Rahul Dravid vs Graeme Pollock

[PlayerComparisons]

Is the question who had a greater career?

Or who is the better test batsman?

First question is Dravid, the second one for me is Pollock

Do you rate Ian Bishop as a better bowler than James Anderson?

 

[Bolo.]

Is the question who had a greater career?

Or who is the better test batsman?

First question is Dravid, the second one for me is Pollock

I voted on the question of greater test bat, which is a pretty easy question to answer in my book.

I think Pollock was a better bat.

The question of better test bats is going to give definitional problems in terms of which of the above it's closer to. I think Pollock performed better in tests than Dravid did at any stage in his career (particularly considering his age), but I prefer players to have done it for longer and in more tests.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Is the question who had a greater career?

Or who is the better test batsman?

First question is Dravid, the second one for me is Pollock

Can you please explain how the two are exclusive of each other?

 

[Coronis]

Can you please explain how the two are exclusive of each other?

They’re not inherently exclusive. But for example.. Shane Bond was a better bowler than Brett Lee. But due to injuries, Brett Lee had a better career.

 

[kyear2]

Do you rate Ian Bishop as a better bowler than James Anderson?

Better?

Easily.

 

[kyear2]

There's also a difference between getting injured and your country being banned

 

[subshakerz]

Pollock is an exceptional case when peer rating is so off the charts to sway the normal longevity argument. The guy was rated freaking Sobers level and had a decent sampling in intl cricket to match those expectations. After that ban, he was still scoring well against quality bowlers until his 40s.

Dravid is just a solid ATVG.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I'm certain Pollock himself would cede ground to Dravid or anyone else with that amount of international experience, and not out of misplaced humility either. The grind of performing at an elite-very good level in two formats for sixteen years outflanks any talent/sample-based extrapolation you care to come up with.

Elite - Very good level in 2 formats?
Tests - yes
ODIs - No ( above avg only )

 

[ma1978]

Pollock not allowed to play in the Windies or the subcontinent. Not his fault but that of en evil odious government. Nevertheless that in itself takes away from the record irreparably. You’ve got subz who spends all his time picking apart records by country who can’t see this flaw in Pollock.

Dravid a consensus ATG.

 

[subshakerz]

Pollock not allowed to play in the Windies or the subcontinent. Not his fault but that of en evil odious government. Nevertheless that in itself takes away from the record irreparably. You’ve got subz who spends all his time picking apart records by country who can’t see this flaw in Pollock.

Pollock has the rep of an ATG. He just has an aborted record. That means to me he should be behind all other ATGs but ahead of ATVGs.

Dravid a consensus ATG.

He ain't if the term ATG means anything. It should be an exclusive term. There may be around 15 or so ATG bats total.

 

[ma1978]

Pollock has the rep of an ATG. He just has an aborted record. That means to me he should be behind all other ATGs but ahead of ATVGs.



He ain't if the term ATG means anything. It should be an exclusive term. There may be around 15 or so ATG bats total.

no way to judge Pollock period. Pre apartheid rep doesn’t meaning - a cricketer who can’t play against dark people has a record no one has the right to judge:

none of this is a criticism of Pollock - by all accounts one of the greatest cricketers to walk the earth and great bloke. But not wvaluatve.

in the case of Dravid, 150 tests averaging 52 with iconic innings everywhere makes you an ATG. No point having arbitrary numbers

 

[OverratedSanity]

Pollock has the rep of an ATG. He just has an aborted record. That means to me he should be behind all other ATGs but ahead of ATVGs.



He ain't if the term ATG means anything. It should be an exclusive term. There may be around 15 or so ATG bats total.

Oh my god stop with this ****ing stupid is he ATG **** everyone loses half their brain cells when this happens , it's a term everyone has different definitions for so you'll just keep arguing coming to no common ground, just discuss the two batsmen's strengths and weaknesses ffs.

 

[subshakerz]

Oh my god stop with this ****ing stupid is he ATG **** everyone loses half their brain cells when this happens , it's a term everyone has different definitions for so you'll just keep arguing coming to no common ground, just discuss the two batsmen's strengths and weaknesses ffs.

Yes true it would take us back to the Ashwin ATG neverending thread.

 

[subshakerz]

no way to judge Pollock period. Pre apartheid rep doesn’t meaning - a cricketer who can’t play against dark people has a record no one has the right to judge:

none of this is a criticism of Pollock - by all accounts one of the greatest cricketers to walk the earth and great bloke. But not wvaluatve.

in the case of Dravid, 150 tests averaging 52 with iconic innings everywhere makes you an ATG. No point having arbitrary numbers

I just think we see his pre ban record differently since it was the 60s. If he was a modern era cricketer I may give Dravid the edge.

 

[shortpitched713]

There's also a difference between getting injured and your country being banned

Not in terms of playing Test cricket. Both cases, you don't get to play Test cricket. Extrapolating the FC stats in the meantime, simply is too fraught of an activity to reliably do.

 

[h_hurricane]

It is disrespectful to Dravid to rate a player with 20 something tests ahead of him. Bradman is just about the only post first world war batsman who should be ahead of him if the sample size was less than 25 tests. Dravid between 2001-2004 alone did more than Pollock did in his whole career. Same holds true for batsmen in the same ballpark as Dravid like Miandad or Steve Waugh if they were to be compared to Pollock.

This is coming from a huge Pollock fan. Saw him in 1995 World Masters Cup when he was well past 50 and agree that his reputation is vindicated.
But his body of work is tragically small in tests and should be rated only on what he did and not on what he could have.

 

[kyear2]

Pollock not allowed to play in the Windies or the subcontinent. Not his fault but that of en evil odious government. Nevertheless that in itself takes away from the record irreparably. You’ve got subz who spends all his time picking apart records by country who can’t see this flaw in Pollock.

Dravid a consensus ATG.

Consensus?

 

[subshakerz]

It is disrespectful to Dravid to rate a player with 20 something tests ahead of him. Bradman is just about the only post first world war batsman who should be ahead of him if the sample size was less than 25 tests. Dravid between 2001-2004 alone did more than Pollock did in his whole career. Same holds true for batsmen in the same ballpark as Dravid like Miandad or Steve Waugh if they were to be compared to Pollock.

This is coming from a huge Pollock fan. Saw him in 1995 World Masters Cup when he was well past 50 and agree that his reputation is vindicated.
But his body of work is tragically small in tests and should be rated only on what he did and not on what he could have.

Do you rate Mohd Yousuf and
Chanderpaul ahead of Pollock? If not, why not? They had full careers.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Do you rate Mohd Yousuf and
Chanderpaul ahead of Pollock? If not, why not? They had full careers.

Because they weren't nearly as good as Dravid.... Not to mention, objectively Chandra had a better Test career than Pollock. Again, Pollock is the better batsman imo, but Dravid had the better career. It's like rating Barry Richards as a greater Test batsman than Hayden.

 

[subshakerz]

Because they weren't nearly as good as Dravid.... Not to mention, objectively Chandra had a better Test career than Pollock. Again, Pollock is the better batsman imo, but Dravid had the better career. It's like rating Barry Richards as a greater Test batsman than Hayden.

You didn't answer the question.