Jacques Kallis vs Rahul Dravid vs Kumar Sangakkara

[Migara]

Anyway from memory, it was Tendulkar and Sidu who made it a complete one way traffic but battles against the rest wasn't all that one sided.

You have discounted Azharuddin. Played Warne like a dream. Don't think Kambli was much behind too.

 

[_00_deathscar]

You have discounted Azharuddin. Played Warne like a dream. Don't think Kambli was much behind too.

Warne's just lucky he'd retired and never had to face Karun Nair.

Being serious though, Warne vs Pant would have been fascinating!

 

[karan_fromthestands]

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

THIS.

Out of all the players I've seen bat live, Dravid was something else. On TV he looks like just another guy, but on a cricket ground, his sound technique made him look like some kind of a batting machine with precision in every movement.

 

[ankitj]

Kallis > Sangakkara > Dravid

 

[Coronis]

1300 of those runs were off Ajmal himself? sounds dubious

Hmm, not impossible, he conceded 2170 runs throughout those matches and bowled twice as many overs as any other Pakistani bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

THIS.

Out of all the players I've seen bat live, Dravid was something else. On TV he looks like just another guy, but on a cricket ground, his sound technique made him look like some kind of a batting machine with precision in every movement.

Have to disagree. Dravid's exaggerated movement's during his strokes or defense were offputting for me. Kallis was much more aesthetically appealing, espescially his drives.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Dravids elbow movements during his shots and while running between the wickets were cute. Dont @ me.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Have to disagree. Dravid's exaggerated movement's during his strokes or defense were offputting for me. Kallis was much more aesthetically appealing, espescially his drives.

Same. Didn't find Dravid appealing to watch at all. Sangakkara was very nice.

 

[Line and Length]

If I was drafting, which I've done unsuccessfully at times, I'd be aiming to grab Kallis as a batting all-rounder and Sangakkara as a 'keeper/batsman (assuming Sobers and Gilchrist had gone). As a straightforward middle order batsman, Dravid ranks behind a significant number.

 

[anil1405]

Sangakkara as a keeper-batsman is a tier or two below Kallis/Dravid.

 

[subshakerz]

If I was drafting, which I've done unsuccessfully at times, I'd be aiming to grab Kallis as a batting all-rounder and Sangakkara as a 'keeper/batsman (assuming Sobers and Gilchrist had gone). As a straightforward middle order batsman, Dravid ranks behind a significant number.

I think Kallis vs Dravid is a close call. Kallis obviously did better in SA but weaker in England. The key difference is that Dravid has big budget performances which Kallis did not.

 

[Line and Length]

I think Kallis vs Dravid is a close call. Kallis obviously did better in SA but weaker in England. The key difference is that Dravid has big budget performances which Kallis did not.

I did say "Kallis as a batting all-rounder". His bowling makes him a more valuable player than Dravid IMO

 

[Migara]

Sangakkara as a keeper-batsman is a tier or two below Kallis/Dravid.

Nah as players, considering all skills in all formats,

Kallis > Sangakkara > Day light > Dravid

 

[Line and Length]

Nah as players, considering all skills in all formats,

Kallis > Sangakkara > Day light > Dravid

@Migara On this we agree

 

[StephenZA]

The biggest thing this thread shows me and the criticisms leveled towards Kallis, is how little understanding people have of SA cricket, its cricket culture, and what was asked of Kallis to help rebuild SA cricket after isolation.

 

[anil1405]

Nah as players, considering all skills in all formats,

Kallis > Sangakkara > Day light > Dravid

Obviously you did not get my point of what I was trying to say. Sanga averages 40 as a keeper batsman.

Agree that skills wise Sanga is ahead with his ability to play attacking cricket as compared to Kallis and Dravid.

 

[Gob]

The biggest thing this thread shows me and the criticisms leveled towards Kallis, is how little understanding people have of SA cricket, its cricket culture, and what was asked of Kallis to help rebuild SA cricket after isolation.

Explain

 

[subshakerz]

The biggest thing this thread shows me and the criticisms leveled towards Kallis, is how little understanding people have of SA cricket, its cricket culture, and what was asked of Kallis to help rebuild SA cricket after isolation.

Kallis was part of a fairly decent South African batting lineup for his entire career. He didn't have to shore up the lineup the same way Lara had to do with West Indies. So he definitely had more freedom to play a bit less dour and up the pace.

I simply cannot rank him the same category as others like Sangakarra, Lara, Ponting and others who would impose themselves on the opposition.

 

[Uppercut]

The biggest thing this thread shows me and the criticisms leveled towards Kallis, is how little understanding people have of SA cricket, its cricket culture, and what was asked of Kallis to help rebuild SA cricket after isolation.

Haha right? It's great to see that so many years after his retirement he still has an unparalleled ability to inspire nonsensical arguments about why he wasn't that good.

At the time I thought he was the best of the three, largely because he scored about as many runs as the others despite the fact that his nightmarish home conditions were such a disadvantage. He played countless memorable innings, so so many. People only don't remember them because they didn't watch South African cricket.

Sangakarra was great too. In my head his typical innings was to ruthlessly pile on runs, usually with Jayawardene, making batting look easy. Then the other team would come out and you'd realise the pitch wasn't actually flat at all. But he also traveled very well. He was kind of underrated too, but more so in the sense that people tended to forget about him. Nobody really took an anti-Sanga position the way they did with Kallis, but a lot of conversations about the world's best batsmen just wouldn't mention him.

I thought Dravid was a bit overrated at the time. Now I more so think he was a little unfortunate to play in an era when you rarely needed impeccable technique to score runs. In a less batsman-friendly era he would really stand out IMO. But he still wasn't as good as Kallis or Sangakarra.

 

[Shady Slim]

kallis was the only one good enough to deliver a big bash championship to the sydney thunder, a feat which not even abdv could accomplish in his time; and as a sixers fan, believe me when i say being able to do that takes atlas-like strength and herculean fortitude

so bear that in mind