The Dark Horse Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 No whinging, no OTT reactions on the field, no cheating. Plays like a gun and is consistent, even in T20. Leads his team well. Career-wise he might surpass Dravid, but his character reminds me of him. beetle, Temujin Khaghan, velu and 2 others 3 1 1 Link to comment
rahulrulezz Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Kane is 100 times better player than Dravid in 50 overs and 20 overs format. Dravid was a better test player than Kane. However, yes character wise, Kane reminds me of Dravid. UrmiSinhaRay 1 Link to comment
sarcastic Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 (edited) On 5/17/2018 at 2:18 PM, The Dark Horse said: No whinging, no OTT reactions on the field, no cheating. Plays like a gun and is consistent, even in T20. Leads his team well. Career-wise he might surpass Dravid, but his character reminds me of him. Indian version of Dravid is Che Pujara. Period! EDIT: Chill, chill guys before troll voting this. It is a light veined remark based on the initial hype that "Chesteshwar Puajara is the successor of Rahul Dravid for number 3 position". Do we not have scope to make some light veined remarks once in a while!!! Edited May 19, 2018 by sarcastic beetle, Garuda and schumibest 3 Link to comment
Gollum Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 14 minutes ago, rahulrulezz said: Kane is 100 times better player than Dravid in 50 overs and 20 overs format. Dravid was a better test player than Kane. However, yes character wise, Kane reminds me of Dravid. Bro, I think you are underselling Dravid the ODI batsman, think of the era he was playing in. Statistically RD was only slightly behind Dada who himself was an ODI great of his era. A brilliant record in big tournaments, averages 61+ in WCs and 48+ in mini WC/CT(http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28114.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;trophy=12;trophy=44;type=batting). Also don't forget he was top run scorer in the 1999 WC (http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=787;type=tournament), 461 runs in a WC which had comparatively low scores and where India didn't even make the semis. How can KW be so much better than RD in ODI? In T20s your point may hold true but even then the format came when the Indian was more or less done in shorter formats while the Kiwi is playing the format at the peak of his powers. I think Kane is merely an excellent ODI/T20 batsman and not elite level. He is an elite level test batsman ofc. So in that sense he is in the Dravid mould. Garuda, Sachinism, Clarke and 5 others 1 7 Link to comment
Gollum Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 9 minutes ago, sarcastic said: Indian version of Dravid is Che Pujara. Period! Bhai please don't insult Dravid . schumibest, Garuda, sarcastic and 5 others 3 1 4 Link to comment
jusarrived Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 24 minutes ago, rahulrulezz said: Kane is 100 times better player than Dravid in 50 overs and 20 overs format. Dravid was a better test player than Kane. However, yes character wise, Kane reminds me of Dravid. Dravid is exactly like KL Rahul , technically , most of his big shots are very similar to how Dravid played just that KL plays those more often . He was just born in a different era when it wasn't mandatory to have a power game . beetle and UrmiSinhaRay 2 Link to comment
jusarrived Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 13 minutes ago, Gollum said: Bro, I think you are underselling Dravid the ODI batsman, think of the era he was playing in. Statistically RD was only slightly behind Dada who himself was an ODI great of his era. A brilliant record in big tournaments, averages 61+ in WCs and 48+ in mini WC/CT(http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28114.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;trophy=12;trophy=44;type=batting). Also don't forget he was top run scorer in the 1999 WC (http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=787;type=tournament), 461 runs in a WC which had comparatively low scores and where India didn't even make the semis. How can KW be so much better than RD in ODI? In T20s your point may hold true but even then the format came when the Indian was more or less done in shorter formats while the Kiwi is playing the format at the peak of his powers. I think Kane is merely an excellent ODI/T20 batsman and not elite level. He is an elite level test batsman ofc. So in that sense he is in the Dravid mould. Yup you cannot compare some of these batsmen from different eras . After Tendulkar who was way ahead , Dravid was easily the most versatile batsmen we have had . Purely based on range of shots I would put him ahead of Virat too . That's all you can compare imo and if you a have such a huge range of shots , all what's needed is improvisation which just comes with practice . Similarly on the flip side potentially ATG level bats like Virat and may be even KL may underachieve in Tests , thanks to lot of bad habits which they would have developed both mentally and technically . Garuda 1 Link to comment
