in the first innings and then the team ran out of time to post a formidable total in the last innings.

Of course, Kallis was a class player, but IMO he was an accumulator who rarely imposed himself on the opposition. In Dravid's case, he didn't need to.

 

[Flem274*]

So Kallis is penalised for not being even better than Dravid because he had less support?

Can't agree, and I've never seen a South African fan agree either. It's always the neutrals who think he hurts SA.

 

[Dendarii]

Well that is precisely the point. In Dravid's case, his team needed him to be the backbone of the innings so he could afford to bat slow.

And South Africa needed Kallis to be the backbone of their innings, so shouldn't the same reasoning apply to him?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Even in ODIs Kallis played for draws.
Dravid's attitude was better.

 

[subshakerz]

And South Africa needed Kallis to be the backbone of their innings, so shouldn't the same reasoning apply to him?

Except SA for much of the 2000s until AB and Amla peaked later in the decade didn't have a really aggressive batter like India, they were all grinders and accumulators. Someone like a Sangakara, Peteiersen, Lara or Ponting would be able to dictate terms and change the tempo of the match. Kallis had that fourth gear but rarely used it.

 

[subshakerz]

So Kallis is penalised for not being even better than Dravid because he had less support?

Can't agree, and I've never seen a South African fan agree either. It's always the neutrals who think he hurts SA.

Kallis is penalized for not being the batsman that his team needed him to be.

And the idea of Kallis being a selfish batsman is a pretty common criticism from SA fans as well, though I do not agree.

 

[Dendarii]

Kallis is penalized for not being the batsman that his team needed him to be.

The team needed him to anchor the innings, which is exactly what he did. That was far more important than him being aggressive.