Why is this relevant here?Brian Lara scored 13 centuries in 93 innings and Sachin Tendulkar scored 18 centuries in 119 innings.
He was in England and NZ.Dravid wasn't quite impressive in SENA.Without his not out his ave is not looking impressive.He scored 35 runs per innings in these nations
I think he scored back to back 3 century in 2010 Eng tour besides that his ave be lower in these nationsHe was in England and NZ.
He had a great tour in 96 and an awesome one in 2002.I think he scored back to back 3 century in 2010 Eng tour besides that his ave be lower in these nations
But both his centuries vs Australia are ATG stuff though. He genuinely underperformed against SA badly, Australia did relatively to his stature; but has enough silver linings for me not hold it against him much.Rahul Dravid underperformed against the best two teams of his era - The biggest flaw in his record.
Just 4 centuries in 102 innings against Aus & SA.
Brian Lara scored 13 centuries in 93 innings and Sachin Tendulkar scored 18 centuries in 119 innings against them.
True. Rahul Dravid has two iconic centuries against Australia and both happen to be the most famous wins of India in 2000s decade.But both his centuries vs Australia are ATG stuff though.
Poor Dravid. If Laxman never scored that 281 and it was spread among several other bats, he would get more credit for that 180.True. Rahul Dravid has two iconic centuries against Australia and both happen to be the most famous wins of India in 2000s decade.
180 - Laxman’s 281 match
233* - Adelaide where India won
I think Dravid was lucky. If Agarkar didn’t take 6 wickets, his century would be forgotten like Sachin’s 241 in that series.Poor Dravid. If Laxman never scored that 281 and it was spread among several other bats, he would get more credit for that 180.