I thought the same about Ganguly and Dravid but there was this tour to NZ in 1999 I think, when I immediately realized that Dravid was a class above all batsmen in the Indian side except Sachin... Even in ODIs there, he was awesome, IIRC.By the end of the 90's I was pretty sure Ganguly would end up better than Dravid in both forms of the game. I think Kolkata 2001 was the turning point for Dravid, to a lesser extent than for Laxman.
Yeah, that tour and the hundred he scored in the 3rd Test in SA in '97. He had a nasty habit of not converting 50s into 100s back then.I thought the same about Ganguly and Dravid but there was this tour to NZ in 1999 I think, when I immediately realized that Dravid was a class above all batsmen in the Indian side except Sachin... Even in ODIs there, he was awesome, IIRC.
You know fine right if he'd been playing today instead of North he'd be not out on 160 (114) having been dropped three times and given not out after edging to first slip, with the referral system unable to be used because it had been put out of action for one over after being struck by lightning.If you're saying then "surprising" as in "should have more" then no IMO.
a fair assessment this one.About Ganguly, While him being made captain obv. was more beneficial to the team, I think it killed him as a batsman, He was almost kissing greatness and averaged 50(?) in the 90s where some 3-4 other blokes did and then regressed into this Marcus North-ish batsman for a long while.
You know fine right if he'd been playing today instead of North he'd be not out on 160 (114) having been dropped three times and given not out after edging to first slip, with the referral system unable to be used because it had been put out of action for one over after being struck by lightning.
HEY! i picked him first . Yeah, he has had something of a special career so far.Johnathon Trott
Played 15 - Just.
Average of 59.95!
Delightful, isn't it?