jusarrived Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Dravid would have been playing like this more often now , may be with a heavier bat and with few more more shots like reverse sweep or a switch hit added to his repotrie this innings was no different from KLR's 12 ball 50 . Lannister, Garuda and beetle 1 2 Link to comment
sandeep Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 46 minutes ago, Gollum said: Bro, I think you are underselling Dravid the ODI batsman, think of the era he was playing in. Statistically RD was only slightly behind Dada who himself was an ODI great of his era. A brilliant record in big tournaments, averages 61+ in WCs and 48+ in mini WC/CT(http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28114.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;trophy=12;trophy=44;type=batting). Also don't forget he was top run scorer in the 1999 WC (http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=787;type=tournament), 461 runs in a WC which had comparatively low scores and where India didn't even make the semis. How can KW be so much better than RD in ODI? In T20s your point may hold true but even then the format came when the Indian was more or less done in shorter formats while the Kiwi is playing the format at the peak of his powers. I think Kane is merely an excellent ODI/T20 batsman and not elite level. He is an elite level test batsman ofc. So in that sense he is in the Dravid mould. Nobody's underselling Dravid the ODI batsman - Until 2003 he used to have an SR in the 50s and 60s, and had an extremely limited scoring game. He had to keep wickets because that was the only way he was staying in the ODI XI. Ironically, that actually ended up helping his batting quite a bit, and he went to improve a bit as an ODI bat. rahulrulezz 1 Link to comment
mancalledsting Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 1 hour ago, Gollum said: Bro, I think you are underselling Dravid the ODI batsman, think of the era he was playing in. Statistically RD was only slightly behind Dada who himself was an ODI great of his era. A brilliant record in big tournaments, averages 61+ in WCs and 48+ in mini WC/CT(http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/28114.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;trophy=12;trophy=44;type=batting). Also don't forget he was top run scorer in the 1999 WC (http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=787;type=tournament), 461 runs in a WC which had comparatively low scores and where India didn't even make the semis. How can KW be so much better than RD in ODI? In T20s your point may hold true but even then the format came when the Indian was more or less done in shorter formats while the Kiwi is playing the format at the peak of his powers. I think Kane is merely an excellent ODI/T20 batsman and not elite level. He is an elite level test batsman ofc. So in that sense he is in the Dravid mould. agree- Dravid was leading run scorer in 1999 WC and one of best batsmen in 2003 WC beetle and Garuda 2 Link to comment
sandeep Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 1 hour ago, mancalledsting said: agree- Dravid was leading run scorer in 1999 WC and one of best batsmen in 2003 WC Revisionist history. Dravid sucked as an ODI batsman in the 1998 to 2002 period. Garuda 1 Link to comment
rahulrulezz Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 2 hours ago, jusarrived said: Dravid is exactly like KL Rahul , technically , most of his big shots are very similar to how Dravid played just that KL plays those more often . He was just born in a different era when it wasn't mandatory to have a power game . I don’t know if I should even laugh at this. Star worshipping is part of our culture and Dravid fans are the special breeds. Dravid was the worst when it came to crossing the inner circle. He could time the ball and use pace of the ball, but even there, he could never get it timed over the infield. KL Rahul, he is a different class altogether in LOI when it comes to hard hitting and timing the ball. Link to comment
sandeep Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, rahulrulezz said: I don’t know if I should even laugh at this. Star worshipping is part of our culture and Dravid fans are the special breeds. Dravid was the worst when it came to crossing the inner circle. He could time the ball and use pace of the ball, but even there, he could never get it timed over the infield. KL Rahul, he is a different class altogether in LOI when it comes to hard hitting and timing the ball. But Dravid saar is the best. He refuses honorary PhDs, shares his coaching bonus, and shits golden turds. He was good at everything he did, even when he wasn't. Btw, I have a lot of love for Dravid. I will forever be able to see the moment that he hit the winning boundary at Adelaide in that away tour to Aus in 2003. Its right up there as one of my fondest memories. And I was privileged to watch him live when he carried his bat at the Kennington Oval, and then came out again to open as India followed on. Love Dravid the cricketer and the person. But lets not turn into blind worshippers and anoint him as a Saint who never put a foot wrong - that's simply not the case. Edited May 17, 2018 by sandeep UrmiSinhaRay and AuxiliA 1 1 Link to comment
