Current Most Technically Correct/Sound Batsman

[Richard]

well..uhm...............wat was the topic of this thread???...........

Richard, apparently.

Well if you want to look at it like that you could say the topic of every thread is me, marc and tooextracool, because a thread with no response from any of us is just about non-existent.

 

[Adamc]

Well if you want to look at it like that you could say the topic of every thread is me, marc and tooextracool, because a thread with no response from any of us is just about non-existent.

It makes one wonder, though, why you would bother posting in a thread to complain that it is irrelevant and is cluttering the forum, when you know full well that by posting in it the thread will return to the top, thus continuing to clutter the forum as you see it.

 

[Richard]

Because I know full well that others will post anyway.
It's one of those infuriating things where activity will cause problems, inactivity will not solve them.

 

[Adamc]

Because I know full well that others will post anyway.
It's one of those infuriating things where activity will cause problems, inactivity will not solve them.

Well.. if you achieve the same thing by posting as by not posting, what is the point of posting?

 

[Richard]

To try to get people to not post?
Or (cunning - and oh so subtle) to distract from the title-topic and turn the discussion my way?

 

[marc71178]

Yet all of which have the thing in common that they're discussing things that can never be quantified and would, in my view, be best not have threads created.

So ignore if others want to discuss them, you've decided they shouldn't be on here, so will do your best to disrupt them.

 

[tooextracool]

Like I've said above - posts and threads aren't quite the same thing.

why? do you really have more problems scrolling down threads you dont like in cc than you have in scrolling down posts in a particular thread?

 

[Richard]

No, of course not - it's just a little more irritating that having to scroll past posts.

 

[Richard]

So ignore if others want to discuss them, you've decided they shouldn't be on here, so will do your best to disrupt them.

No, if they want to discuss stuff it's up to them - but I'm going to point-out why I find it pointless.

 

[marc71178]

And it's up to you, how exactly?

 

[Richard]

I've said it's up to me where, exactly?

 

[tooextracool]

No, of course not - it's just a little more irritating that having to scroll past posts.

for you perhaps, im quite sure most other people get more irritated having to scroll down our posts, especially considering that its longer than the threads.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I personally think these batsmen are technically bloody good, but in no particular order....

Dravid
Kallis
Laxman
Martyn
Ponting
Strauss

 

[James90]

First name that sprung to my mind was Daren Ganga but thinking about it, Rahul Dravid

 

[honestbharani]

Dravid and Kallis for me.

 

[SJS]

Dravid and Kallis for me.

I would tend to agree.

Its not an easy subject but one can go into details of grip, stance, take the execution of all strokes, off both feet and on both sides of the wicket and what every one checks first, the defensive technique. These two are as close to being complete as any one playing today.

There are quite a few batsmen with good techniques in the front foot defense, the drives on the off side and straight on both sides of the wicket, pulling, hooking and cutting square. Although fewer batsmen both pull AND hook correctly.

The lesser common perfection is seen in the backfoot defense. Dravid and Kallis are good. Some others too. But there is an over all tendency to move across but not fully back in most cases. This is a problem against the really fast delivery and the sharply breaking one. Lara is very good with his backfoot movement and thats why he is able to leave the balls so late and is so sure of the position of his off stump when playing back. Dravid's problems of playing on are also 'partly' due to not moving back and across fully.

The backfoot drive to covers with a straight bat with the left elbow (for right handers) high is another rarity but both these play it pretty well and is a lovely stroke to watch.

The same shot on the onside is not played at all today and is one of the most difficult shots to play correctly, most batsmen prefer to turn the wrist and flick rather than drive. I dont think any current batsman plays it.

The ondrive wide of mid on and upto midwicket (played with a straight bat without turning the wrists is another rare and difficult shot to play correctly but a pleasure to watch and impossible to get out to if mastered. Dravid plays it sometimes but prfers a slight wristy turn to mid wicket mostly. Tendulkar plays it sometimes and used to play this shot , against the spin, to Warne a few years ago.

Both of them play the pull and the square cut to near perfection. Both do not play the late cut, its almost gone from the game. Only Laxman plays it at the highest level, sometimes.

Dravid does not sweep well but it never was a cricketing stroke. It came about first from players who had difficulty judging the length of spinners and driving them. A sweep , kind of, swept across the line in the hope of getting it somewhere on the way . Batsmen like Dravid who can drive so well and also use their feet well to spinners dont need to play this low percentage shot. Unfortunately he tries even to play the reverse sewwp and is often made to look ugly, the only time this elegant batsman looks less than poised.
Kallis doesnt sweep much but when he does, he is competent.

Dravid has a more orthodox grip but a very wide spread of his legs in his stance. This is what makes it more difficult for him to move back onto the stumps. This is something bhe has picked up 2-3 years ago and is getting pronounced. Dravid's forward defense is too exaggerated. I think Kallis has a better defense.

 

[Richard]

for you perhaps, im quite sure most other people get more irritated having to scroll down our posts, especially considering that its longer than the threads.

Most of them seem to state they're unwilling to do it and simply refuse to open the threads once we start posting on them.

 

[C_C]

Best technique ?

hmmmm
Alltime, its inconclusive as from numerous books i've read about cricket, its inconclusive as to who was the best technician of the pre-WWII era.
But best post WWII batsman when it comes to technique ?
Its Sunil Gavaskar
Best current batsman in terms of technique ? Its Rahul Dravid.