subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I think the biggest point in Dravid's favor is that he was a number 3 bat compared to a no.5 or 6 bat that Waugh was. But I think Waugh has a better record.
-
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.
Steve Waugh vs Rahul Dravid
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
If Waugh was selfish then Australia clearly benefited from his selfishness.
But I don't think he was, nor do I think Kallis was. That is just sour grapes from Warne for being dropped.
But I don't think he was, nor do I think Kallis was. That is just sour grapes from Warne for being dropped.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
I am now convinced that Bradman is not going to average 104 if he played in 1989-2009 period. Waugh is going to run him out every now and then.
And Ian Chappell in the commentary box will make it an interesting experience.
And Ian Chappell in the commentary box will make it an interesting experience.
anil1405
International Captain
The thing about Dravid is that, while he may have sub par averages (for ATG status) in Aus and SA, he delivered in arguably tougher conditions and played unique knocks where almost all other ATG batsmen failed.
Jamaica 2006 for example is something people will look at the scorecard and say it was just Collins, Collymore and Taylor but people who saw it live know how difficult the pitch was to bat on.
The closest India came to winning a test match in South Africa in the 90s was when Dravid scored 148 and 81 against the likes of Donald and Pollock in Jo'burg.
In general what I've seen is that while assessing a batsman people look at
a) the opposition bowlers he faced
b) his record in overseas countries
Which is a fair way to assess a player BUT not enough credit is given to
c) the match situation and
d) playing conditions for that specific test
Inzamam's century against Bangladesh, for example, was a face saving knock for him and his country which people don't often talk about much but he saved them from embarassment under tough match situation and I consider this an ATG knock.
Jamaica 2006 for example is something people will look at the scorecard and say it was just Collins, Collymore and Taylor but people who saw it live know how difficult the pitch was to bat on.
The closest India came to winning a test match in South Africa in the 90s was when Dravid scored 148 and 81 against the likes of Donald and Pollock in Jo'burg.
In general what I've seen is that while assessing a batsman people look at
a) the opposition bowlers he faced
b) his record in overseas countries
Which is a fair way to assess a player BUT not enough credit is given to
c) the match situation and
d) playing conditions for that specific test
Inzamam's century against Bangladesh, for example, was a face saving knock for him and his country which people don't often talk about much but he saved them from embarassment under tough match situation and I consider this an ATG knock.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No doubt Dravid had his fair share of tough gritty knocks. But then so did Waugh in very critical situations.
His 200 in 95 in WI against was an absolutely crucial knock when the match was poised to win the series. Before that test, he scored a priceless 63* on the greenest wicket against a raging Ambrose when everyone failed.
Then he had 164 in Johannesburg when he batted a full day against Pollock and Donald. He has twin 50s in the last test of that series when Donald was breathing fire were top notch knocks. This clip is from that match.
And his twin centuries in the 97 Ashes were on an absolute minefield of a pitch.
If there was one guy who was hard to get out on a tough wicket it would be Waugh.
anil1405
International Captain
My post was not in comparison with Waugh but about the general perception that people have about Dravid in this forum.
He is underrated for some invaluable knocks that he has played imo. And a beast in England. And plays lateral movement really well as mentioned few posts above.
What he has achieved elsewhere negates his overall record in SA and Aus to a decent extent for which he gets a lot of flack.
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
State Vice-Captain
Waugh by a very small margin.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I am not sure him being fantastic in England makes up for his weak record in Australia and SA when comparing him to cricketers who may be excellent in all three countries.
I give Dravid credit for some top notch innings though and taking the pressure at no.3
_00_deathscar
International Regular
I like Dravid but this is clearly Waugh.
Kirkut
International Regular
Dravid's 2011 tour of UK was his best ever performance IMO, even better than 2006 Sabina Park knocks possibly.
At Sabina Park, the bowlers were quite good but the pitch did most of the thing, no need for planning.
In the UK there was a far more strategic approach from Broad, Anderson, Bresnan and Swann apart from the fact that these bowlers were at their prime, Duke balls swung wild that year and pitches were good for bowling without being greentops.
At Sabina Park, the bowlers were quite good but the pitch did most of the thing, no need for planning.
In the UK there was a far more strategic approach from Broad, Anderson, Bresnan and Swann apart from the fact that these bowlers were at their prime, Duke balls swung wild that year and pitches were good for bowling without being greentops.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah that was easily his best series performance especially given that the rest of the lineup failed.
Kirkut
International Regular
Hard to compare Dravid and Waugh, maybe I'll choose Waugh because he was more of a match winner, but then Indian bowling was mediocre for most of the time, Kasprowicz would have walked in as a strike bowler in our team.
Dravid's peak was in 1999-2006 period, made huge scores regularly but nothing compares with the technical mastery he displayed in 2011 against England which surpasses his batting against Australia in 2003 or even Pakistan in 2004, one of the best displays of batsmanship I've ever watched. Only Waugh's batting against Windies in 95 betters Dravid in England when comparing the two.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I think Dravid's peak began in 2001 with that 180 against Australia. Before that, he wasnt as high profile or rated a batsman. Then in 2002 he had that jumbo series in England and became India's numero uno.
I suppose it might be unfair, but one of the reasons I rate Waugh more than Dravid is that Dravid's peak I believe was helped in coinciding with the run buffet of the 2000s.
Last edited:
Calm_profit
State Vice-Captain
In the 90's Dravid was clearly second best batsman for India,had great tours outside Asia except in Australia 1999,Averages almost 50.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes he did very well before 2001 but wasn't considered one of the top batsmen in the world, more like a tier below Tendulkar, Lara and Waugh.In the 90's Dravid was clearly second best batsman for India,had great tours outside Asia except in Australia 1999,Averages almost 50.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
2001 and that innings really raised Dravid's profile and then by the 2002 England series next year it was clear that he and Ponting were the best in the world.