Understanding Agression and the classification of an attacking cricketer

[maniac]

How is a player classified as being agressive or defensive?Let us try to analyze a few players who are easily classified as agressive or defensive type of players by us fans Sreeshanth:A lot of us like him for the aggression he brings in and a lot of us hate him for his obnoxious behavior and probably he might be well remembered for his antics on the field than his actual bowling once he is done with the game.Some of his supporters like me for eg think he brings in the needed edge of aggression to the team.I thought he bowled superbly and aggressively yesterday minus the antics.If he continues the same way and is successful for a longer period of time giving up his circus like behavior would we still consider him aggressive???? Afridi:Like it or not this guy has an incredible amount of fan following amongst the masses across the border.The reason given by his supporters is apparently his beastly sixes and strike rate.Lot of his fans consider him being an attacking player.He will slog a few and get out and his fans will justify saying he is aggressive and that's the only way he know how to play but the question is is he being aggressive?Because I look at it as quitting given his limited technique and refusal to fight it out.How can that be aggressive?In fact to be fair to him he is a more than a decent LOI bowler.But is he an attacking bowler?No in fact he is more of a defensive bowler to keep a check on the batsmen in the middle overs.How many fans does he attract for his bowling than his apparently 'aggressive' batting? Rahul Dravid/Chanderpaul/Kallis:I have merged them together because of their similar styles of grinding the attacks and ability to occupy the crease for long periods of time.I am not drawing comparisons among the three but just classifying them based on their similar batting roles in the team.These guys are generally called boring and defensive by a lot of critics but can we not classify them as attacking and aggressive cricketers based on the fact that more often than not they are willing to fight it out and frustrate the opposition in crisis situations?I believe that it takes aggression and a lot of courage to hang around when your team is collapsing like a pack of cards. McGrath :Another player who is called aggressive by the fans based on his on field sledging and in your face attitude to add to his incredible skill with the ball is McGrath but if you look at his bowling he did bowl a defensive line just around the off stump to frustrate the batsman and force him to make a mistake.He was neither super fast or bowled a short and hurting length.This would contradict with the above example when batsmen like Dravid,Kallis are called defensive for hanging in their and frustrate the opposition than why is McGrath hailed as an attacking cricketer.Is it just his on field behavior? So the basic summary of my long winded post is that how do we classify a player as attacking and defensive?I always felt bad when people called Dravid as a boring and defensive cricketer and average or cricketers with similar skills have been hailed as aggressive and entertaining.

[rkt.india]

you also need skills to be aucggressive and successful.

[Sooda]

The galling thing about some ignorami who classify Dravid as boring is how they some how equate that to a lack of talent, or a lesser talent than a supposeldy more 'attacking' player. When in fact as a strokeplayer Dravid is on par with anyone in the world.

[Andrew Peter]

Dravid cant change the outcome of a game with aggressive play and make the opposition bow into Submission = Fact . Thats why Tendulkar , Ponting , Viv Richards, Lara , Petersen are a class apart. Playing with a strike rate of 30 without taking any risks to up the ante results in dull draws.