Jacques Kallis vs Rahul Dravid vs Kumar Sangakkara

[Teja.]

Just a reminder that Sangakkara averages 66.7 over 86 tests while not being the designated keeper and 40.48 over 48 tests while being the keeper.

That is not to say that he'd average 67 over his entire career if he did not keep because the tests he did not keep co-related more to his peak, but it's still 86 ****ing tests which is a huge sample size and it's fair to say his average over 134 tests of 57.4, which is still higher than the other 2 is hindered by a fair bit by having to keep for 36% of his tests.

It's also worth noting that he had to bat at No.3 in the 'Sanga' role for the majority of the tests that he was keeping as well which is very different from batting as a No.6/7 in a more aggressive role which mist have been incredibly strenuous.

Overall, I rate Sangakkara incredibly highly. In the 1990-2010 period, I'd say only Sachin and Lara were better test batsmen and in more recent times, Smith will probably finish ahead.

 

[anil1405]

Dravid, in comparison to other star batsman, is neither flamboyant nor aggressive. Yes he had struggled against certain attacks too.

But the role he has played in transforming India's fortunes overseas is massive to say the very least.

India forgot what it meant to win overseas (SENA + W) since 1986 but his arrival instantly had an impact. We came close to sniffing victory in Wanderers in '97 thanks to his stellar 148 and 81. And his massive overseas contributions continued until the England tour in 2011.

Dravid had a hand in pretty much every Indian overseas win or a defeat that was turned into a draw. More so than any other individual.

One of his best knocks (twin knocks rather) aren't even talked about much because it came against a mediocre attack but on a minefield where he batted close to 400 balls in total on that Kingston pitch in '06 when every other batsman (including Lara) struggled to face 150 balls.

I am not saying he did it single handedly but no one has come close to transforming India's overseas fortunes consistently as he did.

 

[subshakerz]

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.

That is not true really. We remember great innings by AB, Amla, and Graeme Smith because they were more memorable and more often than not led SA to victory.

Kallis' greatest knock was likely the one that help draw a test against Australia in 1997, but that was early in his career and SA lost that series anyways.

Since then he does have many good knocks, but how many were dominant ones against great attacks or in difficult conditions? He has two double tons in 166 matches, those too against weaker attacks of India and Sri Lanka at home.

He certainly had the ability to let himself loose and attack but chose a safety-first approach to batting for much of the 2000s even when it was not warranted.

Again, he was a great batsman, arguably the best South Africa produced, but I would argue Dravid and Sanga are better.

 

[subshakerz]

I see Kallis as a batting version of Allan Donald, a great career, solid numbers but lacking in global impact compared to other greats.

 

[anil1405]

That is not true really. We remember great innings by AB, Amla, and Graeme Smith because they were more memorable and more often than not led SA to victory.

Kallis' greatest knock was likely the one that help draw a test against Australia in 1997, but that was early in his career and SA lost that series anyways.

Since then he does have many good knocks, but how many were dominant ones against great attacks or in difficult conditions? He has two double tons in 166 matches, those too against weaker attacks of India and Sri Lanka at home.

He certainly had the ability to let himself loose and attack but chose a safety-first approach to batting for much of the 2000s even when it was not warranted.

Again, he was a great batsman, arguably the best South Africa produced, but I would argue Dravid and Sanga are better.

And the point being, he may not be as good as Sanga or Kallis but he isn't as far behind as the others are suggesting.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah I dont think Kallis' best innings were quite as great as Sanga/Dravid's but that introduces a huge level of subjectivity and bias obviously.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

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

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.

Are you guys talking about watching him on TV or live??

On a TV screen, he looks OK, but if you really see him play in a stadium, it's a completely different thing. And I've been to plenty of matches, no batsmen has ever looked as great as Dravid IMO.

 

[karan_fromthestands]

Nah as players, considering all skills in all formats,

Kallis > Sangakkara > Day light > Dravid

How?

 

[karan_fromthestands]

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.

But they shouldn't be in the same poll to start off with, both played in a different era. But I don't think any Indian batsmen was better than Gavaskar, imagine facing those great bowling lineups of Australia and WI without a bloody helmet. Aus and WI players still had the advantage of not facing their own set of bowlers, Gavaskar didn't.

 

[harsh.ag]

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.

SA had a very good batting line up almost always. Strange to single out Kallis as if he was carrying the side in some way.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In the 90s SA's batting lineup wasnt amazing but they made up for lack of greats with sheer depth. I think Stephen's point was more to do with the ridiculous "Kallis was selfish because he batted slow" accusations. It was simply never true imo.

 

[Coronis]

But they shouldn't be in the same poll to start off with, both played in a different era.

If we’re not going to compare players because they played in different eras we’ll have to shut down 75% of the threads in CC.

 

[subshakerz]

In the 90s SA's batting lineup wasnt amazing but they made up for lack of greats with sheer depth. I think Stephen's point was more to do with the ridiculous "Kallis was selfish because he batted slow" accusations. It was simply never true imo.

I dont think he was selfish. He just batted too conservatively and didnt dominate the bowling once he was settled in, especially for a cricketer meant to be the alpha bat for his team.

 

[Dendarii]

In the 90s SA's batting lineup wasnt amazing but they made up for lack of greats with sheer depth.

It was still like that going into the 2000s. They did have Kirsten, Gibbs, and Smith at the top of the order, but the middle order was still a bit iffy until AB came along.

 

[sunilz]

What does @Prince EWS adjusted average say about these 3 ?

 

[harsh.ag]

Kallis sometimes made one think he was a little too hard on himself. That also seems like a bit of a Saffer thing. Not selfish, but too cautious fo sho.

 

[Jack1]

Kallis sometimes made one think he was a little too hard on himself. That also seems like a bit of a Saffer thing. Not selfish, but too cautious fo sho.

He was trying his best to average 50 but it didn't work. Haha.

 

[Gob]

He was trying his best to average 50 but it didn't work. Haha.

He average 55

 

[Migara]

How?

Dravid had only one skill. Kallis and Sanga possessed two. And there is a small matter of ODI performances too.

 

[sunilz]

Dravid had only one skill. Kallis and Sanga possessed two. And there is a small matter of ODI performances too.

Are you forgetting that Dravid was wicket keeper of India in 2003 WC ?