vvvslaxman Posted March 25 Posted March 25 Both are better than each other. Tillu, jf1gp_1, Frustrated and 1 other 4
KV244 Posted March 25 Author Posted March 25 1 hour ago, AKane said: Gotta be kidding - Pujara was nowhere as good as Dravid was. Explain in detail.
tapandrun Posted March 25 Posted March 25 (edited) Pujara underachieved and Dravid Over archived dravid --13k+ test runs and 10k+ odi runs pujara- 7k test runs and 51 odi runs Edited March 25 by tapandrun
AKane Posted March 25 Posted March 25 22 minutes ago, tapandrun said: Pujara underachieved and Dravid Over archived dravid --13k+ test runs and 10k+ odi runs pujara- 7k test runs and 51 odi runs Look at the averages too - Pujara 43 odd in tests while Dravid was 52 odd in tests. Dravid played against Walsh/Ambrose/Donald/Pollock/Wasim/Shoaib/McGrath/Gillespie/Lee/Warne/Muralitharan and now check the bowling vs Pujara. Except for Starc/Cummins/Haze/Rabada (Dravid played peak Steyn)... its mostly riff raff. tapandrun and KV244 2
tapandrun Posted March 25 Posted March 25 Just now, AKane said: Look at the averages too - Pujara 43 odd in tests while Dravid was 52 odd in tests. Dravid played against Walsh/Ambrose/Donald/Pollock/Wasim/Shoaib/McGrath/Gillespie/Lee/Warne/Muralitharan and now check the bowling vs Pujara. Except for Starc/Cummins/Haze/Rabada (Dravid played peak Steyn)... its mostly riff raff. When pujara came to Ind side he was more polished, he knew how to construct a test innings, dravid learnt it late in his career. Think at one time dravid also had to compete with azhar for #3 spot. Pujara road was easy in that term, he looked like a direct replacement for dravid and it starting looked like do better than dravid.
singhvivek141 Posted March 26 Posted March 26 15 hours ago, tapandrun said: When pujara came to Ind side he was more polished, he knew how to construct a test innings, dravid learnt it late in his career. Think at one time dravid also had to compete with azhar for #3 spot. Pujara road was easy in that term, he looked like a direct replacement for dravid and it starting looked like do better than dravid. Pujara lacked the range of shots which Dravid had. Pujara also didnt had any power in his strokes, his shots were always more laboured that Dravid who despite defensive had natural strength.
jf1gp_1 Posted March 26 Posted March 26 19 hours ago, KV244 said: Who is better Batsman between these two. obviously Pujara. Look at his t20 record. Frustrated and cricspirit 2
kosingh Posted March 26 Posted March 26 None of them compare to Venkatpathy Raju. Without a doubt, India's greatest batter of all time.
zen Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Both are good in their own ways. Dravid batted in a relatively batting friendly era while Pujara in a relatively bowling friendly era. Anyways, I would do the below: Subcon + Aus = Count Pujara Other areas = Dravid
HimeshChaturvedi Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Don't think Kohli is better than Dravid. Pujara is well behind. GoldenSun 1
putrevus Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Other than England, I would take Pujara everywhere. Dravid was horrible in Australia , SA and SL.If you take that Adaleide test without Warne and Mcgrath on flattest batting pitch Dravid was awful in Australia. Pujara underachieved but still was backbone for two of the greatest triumphs. Dravid played in stronger batting lineups and never played in SENA so much as Pujara did and on much more bowler friendly wickets. He never got to fill his boots with weak sides like Dravid. Pujara in India was a thing of beauty which Dravid cannot match. GoldenSun 1
Nileshkohli Posted March 26 Posted March 26 2 hours ago, putrevus said: Other than England, I would take Pujara everywhere. Dravid was horrible in Australia , SA and SL.If you take that Adaleide test without Warne and Mcgrath on flattest batting pitch Dravid was awful in Australia. Pujara underachieved but still was backbone for two of the greatest triumphs. Dravid played in stronger batting lineups and never played in SENA so much as Pujara did and on much more bowler friendly wickets. He never got to fill his boots with weak sides like Dravid. Pujara in India was a thing of beauty which Dravid cannot match. Off course u can take Pujara in nz & wi with mighty 20 avg. GoldenSun, Ultimate_Game and cricspirit 3
sage Posted March 26 Posted March 26 what an insulting question Next you’ll ask Laxman vs Rahane Ultimate_Game and cricspirit 2
Ultimate_Game Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Dravid hands down. Dravid never had the benefit of a strong bowling attack which Pujara had. If Dravid had the backing of Bumrah, Shami and company, he probably would've ended with a much more impactful career. cricspirit, Lord and Nileshkohli 1 2
vvvslaxman Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Guys pay attention to OP lol Almost all his posts are random comparisons. That is why i didn't respond seriously. Expect few more threads like this from OP Chaos 1
putrevus Posted March 27 Posted March 27 (edited) 23 hours ago, Nileshkohli said: Off course u can take Pujara in nz & wi with mighty 20 avg. Dravid was least effective player , you can keep his mighty avgs against useless teams. I will take Pujara over him anyday. Pujara had two major ACL injuries before he becamer regular player and those had big impact on his career. Edited March 27 by putrevus Nileshkohli, Ultimate_Game and HimeshChaturvedi 3
bsriharsha Posted April 1 Posted April 1 Dravid by a good margin. Pujara did have to face tougher pitches but dravid still beats him as easily the better batsman
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