Riggins
International Captain
Man. This is the best.
-
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.
Exactly how good was VVS Laxman?
- Thread starter GuyFromLancs
- Start date
watson
Banned
Dravid: Bowled 55/286 - 21.7%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
Laxman: Bowled 39/224 - 20.4%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
Tendulkar: Bowled 53/327 - 18.4%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
Sehwag: Bowled 31/180 - 17.8%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
Gavaskar: 33/214 - 16.7%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
Ganguly: 26/188 - 15.2%
HowSTAT! Player Dismissal Analysis Graph
It appears that Ganguly defends his stumps the best out of some great Indian batsman. But what does that mean?
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That settles it I reckon. Ganguly has the least technical faults among India's batsmen while Dravid has the most deficiencies. Sounds about right
Far more technical faults around than ones that only get you bowled. Case in point: Shane Watson.
Though it does seem opposite to conventional wisdom that David got bowled so much, given he was known as The Wall
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Dravid's technique is often exaggerated as being perfect.
He did actually get bowled fairly often, and not just at the end of his career.
What was so outstanding about his technique is that he always played the ball as late as possible. He'd rarely be caught behind the wicket to outswing, for example. That is a pretty awesome quality.
Someone like Sachin in his peak had perhaps more orthodox technique but could be known to swing through the line of the ball, and if there was shape he'd be as vulnerable as anyone to being caught behind the wicket.
Dravid was extremely good at waiting for the ball to swing and playing it right in front of his eyes.
He did actually get bowled fairly often, and not just at the end of his career.
What was so outstanding about his technique is that he always played the ball as late as possible. He'd rarely be caught behind the wicket to outswing, for example. That is a pretty awesome quality.
Someone like Sachin in his peak had perhaps more orthodox technique but could be known to swing through the line of the ball, and if there was shape he'd be as vulnerable as anyone to being caught behind the wicket.
Dravid was extremely good at waiting for the ball to swing and playing it right in front of his eyes.
Last edited:
JontyPanesar
U19 Vice-Captain
Really good but also very flawed. My favorite batsman (favorite != best or anything near it)
Flaws:
1.) Lazy on the front foot made him very pleasing on the eye, but that also meant he could get in trouble against quality swing bowling. It wasn't a pace or bounce issue. It was a swing issue and to a larger extent, a moving ball issue.
2.) Could throw away his wicket cheaply when the runs were there for the taking. If he didn't have those match-winning contributions in tough situations (Ahmedabad, Kolkata, etc), we'd call him temperamentally weak for how he threw his wicket away oftentimes. The 'appetite for runs' was lacking. I don't find this to be a big deal but those obsessed with needing to have a 50+ average should point to this. IDGAF (see strength 1).
Strengths:
1.) The strongest case for Laxman is that he made runs when most of the team didn't or couldn't make runs (overseas conditions, 4th innings chases, avoiding follow-ons). It's a team game; you should want players to complement each other in order to increase the set of circumstances in which your team can win or save matches. There's no point having seven clones of the same batsman if they will still succeed and fail in the same situations. It's part of why Laxman was twice the player Sehwag was imho. Sehwag almost always made runs in conditions where any other Indian bat down the order would've made runs. Laxman's 4th innings average is amazing. He also didn't earn his average by FTB-ing in India. Au contraire, his overseas average is very comparable to his average in India, which is rare to say for an Indian batsman.
2.) One of the best at shepherding the tail. He got the most out of Ishant, Zak, Kumble, Harbhajan, and RP Singh when he batted with them.
3.) Wrists
4.) Timing
Flaws:
1.) Lazy on the front foot made him very pleasing on the eye, but that also meant he could get in trouble against quality swing bowling. It wasn't a pace or bounce issue. It was a swing issue and to a larger extent, a moving ball issue.
2.) Could throw away his wicket cheaply when the runs were there for the taking. If he didn't have those match-winning contributions in tough situations (Ahmedabad, Kolkata, etc), we'd call him temperamentally weak for how he threw his wicket away oftentimes. The 'appetite for runs' was lacking. I don't find this to be a big deal but those obsessed with needing to have a 50+ average should point to this. IDGAF (see strength 1).
Strengths:
1.) The strongest case for Laxman is that he made runs when most of the team didn't or couldn't make runs (overseas conditions, 4th innings chases, avoiding follow-ons). It's a team game; you should want players to complement each other in order to increase the set of circumstances in which your team can win or save matches. There's no point having seven clones of the same batsman if they will still succeed and fail in the same situations. It's part of why Laxman was twice the player Sehwag was imho. Sehwag almost always made runs in conditions where any other Indian bat down the order would've made runs. Laxman's 4th innings average is amazing. He also didn't earn his average by FTB-ing in India. Au contraire, his overseas average is very comparable to his average in India, which is rare to say for an Indian batsman.
2.) One of the best at shepherding the tail. He got the most out of Ishant, Zak, Kumble, Harbhajan, and RP Singh when he batted with them.
3.) Wrists
4.) Timing
Salamuddin
International Debutant
High quality player. Averaged 40+ in Australia and South Africa. Very few subcontinental players managed that. The 40+ in SA is particularly impressive - given the nature of SA wickets and particularly so when suncontinental teams tour.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
Classy, classy batsman Laxman - wonder if the last sentence changes with what Kohli has done/started doing recently though.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Kirkut
International Regular
I remember a story when India toured Australia in 1999, Laxman wasn't getting any runs initially and his stats were horrible. Before the Sydney test, Laxman's father had adviced him to quit cricket and continue his studies in medicine, so that Sydney test was a do or die for him. And then he bats in Sydney as if there was no tomorrow, scored an awesome 167 comprising of effortless class shots, thus began his love for scoring against Australia, because of that 167 his cricket career was saved.