Gollum Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, sandeep said: Nobody's underselling Dravid the ODI batsman - Until 2003 he used to have an SR in the 50s and 60s, and had an extremely limited scoring game. He had to keep wickets because that was the only way he was staying in the ODI XI. Ironically, that actually ended up helping his batting quite a bit, and he went to improve a bit as an ODI bat. Frankly this is a low quality post coming from you because you are a sensible poster who generally makes good posts. Nobody's underselling Dravid the ODI batsman- really? These were the exact words to which I responded to "Kane is 100 times better player than Dravid in 50 overs and 20 overs format"......I know this was figure of speech and he didn't mean it literally. But is KW really that much better than Dravid as an ODI batsman? Kane isn't King Viv and RD isn't an Amay Khurasia or Kanitkar that one can make such a sweeping statement. Regarding Dravid's SR I had never verified it myself before but based on hunch found it a bit unrealistic to believe that it was in the 50s and 60s...so checked it out myself.HERE Till the end of Dec 2002 he was striking at 69.28...so clearly closer to 70 than 50 or 60. Sachin was a marvel at that time so won't bring him into this discussion (his competition was clearly higher level like Viv, Lara). But RD's SR was comparable to that of Sidhu and Jadeja, 2 other important batsmen for us in the late 90s. Azhar's was higher and so was Dada's...both had SR in the 73-74 range. Dravid never had a limited scoring game, he had all the shots...just the mindset (intent) was lacking when he 1st came circa 1996. He improved that area in the coming years and peaked by 1999. In 1999 WC he was top scorer: 461 runs in 8 matches, average 65.8, SR 85.5. He had better returns (both avg and SR) than Steve Waugh, Dada, Anwar, Mark Waugh, Ponting, Gibbs, Bevan, Inzi, Kirsten, Gilly etc. He had a lower SR than SRT (90) but anyone who saw that edition would rate RD as our standout batsman. Only Klusener had a better WC than him because of sheer impact. 1999 WC BATTING Here are the names of players who topped the batting charts in World Cups 1975: Glenn Turner 1979: Greenidge 1983: Gower 1987: Gooch 1992: Crowe 1996: SRT 1999: Dravid 2003: SRT 2007: Hayden 2011: Dilshan 2015: Guptill Dunno about you but pretty exalted company I'd say, Dravid also happens to be the only player apart from 'You Know Who' representing India on that list. Not bad for someone 100 times worse than Williamson,eh? He also did well in the 2000 and 2002 editions of ICC CT/Mini WC averaging over 50 both times. Coming to 2003 WC yes he played as keeper? But unless you get your sources from some gossip site or India TV he was made to keep gloves to bolster our batting and give better balance, not because he couldn't fit in otherwise. The only reason he was given gloves and not SRT/Dada/Viru/UV was because they were better part timers and RD wasn't exactly a novice in the art of keeping. 'The Hindu' is an outlet that doesn't sensationalize stuff so here's an article from that time around. To don the gloves or not is Dravid's predicament LINK Quote Rumours were rife then that Dravid would not fit into the scheme of things for the World Cup, if he did not agree to keep wickets. It turned out later that such innuendoes were just hogwash. Here's an interview of Dravid where he admits that this idea was floated by the management to counter teams like Aus, SA, Zim etc who had good keeper batsmen. Besides other teams had good A/Rs (Flintoff, Cairns, Kallis, Razzaq) and India didn't have one on the horizon. INTERVIEW Nayan Mongia had retired in 2000 and the likes of MSK Prasad/Dighe/Dahiya/Ratra/Dasgupta etc were never going to be good enough. Dravid had to make a sacrifice for his team by donning gloves and not the other way as you believe. By accommodating him as keeper India could also play a quasi A/R like Dinesh Mongia. Now coming to his role as keeper batsman, he became full time keeper in the 2002 away ODI series in WI (almost a year before the WC). Before that one we had a Zim home series (Marillier wallah) where Ratra was keeper and had a stinker. BTW Ratra's record reads: avg 13, SR 71......imagine him in place of RD in WC 2003 !!! So RD kept wickets in all ODI matches from then on till 2003 WC, selectors simply didn't pluck him out of thin air a day before WC selection. In fact he also kept wickets in the 2002 CT, so 2003 wasn't his 1st venture as keeper in a major tournament. So again I had to check if RD warranted a place in the side when the squad for 2003 WC was selected. WC started on Feb 9, 2003 so I am assuming they chose the squad by Dec 31, 2002. RANKING Surprise surprise, RD was the 19th ranked player and 4th best from India behind SRT, Dada and Viru. in fact you can play around with the dates, you will always find RD as our 3rd-4th best batsman in 2002. So 1 month before selection, here are the rankings of