Rahul Dravid vs AB de Villiers, who was better against high quality bowling?

[ma1978]

Foolishly missed two prime years of his career when he could have plundered and bumped the averages up further.

So?

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Against nobodies. Look at the title of this thread.

Last time i checked It's high quality bowling not high bowlers. Anyway Johnson was never a high quality bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

Last time i checked It's high quality bowling not high bowlers. Anyway Johnson was never a high quality bowler.

He was at that time on those pitches.

 

[Prince EWS]

If he was more skilled, why didn’t he do better

I blame the French.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

He was at that time on those pitches.

Just like any test level bowler was in Sabina

 

[subshakerz]

So?

Otherwise his case against Dravid would be clearer.

Anyways Dravid's record against high quality bowlers is spotty enough to make this straightforward in favor of ABD.

 

[subshakerz]

Just like any test level bowler was in Sabina

No. High quality implies skill level of the bowler.

 

[anil1405]

That Sabina Park pitch made Taylor and Collymore look like Ambrose and Walsh.

Dravid's two of the finest knocks.

 

[ma1978]

I blame the French.

“We hate the French! We fight wars against the French! Did all those men die in vain on the fields of Agincourt? Was the man who burned Joan of Arc just wasting good matches?” - E Blackadder

 

[subshakerz]

That Sabina Park pitch made Taylor and Collymore look like Ambrose and Walsh.

Dravid's two of the finest knocks.

Great knocks but irrelevant to this question.

 

[ma1978]

Otherwise his case against Dravid would be clearer.

Anyways Dravid's record against high quality bowlers is spotty enough to make this straightforward in favor of ABD.

The point is he didn’t play those two years so everything you’re saying is just speculative and if his record was better, he would have the numbers to show for it which he doesn’t

 

[Adorable Asshole]

No. High quality implies skill level of the bowler.

You yourself implied it was the pitches that made Johnson high quality

He was at that time on those pitches.

 

[anil1405]

Great knocks but irrelevant to this question.

You're face is irrelevant.

 

[ma1978]

He did say high quality bowling not high quality bowlers. There is a distinction.

Example - Devon Malcolm wasn’t the best bowler but on the day he was unplayable.

 

[subshakerz]

You yourself implied it was the pitches that made Johnson high quality

Not at all. He was high quality aside from that.

 

[subshakerz]

You're face is irrelevant.

That didn't take long.

 

[subshakerz]

The point is he didn’t play those two years so everything you’re saying is just speculative and if his record was better, he would have the numbers to show for it which he doesn’t

Let's talk about their records against high quality bowling then. Give me Dravid's case.

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Not at all. He was high quality aside from that.

Nah he wasn't we all know that

 

[Prince EWS]

You're face is irrelevant.

As are your posts.

 

[subshakerz]

Nah he wasn't we all know that

At that time, yes.