Jacques Kallis vs Rahul Dravid vs Kumar Sangakkara

[subshakerz]

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

SA already had a fairly solid batting lineup, it's not like it was with Andy Flower and Zimbabwe. They could have used someone to force the pace in the early 2000s.

Notice how 'Kallis is selfish' wasn't really a thing once the more aggressive AB and Amla got into full form around 2007/2008. Nobody had an issue with Kallis as anchor then.

 

[Jack1]

If we are just talking about test batting the answer is Sangakkara.

 

[honestbharani]

Even in ODIs Kallis played for draws.

NGL.. this made me laugh.

 

[Dendarii]

SA already had a fairly solid batting lineup, it's not like it was with Andy Flower and Zimbabwe. They could have used someone to force the pace in the early 2000s.

He did actually become more aggressive then. Prior to 2001 his strike rate was less than 40 while from 2002 onwards it was close to 50. It appears that the catalyst for that was a drop one place down the order to 4.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[Zinzan]

Sanga>Kallis>Dravid - Not as much in it as some are suggesting

 

[Jack1]

Sanga>Kallis>Dravid - Not as much in it as some are suggesting

Sangakkara 1
Kallis 2
Dravid 3

 

[a massive zebra]

Purely as a batsman, Sanga is the best of these without question.

I dont have a strong opinion on Kallis vs Dravid. Kallis has a better record but a lot of that was because he really cashed in against the weaker teams like West Indies and Zimbabwe. Dravid was really good at delivering in clutch situations, unlike his much more celebrated colleague. Obviously Kallis was the better cricketer overall.

 

[srbhkshk]

The Sanga love is justified especially with his late peak but just to argue otherwise he played 56% at home compared to 43% for Dravid. And he does have a decent difference between his home and away average.

 

[harsh.ag]

Hard to understand why Sanga didn't fare well in England despite his record and some stellar innings in New Zealand. Dravid did incredibly in England. Kallis also found wanting in this regard.

Also hard to understand why Dravid didn't fare well in SL despite being the best player of spin bowling of the three.

 

[subshakerz]

I am wondering on what grounds Kallis can be ranked ahead of Dravid?

 

[Coronis]

The Sanga love is justified especially with his late peak but just to argue otherwise he played 56% at home compared to 43% for Dravid. And he does have a decent difference between his home and away average.

And yet his away average is still higher than Dravid’s home, away and overall average.

 

[subshakerz]

Hard to understand why Sanga didn't fare well in England despite his record and some stellar innings in New Zealand. Dravid did incredibly in England. Kallis also found wanting in this regard.

Also hard to understand why Dravid didn't fare well in SL despite being the best player of spin bowling of the three.

Sangakarra did about as well in England as Dravid did in Australia. An average of 41 is still a pass.

As for Dravid against Sri Lanka, he did struggle against Murali. His style of defensive play basically falls right into Murali's containment strategy of getting wickets. I considered Sanga a better player of spin actually.

 

[Gob]

I am wondering on what grounds Kallis can be ranked ahead of Dravid?

Much better in Australia (includes runs against McGrath and Warne)
RSA probably the only country to continuously produce bowler friendly wickets even in 00s
Generally better stats (45 hundreds)

As is said though I can come up with many reasons as of why he should be rated below Dravid aswell

 

[harsh.ag]

In terms of ability, Dravid better at negotiating spin and swing through the air than the other two. Though it's close for spin for all three, they were all great.

Kallis better at playing swing off the pitch than the others.

Sanga better at playing pace and bounce than the other two.

Hard call to rank anyone the best. Sanga maybe the all round better bat.

 

[Gob]

Sangakarra did about as well in England as Dravid did in Australia. An average of 41 is still a pass.

As for Dravid against Sri Lanka, he did struggle against Murali. His style of defensive play basically falls right into Murali's containment strategy of getting wickets. I considered Sanga a better player of spin actually.

Another interesting question is who is the best against spin out of the three. Kallis was exceptional against spin despite not being from the subcontinent

 

[Migara]

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

Here we go again. So weren't these dust bowls specifically made for Muralitharan?
As far as I know, SL was one of the most difficult places to bat.

 

[StephenZA]

Here we go again. So weren't these dust bowls specifically made for Muralitharan?
As far as I know, SL was one of the most difficult places to bat.

Yep. SA tracks are known for how flat they are...

 

[Migara]

Another interesting question is who is the best against spin out of the three. Kallis was exceptional against spin despite not being from the subcontinent

Kallis struggled big time against Murali, much more than he did against Warne. Dravid did struggle against Warne, but his fellow batsmen made it a habit to take it to Warne. But in the case of Murali, when he was in zone, even the Indian line up was found wanting against him. Other times once again Dravid's fellow batsmen bashed Murali around so there was very little pressure on him.

 

[Migara]

Yep. SA tracks are known for how flat they are...

So are SL pitches flat/ or are they dustbowls? pick one.

 

[StephenZA]

So are SL pitches flat/ or are they dustbowls? pick one.

SL are far flatter pitches than SA pitches... the fact that SL had one of the best spin bowlers of all time to take advantage of the slower pitches does not suddenly make those pitches green or less flat. First innings scores of 400+ in SL are not uncommon. In SA they are rare gems.