other batsmen who were in the squad in 2003 WC: UV (38) Kaif (53) Dinesh Mongia (65) Now I have the highest regards for young UV but difficult to convince me that Kaif/Dinesh Mongia or some domestic player worse than these 2 could have been better options than Dravid. Your words- 'he had to keep wickets because that was the only way he was staying in the ODI XI'. Please come up names of domestic batsmen who Dravid was blocking. Let me make your job easier, HERE is the complete list of our ODI players ranked in the order of date of debut. Please sift through them and name me the person who would have played the WC in case RD refused to be keeper? Or in case you believe there was some ratna hidden in domestic cricket who could never wear India ODI jersey because of Dravid in the 2002-03 period you can add his name and I will look at it objectively. All in all thankfully RD didn't make a fool out of himself in that WC else there would have been statements here like Manish Pandey is 1000000 times better than RD as an ODI batsman . Edited May 17, 2018 by Gollum AuxiliA, philcric, Jimmy Cliff and 2 others 3 2 Link to comment
rahulrulezz Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 2 hours ago, jusarrived said: Dravid would have been playing like this more often now , may be with a heavier bat and with few more more shots like reverse sweep or a switch hit added to his repotrie this innings was no different from KLR's 12 ball 50 . So out of the 300 tuck tuck innings, you finally found an innings where he blindingly slogged some and connected some.That too full tosses served at 115km thunderbolts against the likes ofScot Styris, Jacob Oram. Check his strike rate in the start after 220 innings, 68!!!! That was super pathetic. But we Indians like good natured sweet obedient guys even if they are average. Dravid played that card pretty well. Garuda 1 Link to comment
Gollum Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Made an error in linking stats in the previous post, corrected now. Link to comment
sandeep Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 7 minutes ago, Gollum said: Frankly this is a low quality post coming from you because you are a sensible poster who generally makes good posts. Nobody's underselling Dravid the ODI batsman- really? These were the exact words to which I responded to "Kane is 100 times better player than Dravid in 50 overs and 20 overs format"......I know this was figure of speech and he didn't mean it literally. But is KW really that much better than Dravid as an ODI batsman? Kane isn't King Viv and RD isn't an Amay Khurasia or Kanitkar that one can make such a sweeping statement. Regarding Dravid's SR I had never verified it myself before but based on hunch found it a bit unrealistic to believe that it was in the 50s and 60s...so checked it out myself.HERE Till the end of Dec 2002 he was striking at 69.28...so clearly closer to 70 than 50 or 60. Sachin was a marvel at that time so won't bring him into this discussion (his competition was clearly higher level like Viv, Lara). But RD's SR was comparable to that of Sidhu and Jadeja, 2 other important batsmen for us in the late 90s. Azhar's was higher and so was Dada's...both had SR in the 73-74 range. Dravid never had a limited scoring game, he had all the shots...just the mindset (intent) was lacking when he 1st came circa 1996. He improved that area in the coming years and peaked by 1999. In 1999 WC he was top scorer: 461 runs in 8 matches, average 65.8, SR 85.5. He had better returns (both avg and SR) than Steve Waugh, Dada, Anwar, Mark Waugh, Ponting, Gibbs, Bevan, Inzi, Kirsten, Gilly etc. He had a lower SR than SRT (90) but anyone who saw that edition would rate RD as our standout batsman. Only Klusener had a better WC than him because of sheer impact. 1999 WC BATTING Here are the names of players who topped the batting charts in World Cups 1975: Glenn Turner 1979: Greenidge 1983: Gower 1987: Gooch 1992: Crowe 1996: SRT 1999: Dravid 2003: SRT 2007: Hayden 2011: Dilshan 2015: Guptill Dunno about you but pretty exalted company I'd say, Dravid also happens to be the only player apart from 'You Know Who' representing India on that list. Not bad for someone 100 times worse than Williamson,eh? He also did well in the 2000 and 2002 editions of ICC CT/Mini WC averaging over 50 both times. Coming to 2003 WC yes he played as keeper? But unless you get your sources from some gossip site or India TV he was made to keep gloves to bolster our batting and give better balance, not because he couldn't fit in otherwise. The only reason he was given gloves and not SRT/Dada/Viru/UV was because they were better part timers and RD wasn't exactly a novice in the art of keeping. 