• 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.

Rahul Dravid vs AB de Villiers, who was better against high quality bowling?

Who was the better batsman against high quality bowling

  • Total voters
    26
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
ABD:

- Rather easily negotiated Mitch Johnson in beast mode
- Dead batted an entire day against Ashwin/Jadeja
- Scored 33 off 220 balls in one test against Australia, then 169 off 184 in the next
- Scored runs against Murali in SL, Kumble in India and Ajmal in UAE
 
M

Majestic

U19 Captain
ABD was better vs high quality attack and had wider range of shots.

Dravid was mentally tougher and more resilient.

There will be days when AB will threaten you but then get out. But on days when Dravid threatens you, he will grind our for hours and hours and then make you pay.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Majestic said:
ABD was better vs high quality attack and had wider range of shots.

Dravid was mentally tougher and more resilient.

There will be days when AB will threaten you but then get out. But on days when Dravid threatens you, he will grind our for hours and hours and then make you pay.
Click to expand...
ABD was perfectly capable of that. The only thing I think Dravid was slightly better at is playing against lateral movement, but ABD wasn't weak against that either. ABD was just a better quality bat who didn't play enough.
 
Last edited:
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Whenever anyone asks a question like this my instinct will always be to vote for de Villiers. The most skilful and technically adept batsman I've seen tbh, he just didn't have the career he should so he wasn't as good in the end.
 
M

Majestic

U19 Captain
subshakerz said:
ABD was perfectly of that. The only thing I think Dravid was slightly better at is playing against lateral movement, but ABD wasn't weak against that either. ABD was just a better quality bat who didn't play enough.
Click to expand...
ABD has played 110 games that's enough. His problem is he didn't scored big. That Johnson game you are saying SA lost at home. Had he hit a big hundred, it would have been match winning knock.

The dead batting he did on multiple occasions,none of them he stayed not out till end.

Dravid was better vs lateral movement, batted longer innings, batted for hours and hours and ended up as a superior test batsman.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Majestic said:
ABD has played 110 games that's enough. His problem is he didn't scored big. That Johnson game you are saying SA lost at home. Had he hit a big hundred, it would have been match winning knock.

The dead batting he did on multiple occasions,none of them he stayed not out till end.

Dravid was better vs lateral movement, batted longer innings, batted for hours and hours and ended up as a superior test batsman.
Click to expand...
Dravid played 50 tests more than ABD so it just seems like he scored bigger more often. Him batting longer in general isn't really a point in his favor. Him batting at no.3 is. ABD batting so deep wouldn't give him too long to hang around anyways.

And you are rubbishing ABD knocks that are actual superhuman efforts by even other greats' standards. Peak Johnson was ripping through Smith, Amla, etc and the fact that he was being negotiated by ABD so well proves he was in another class as afar as skill is concerned. And yeah he followed it up in the next test with a hundred and SA won.

His dead batting was exceptional given that his regular mode is to bat super aggressively. And good luck for Dravid trying to do that against Ashwin and Jadeja as he was a flatfoot against great spin.
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
In Kohli's time, Dravid's strike rate would dip below 40 with the same approach but I think he had the skillset to expand to a certain extent.
 
M

ma1978

International Debutant
subshakerz said:
Dravid played 50 tests more than ABD so it just seems like he scored bigger more often. Him batting longer in general isn't really a point in his favor. Him batting at no.3 is. ABD batting so deep wouldn't give him too long to hang around anyways.

And you are rubbishing ABD knocks that are actual superhuman efforts by even other greats' standards. Peak Johnson was ripping through Smith, Amla, etc and the fact that he was being negotiated by ABD so well proves he was in another class as afar as skill is concerned. And yeah he followed it up in the next test with a hundred and SA won.

His dead batting was exceptional given that his regular mode is to bat super aggressively. And good luck for Dravid trying to do that against Ashwin and Jadeja as he was a flatfoot against great spin.
Click to expand...
He played 50 more tests at a higher average overall, spanning a more difficult batting era. That’s a material difference in quality / impact
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
ma1978 said:
He played 50 more tests at a higher average overall, spanning a more difficult batting era. That’s a material difference in quality / impact
Click to expand...
Sure I rate Dravid better overall because of a more full career. But pound for pound ABD was more skilled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top