Jacques Kallis or Rahul Dravid?

[sohum]

you can see it in any thread that has Indian batsman in it, just by the sheer amount of votes they get. If there was as many South Africans the story would be different in the poll, they would be tied. Its just the way it is.

And yes there are fans from England and Australia and other countries and they are the only ones with a view that isn't biased towards Dravid or Kallis and they are the ones that voted for the better batsman. The Indian fans don't see as much of Kallis and even if they did they would still vote for Dravid because thats the way it goes.

Have to disagree with Dare on this one. Sehwag was losing to Greame Smith last time I checked.

Precisely.

Most of the world agrees that Kallis is a good batsman, but Dravid is (/was) better.

 

[manee]

Richard? Is that you?

I've had many an MSN conversation with him, perhaps he's getting to me. It is a pretty simple thing to prevent comments like that though.

 

[sohum]

yes because thats the obvious one, as good as Sehwag is people value Smith more because he values his wicket more. Sehwag really bumped his value with last nights performance, he showed everyone that he can bat with the tail enders which is something that we didn't see from him before because he rarely got the chance to do it.

The gap between Dravid and Kallis is not as big as the poll shows. In fact at best it should be even, if 10 South African people were the register to these forums and vote the result would be different than it is now.

Why is the Smith situation "obvious" whereas the Dravid situation isn't? You have to stop thinking that your poll choice is the right one. On Sehwag, I suggest you pay that thread a visit and look at the very valid argumetns that support Sehwag as being better. :

 

[Dare]

Precisely.

Most of the world agrees that Kallis is a good batsman, but Dravid is (/was) better.

lol most of the world. since when has a cricket forum become most of the world.

well stats point the other way. Kallis has better stats than Dravid, so obviously most of the people that voted for Dravid aren't looking at them.

 

[manee]

well stats point the other way. Kallis has better stats than Dravid, so obviously most of the people that voted for Dravid aren't looking at them.

In Tests, I disagree.

Now this is a tough one indeed. I'll do my thing first and filter out Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and make Dravid's stats exclusive to him batting in the middle order, as Kallis never opened:
Kallis averages 52.85
Dravid averages 59.25

Dravid has the clear, massive edge. Dravid scored far more runs at a better average in the 1990s, which was the tougher decade to bat on due to the pitches and better bowlers. Kallis has a mediocre record in England, Dravid in South Africa. Normally, Kallis' good record in New Zealand would pretty much cancel out the issue in England as an anomaly rather than an issue against seaming pitches - but further analysis shows that Kallis' runs in New Zealand have come in high scoring contests - whether this is due to flat pitches or poor bowling is irrelevant. All things considered, Dravid has the clear edge due to a better average and nothing which discounts this on the negative of Dravid or positive of Kallis.

 

[sohum]

lol most of the world. since when has a cricket forum become most of the world.

well stats point the other way. Kallis has better stats than Dravid, so obviously most of the people that voted for Dravid aren't looking at them.

I'm not talking about this forum, I'm talking about most people with valid opinions (aka people who have actually played cricket and/or played against these two players).

And if you're going to base your votes off pure statistics, how come you didn't vote for Sehwag? He clearly dominates Smith in all categories there.

 

[Dare]

Why is the Smith situation "obvious" whereas the Dravid situation isn't? You have to stop thinking that your poll choice is the right one. On Sehwag, I suggest you pay that thread a visit and look at the very valid argumetns that support Sehwag as being better. :

and how many of Sehwags centuries came outside the sub continent. only a small amount of his centuries came outside the sub continent. while Smiths centuries came on grounds that are usually "seam friendly". If your gonna pull out stats at least be fair about it.

In Tests, I disagree.

look on what Kallis has to bat at home and where Dravid bats at home, totally different. Dravids good but not this much better, If i had the option of having both in my team i obviously would but for me i prefer Kallis.

I cant fault people for voting for who they like, or think is better but I know that most of the people that voted just clicked on Dravid because thats who they adore. I give props to Dravid, allot of his centuries came outside the subcontinent which you don't see allot.

I
And if you're going to base your votes off pure statistics, how come you didn't vote for Sehwag? He clearly dominates Smith in all categories there.