'The Hindu' is an outlet that doesn't sensationalize stuff so here's an article from that time around. To don the gloves or not is Dravid's predicament LINK Here's an interview of Dravid where he admits that this idea was floated by the management to counter teams like Aus, SA, Zim etc who had good keeper batsmen. Besides other teams had good A/Rs (Flintoff, Cairns, Kallis, Razzaq) and India didn't have one on the horizon. INTERVIEW Nayan Mongia had retired in 2000 and the likes of MSK Prasad/Dighe/Dahiya/Ratra/Dasgupta etc were never going to be good enough. Dravid had to make a sacrifice for his team by donning gloves and not the other way as you believe. By accommodating him as keeper India could also play a quasi A/R like Dinesh Mongia. Now coming to his role as keeper batsman, he became full time keeper in the 2002 away ODI series in WI (almost a year before the WC). Before that one we had a Zim home series (Marillier wallah) where Ratra was keeper and had a stinker. BTW Ratra's record reads: avg 13, SR 71......imagine him in place of RD in WC 2003 !!! So RD kept wickets in all ODI matches from then on till 2003 WC, selectors simply didn't pluck him out of thin air a day before WC selection. In fact he also kept wickets in the 2002 CT, so 2003 wasn't his 1st venture as keeper in a major tournament. So again I had to check if RD warranted a place in the side when the squad for 2003 WC was selected. WC started on Feb 9, 2003 so I am assuming they chose the squad by Dec 31, 2002. RANKING Surprise surprise, RD was the 19th ranked player and 4th best from India behind SRT, Dada and Viru. in fact you can play around with the dates, you will always find RD as our 3rd-4th best batsman in 2002. So 1 month before selection, here are the rankings of other batsmen who were in the squad in 2003 WC: UV (38) Kaif (53) Dinesh Mongia (65) Now I have the highest regards for young UV but difficult to convince me that Kaif/Dinesh Mongia or some domestic player worse than these 2 could have been better options than Dravid. Your words- 'he had to keep wickets because that was the only way he was staying in the ODI XI'. Please come up names of domestic batsmen who Dravid was blocking. Let me make your job easier, HERE is the complete list of our ODI players ranked in the order of date of debut. Please sift through them and name me the person who would have played the WC in case RD refused to be keeper? Or in case you believe there was some ratna hidden in domestic cricket who could never wear India ODI jersey because of Dravid in the 2002-03 period you can add his name and I will look at it objectively. All in all thankfully RD didn't make a fool out of himself in that WC else there would have been statements here like Manish Pandey is 1000000 times better than RD as an ODI batsman . Dayum that's quite a write-up. Tell me Gollu bhai, was Dravid dropped ever from the Indian ODI team? If so, when? And for how long? Link to comment
Gollum Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 (edited) I am not claiming Dravid was an ATG ODI batsman or that he would make an all time India XI, not even close to that. But there has to be a sense of objectivity in evaluating a player. For his era Dravid wasn't an elite player but not a raddi player either. He had 10000+ runs in ODI cricket besides a very good ICC tournament record. Anyone with that record has to have something in him. While remembering Dravid the test player we forget his ODI career. In fact I believe he is over rated as a test batsman and under rated as an ODI batsman. 90s-2002 was a bloody tough era where even the very best would struggle to maintain a SR of 80, and unless you were an opener enjoying 15 overs of fielding restrictions against brand new cherry, the task became that much more difficult. Credit to Dravid, he came in as a stonewaller in 1996 but adapted his game to survive changing times and when he couldn't keep up with time he made way for more equipped batsmen. Sorry @rahulrulezz I really enjoy your posts man (esp in time pass, history related) but have to fervently disagree with you on this topic. Edited May 17, 2018 by Gollum AuxiliA and rahulrulezz 1 1 Link to comment
master22 Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 2 hours ago, sandeep said: Nobody's underselling Dravid the ODI batsman - Until 2003 he used to have an SR in the 50s and 60s, and had an extremely limited scoring game. He had to keep wickets because that was the only way he was staying in the ODI XI. Ironically, that actually ended up helping his batting quite a bit, and he went to improve a bit as an ODI bat. Lol thats rubbish. Just watch the below video, Ganguly himself said there was no question about Dravid's place in the ODI side. I guess you know more than Ganguly himself. Garuda 1 Link to comment
gattaca Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, master22 said: Lol thats rubbish. Just watch the below video, Ganguly himself said there was no question about Dravid's place in the ODI side. I guess you know more than Ganguly himself. Dravid is a great test bat but he was poor odi bat while chasing and setting target he would suck the momentum. He just couldn’t find the gaps in middle overs as well. There is video of Jeff boycott in Sharjah complaining how Dravid just couldn’t hit through the gaps.His strike rate in early part of career was not even 70. Azhar and Jadeja were comparatively better in this regard even though they start slow they used to improve strike rate later but Dravid couldn’t. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now