Steve Waugh vs Rahul Dravid (Tests)

[J_C]

Now it all makes sense. Further proof of the need for a separate sub forum for drafts so those of us who live in the real world can focus on the real thing.

This just proves what a farce drafts are tbh. While the blokes you prefer are highly prized in the virtual world, blokes like Waugh won tests in the real one.

He "won" Tests as he played for a far better side. Just like someone like Greenidge "won" far more Tests than Border. In a weaker side, he'd pretty much be a right-handed Chanderpaul.

 

[Burgey]

Steve Waugh on a hot March morning in 2001 ( Visibly annoyed that Ganguly had kept him waiting for toss) : How dare he do this to irrefutably the best batsman of the past decade ?

Ian Chappell (waiting for the same toss report) : Don't make me laugh my *** off mate. You were not even the best batsman born on the same ****ing day you were born.

The subcontinental sense of humour on display again, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[Burgey]

Can't we just agree that Smith is better than both and move on?

Irrefutably better than Waugh, Spudulkar and Lara

 

[Burgey]

He "won" Tests as he played for a far better side. Just like someone like Greenidge "won" far more Tests than Border. In a weaker side, he'd pretty much be a right-handed Chanderpaul.

Don’t put “won” in quotation marks mate. You do that in drafts, because there’s nothing to win in that virtual world.

Waugh would never have let his side get weaker. He learned from Border. That’s the difference between them and Tendulkar, who had a crack at the captaincy and let it go within 12 months because too hard.

 

[OverratedSanity]

The subcontinental sense of humour on display again, ladies and gentlemen.

Clearly we need to take tips on humour from a guy who gave us hilarious gems like the below.

No idea what people were saying about Boland in the thread, but for a guy who was picked as a Test reserve under the godawful (and horrendously named) 'velocity policy', he was pretty bloody standard in the pace he was bowling today.

Yeah he just doesn't seem anything special at all, other than special olympics.

 

[Burgey]

Again, resorting to straw men and ad homs.

My opinion was obviously at the upper end of harsh (the word, not the moderator), but tell me where I was wrong in my sentiments about Boland?

 

[J_C]

Don’t put “won” in quotation marks mate. You do that in drafts, because there’s nothing to win in that virtual world.

Waugh would never have let his side get weaker. He learned from Border. That’s the difference between them and Tendulkar, who had a crack at the captaincy and let it go within 12 months because too hard.

In the real world, Border had 2 match-winning hundreds from 1978-1991. Batsmen all round the world look at him bat and do the exact opposite if they want to win games .

 

[Burgey]

Stats brought to you by the CEO of Make Believe Drafts R Real Inc

 

[J_C]

Wake me up when you find a third match-winning Test hundred by Border during 1978-1991 in the real world . I think it should be pretty clear to everyone by now. If Waugh was better than Lara/SRT in the 90s because he "won" more Tests, then Border must have been one of the worst Test batsmen in the world from 1978-1991 .

 

[h_hurricane]

Wake me up when you find a third match-winning Test hundred by Border during 1978-1991 in the real world . I think it should be pretty clear to everyone by now. If Waugh was better than Lara/SRT in the 90s because he "won" more Tests, then Border must have been one of the worst Test batsmen in the world from 1978-1991 .

Lol. And none against the great WI sides of 1970s and 80s

 

[Burgey]

Being that I’m operating from my phone and am not a draft nerd so do not have statistics at hand, I would say off the top of my head TOTAB made about half a dozen match winning tons that I can think of, not to mention innumerable match saving hundreds. Something which Tendulkar was incapable of mustering, as he was the Little Master of the Ton in a Losing Side.

 

[Burgey]

I can recall Border making a ton in 93 at the MCG against Ambrose Bishop and Walsh. Of course, his 98* and 100* in 84 were innings the likes of which Tendulkar could only dream of playing.

My personal favourite was the 196 at Lords with a broken thumb, part of the 153 tests on a row he played.

I recall Tendulkar missing tests because of a wrist injury ffs. I won’t hazard a guess at how that developed, but apparently he couldn’t sleep at night because he was so upset at being injured. Don’t lose sleep. Man up and actually play on. It’s these sort of character flaws which make him a lesser player than many before and since tbh.

 

[cnerd123]

when I was living in the late 90s/ early 2000s

Big achievement for your age

 

[h_hurricane]

Being that I’m operating from my phone and am not a draft nerd so do not have statistics at hand, I would say off the top of my head TOTAB made about half a dozen match winning tons that I can think of, not to mention innumerable match saving hundreds. Something which Tendulkar was incapable of mustering, as he was the Little Master of the Ton in a Losing Side.

Here is the break down of his match winning hundreds.

3 against Eng
1 against WI ( towards the end of their golden period, after the likes of Marshall, Garner and Holding retired, Ambrose was at his peak though)
1 against NZ

So 5 match winning hundreds in 156 matches is all he could muster. The real AB scored 16 winning hundreds in 114 test matches.

And FWIW, Sachin (who never wins any matches according to you) has 20 match winning hundreds in 200 test matches.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Here is the break down of his match winning hundreds.

3 against Eng
1 against WI ( towards the end of their golden period, after the likes of Marshall, Garner and Holding retired, Ambrose was at his peak though)
1 against NZ

So 5 match winning hundreds in 156 matches is all he could muster. The real AB scored 16 winning hundreds in 114 test matches.

And FWIW, Sachin (who never wins any matches according to you) has 20 match winning hundreds in 200 test matches.

Ouch. Owned and boned one would say.

 

[harsh.ag]

Tendulkar could learn a lot from Border. The next time he's cooped up in a hotel in Melbourne, he should hurl down a few pails of water on the locals strolling below. You know, for fun.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Tendulkar could learn a lot from Border. The next time he's cooped up in a hotel in Melbourne, he should throw down a few Australian dollars and hurl pails of water on the locals scrambling below. You know, for fun.

Fixed for accuracy.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Here is the break down of his match winning hundreds.

3 against Eng
1 against WI ( towards the end of their golden period, after the likes of Marshall, Garner and Holding retired, Ambrose was at his peak though)
1 against NZ

So 5 match winning hundreds in 156 matches is all he could muster. The real AB scored 16 winning hundreds in 114 test matches.

And FWIW, Sachin (who never wins any matches according to you) has 20 match winning hundreds in 200 test matches.

Hmm I may be misunderstanding the discussion here but IMO a "match-winning" hundred isn't the same as any hundred that was made in a match that you won.

 

[Borges]

So 5 match winning hundreds in 156 matches is all he could muster. The real AB scored 16 winning hundreds in 114 test matches.

What are you guys up to? Trying to get people refer to the Lesser AB as the Much Lesser AB ?

 

[h_hurricane]

Hmm I may be misunderstanding the discussion here but IMO a "match-winning" hundred isn't the same as any hundred that was made in a match that you won.

I counted both as same. But if I further try to narrow them down based on the actual definition of a quality match winning hundred, it might get a bit embarrassing for the AB from 20th century.
After all, how much further down from 5 should we go ?