Id like to see him open more outside the subcontinent and get his big scores, if Smith batted on those flat pans in the subcontinent than the stats would be different. No to mention the pressure of him being the captain of one of the best test squads in cricket today.

 

[sohum]

and how many of Sehwags centuries came outside the sub continent. only a small amount of his centuries came outside the sub continent. while Smiths centuries came on grounds that are usually "seam friendly". If your gonna pull out stats at least be fair about it.

Home vs. Away is a much more valid statistic, in my opinion. Sehwag hasn't had the benefit of playing all his junior cricket on these "seam friendly" tracks, whereas Smith has. Similarly, Smith hasn't had the benefit of playing quality spinners, whereas Sehwag has. Also, Sehwag's ability to convert a 50 into a big century is just something Smith doesn't have. You should see the Smith-v-Sehwag thread for more statistics about why Sehwag is more valuable as a Test batsman.

look on what Kallis has to bat at home and where Dravid bats at home, totally different. Dravids good but not this much better, If i had the option of having both in my team i obviously would but for me i prefer Kallis.

I cant fault people for voting for who they like, or think is better but I know that most of the people that voted just clicked on Dravid because thats who they adore. I give props to Dravid, allot of his centuries came outside the subcontinent which you don't see allot.

Again, the point is invalid for the same reason as above. It's not as if Kallis grew up in India and then moved to South Africa to play international cricket. He has been playing there all his life and has the technique to play the moving, bouncing ball.

Id like to see him open more outside the subcontinent and get his big scores, if Smith batted on those flat pans in the subcontinent than the stats would be different. No to mention the pressure of him being the captain of one of the best test squads in cricket today.

Sehwag has got pretty decent scores out of the subcontinent. For example, his performances in Australia (the top side in the world and one of the harder places to tour) far outshine Smith's.

 

[manee]

look on what Kallis has to bat at home and where Dravid bats at home, totally different. Dravids good but not this much better, If i had the option of having both in my team i obviously would but for me i prefer Kallis.

I factored in what Kallis' home country is and it still does not discredit Dravid's massively higher filtered average.

I cant fault people for voting for who they like, or think is better but I know that most of the people that voted just clicked on Dravid because thats who they adore. I give props to Dravid, allot of his centuries came outside the subcontinent which you don't see allot.

Indeed - he averages more outside India than inside!

 

[Jakester1288]

Good question. I would rather watch Kallis bat than Dravid, but Dravid is much better at occuping the crease. It is interesting to see that most people have gone with Dravid, as I have seen a fair bit of him and is really not very entertaining to watch. You think he is never going to score a run. This leads me to vote for Kallis.

 

[sohum]

Good question. I would rather watch Kallis bat than Dravid, but Dravid is much better at occuping the crease. It is interesting to see that most people have gone with Dravid, as I have seen a fair bit of him and is really not very entertaining to watch. You think he is never going to score a run. This leads me to vote for Kallis.

When have you watched him? It is only over the last 1-2 seasons that he has hit a road-block. But otherwise he is a treat to watch. If you read some of this thread, you will notice that Dravid's strike rate in Test cricket is only two lower than Kallis', which suggests that his defensive style is just an illusion.

 

[aditya123]

Good question. I would rather watch Kallis bat than Dravid, but Dravid is much better at occuping the crease. It is interesting to see that most people have gone with Dravid, as I have seen a fair bit of him and is really not very entertaining to watch. You think he is never going to score a run. This leads me to vote for Kallis.

I`ve seen many such replies from Aussie members,maybe because of the way he played in Aussie summer this year.
Please keep in mind that he was woefully out of form there.Even in that sort of form he played a vital role in India winning the Perth test.

Have`nt you guys seen a few of Dravid`s knocks against Australia which took India from a hopeless situation to a win(Adelaide 2003 and Kolkata 2001).

 

[aussie_ben91]

I saw the Kolkata innings where he played in the shadow of VVS Laxman. Didn't see Adelaide 2003 though.

I've always liked Kallis as a batsman. More so then Dravid who reminds me of a batsman that would've been in the 1940s or 50s.

 

[Will_NA]

At least Dravid doesn't act like an utter idiot after getting out.

 

[manee]

More so then Dravid who reminds me of a batsman that would've been in the 1940s or 50s.

In what way?