• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

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

Who was the better batsman against high quality bowling

  • Total voters
    26
M

ma1978

International Debutant
subshakerz said:
Are you sure? Seem to be taking this personally.

We saw ABD and Dravid their entire careers. Dravid was definitely more flawed in his skillset except against lateral movement.

I don't think we can have a conversation though since any of ABD positives, including the 2014 Johnson series and 2018 Australia series with Cummins, etc, you don't even want to acknowledge.
Click to expand...
we saw very different things
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
trundler said:
Against a level De Villiers didn't experience. I cant simplify it further. Improve your comprehension.


See my Rawalpindi example. Those same pitches sent Mitchell Johnson into retirement despite him being in prime form. Including that throws the whole premise of the thread out of the window and just exposes the fact that you want to pump De Villiers's tires because you like him more.

Except it's literally the exact other way around. I only said De Villiers's resume is overrated which it definitely is by the standards you apply to cricketers you don't like. You never addressed the fact that looking pretty is a lot easier when you hide down at 5 behind a strong lineup.

I will do as I please, thanks. Dravid was a substantially more accomplished and plain better test batsman than De Villiers and any ethereal perception of perceived solidity means zilch when it didn't amount to better output against any standard of bowling for De Villiers.
Click to expand...
trundler said:
.. where Dravid was still better in practice.
Click to expand...
Interesting arguments applying solely to this thread…
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
trundler said:
You get great value for shots in SA and once the new ball has worn out, it gets easier to score. Batting 5 there especially with a stacked top 4 is a lot easier than batting top 3.
Click to expand...
This is a very good point on RSA pitches in general. Your point notwithstanding, it's not an easy place to bat regardless of position (reverse, life in wicket etc.), but the difference between the new and old ball is a lot starker than most other places.
trundler said:
Don't think De Villiers should get any conditions points. He wasn't coming in at 3/50 all that often.
Click to expand...
'XYZ does not deserve condition points' is basically CW shorthand for 'XYZ has a record in particular conditions that I feel like dismissing'. You get condition points, positively or negatively, all the time.

I think you are underestimating what kind of platform AB had in RSA when you say he seldom came in at 50/3. He opened nearly 30% of the time, batted 4 a fair few more, and when he was batting 5, had to deal with a lot of top order collapses, cos no RSA bat other than Kallis could bat for beondegi in RSA. In the context of this conversation, he was typically coming in at much worse than 3/50, even if he did sometimes have an old ball.

If you want to beat down the home record of someone like Duminy or Prince, i think the critique would be more applicable.

FTR, because you seem to be focused on him batting 5 in RSA, when he was actually batting 5 in RSA, he averaged 66, and it actually felt like this average undersold both the quality of his innings and his contributions. Obviously he was nowhere near this quality as a bat overall, but it's what you are zooming in on, not me.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Bolo. said:
This is a very good point on RSA pitches in general. Your point notwithstanding, it's not an easy place to bat regardless of position (reverse, life in wicket etc.), but the difference between the new and old ball is a lot starker than most other places.

'XYZ does not deserve condition points' is basically CW shorthand for 'XYZ has a record in particular conditions that I feel like dismissing'. You get condition points, positively or negatively, all the time.

I think you are underestimating what kind of platform AB had in RSA when you say he seldom came in at 50/3. He opened nearly 30% of the time, batted 4 a fair few more, and when he was batting 5, had to deal with a lot of top order collapses, cos no RSA bat other than Kallis could bat for beondegi in RSA. In the context of this conversation, he was typically coming in at much worse than 3/50, even if he did sometimes have an old ball.

If you want to beat down the home record of someone like Duminy or Prince, i think the critique would be more applicable.

FTR, because you seem to be focused on him batting 5 in RSA, when he was actually batting 5 in RSA, he averaged 66, and it actually felt like this average undersold both the quality of his innings and his contributions. Obviously he was nowhere near this quality as a bat overall, but it's what you are zooming in on, not me.
Click to expand...
5 or lower is about 70% of his career though. And the higher up than 5 he batted, the worse he did. I'm not going to hold that record against him because batting top order in SA is seriously hard. And it's not just the fact that De Villiers batted in an easier position, one which I think is relatively easier than batting top order in SA particularly because in SC the pitch breaks down and in England it h00ps after the lacquer comes off, but also the fact that De Villiers was coming in after a *stacked* lineup. These two things in combination pretty much cancel out De Villiers home conditions being tougher on paper. You can, of course, instead choose to believe that I don't give De Villiers conditions points because I want to dismiss his record.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
PlayerComparisons said:
Depends on the conditions the game is being played under. Ponting was better on flat bouncy pitches but I’d pick Kallis against lateral movment and spin. Depends on which you care about more
Click to expand...
Overall as a career, Ponting is well ahead. Ponting was rivaling Tendulkar/Lara for some time.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
trundler said:
5 or lower is about 70% of his career though. And the higher up than 5 he batted, the worse he did. I'm not going to hold that record against him because batting top order in SA is seriously hard. And it's not just the fact that De Villiers batted in an easier position, one which I think is relatively easier than batting top order in SA particularly because in SC the pitch breaks down and in England it h00ps after the lacquer comes off, but also the fact that De Villiers was coming in after a *stacked* lineup. These two things in combination pretty much cancel out De Villiers home conditions being tougher on paper. You can, of course, instead choose to believe that I don't give De Villiers conditions points because I want to dismiss his record.
Click to expand...
I think you are conflating his home and away while specifically trying to look at his home. 42/109 home Innings were opening or at 4.

The top order above him may have been strong, but they didn't average that much at home- they didn't have players like India, Aus, Lanka and Pak who scored heaps at home. Add the averages to your point about strokemaking and you are looking at a lot of collapses.

Plus the second new ball happens when the top order is doing a good job.

So he's probably facing the new ball 60% of games. You are writing off the conditions based on 40% of his games, which were still pretty tricky?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top