AB de Villiers or Inzamam-ul-Haq - Who is the better player in Tests?

[Ted123]

Both middle order players who have been country greats at least.

Both avgs close to 50 in tests.Who is a better test player?

 

[Ab Fan]

AB de Villiers.

He is one of the modern greats of the game combining all formats who has got stats, peer reputation and fan following across the globe.

He is also very exciting and innovative unlike Kallis, Smith or Pollock who are underrated because they don't have that x-factor and are boring to watch.

 

[austerlitz]

AB obviously.Scored test runs everywhere.
Inzi walking wicket in australia,south africa.

 

[Hasan123]

In tests it's a difficult one. I'll go with ABD.

 

[HuzaifaE]

I think it's significantly closer in tests, in ODIs obviously AB wipes the floor with all but a handful of players, PERIOD.

 

[Hitman]

Are you serious? ABDV any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Nothing against Inzamam though, he was a fantastic servant of Pak cricket and a credit to the game.

 

[KyoOne]

Inzi in tests.

Ab plays in batting era.

 

[Princejain191]

I am not a big AB fan but give the man some respect. AB over Inzamam - any day, any pitch, any format, and any opposition. There is absolutely no rational case for Inzi (as great as he may have been for Pakistan) over AB.

 

[Godhelpma]

Ab by close margin especially in tests.
Ab is overrated here , he is good only in bilateral series , have done nothing of note when it matters.Not a pressure player too except a few test innings in Australia and India .

 

[Mamoon]

de Villiers is better than the "greatest match-winner".

 

[dravidthewall]

ABD is better than inzi...

 

[Saffer_XIII]

Lol what? Only good in bi-laterals? Well considering that tests are exclusively bi-laterals I don't quite understand your point. A better argument against AB would be that there were 3 batsman in his team who were better than him for a bulk of his career. Even that would be clutching at straws in this comparison.

 

[Zaz]

Inzy in tests

 

[The_Odd_One]

AB in all formats. People underestimate AB in tests. He has done far better than Inzy even in tests.

 

[Ab Fan]

AB in all formats. People underestimate AB in tests. He has done far better than Inzy even in tests.

Not far better but he has done better.

Since he established himself as test player in 2008, he has been averaging 60+ for a 7 year period where he has performed in most of the big series with very rare failures among all. Yes, he batted below Smith, Amla and Kallis but did all you would expect from a no.5 bat who bats behind these three. He can't be the standout series performer if he bats behind these three but has still contributed in most of those away wins.

However, he has failed to carry his team after the retirement of Smith and Kallis and hence he isn't an ATG.

But an AVG of 63-64 for a 7 year period between 2008-2015 is itself a good enough peak phase which not many have.

 

[Haroon786]

Abdv.

 

[InziRules]

In tests, AB has played some magnificent innings and I'd go for him, but it's tighter than most think

 

[The_Odd_One]

Not far better but he has done better.

Since he established himself as test player in 2008, he has been averaging 60+ for a 7 year period where he has performed in most of the big series with very rare failures among all. Yes, he batted below Smith, Amla and Kallis but did all you would expect from a no.5 bat who bats behind these three. He can't be the standout series performer if he bats behind these three but has still contributed in most of those away wins.

However, he has failed to carry his team after the retirement of Smith and Kallis and hence he isn't an ATG.

But an AVG of 63-64 for a 7 year period between 2008-2015 is itself a good enough peak phase which not many have.

Inzy also hid behind Younis and Yousuf. AB has played big innings almost everywhere. Inzy was disappointing in Australia and SA.

 

[giri26]

ABD for me overall, fantastic player in all formats. Since cricket is a team game, I don't believe in giving one player credit for winning a tournament nor would I want to criticise one player for the team not wining any major tournament. This is not tennis. Like someone said Inzamam helped Pakistan to win a world cup as in he was one of the reasons, which is absolutely correct. There were other performers like Mushtaq Ahmed's brilliant spell in the finals, Wasim Akram's fantastic over to get Neil Fairbrother and Chris Lewis. Imran Khan and Miandad's batting in the finals and semi-finals. you would be demeaning the overall team if one player is credited with the teams success.

There have been teams with brilliant players in them, like Lara, Andy Flower, Kallis, Smith, Donald, Pollock, Ambrose, Walsh, Waqar, Dravid, Ganguly etc..All brilliant players on their own right but cannot be called as the the reason for their teams non performance. To win a tournament, everyone needs to contribute. If one player can win series and tournaments West Indies would have won a lot more when Lara was playing for them. The guy scored 600+ runs in SL against Murali and his team still got whitewashed, now would you blame him for their loss?

 

[SLcric123]

de Villiers in all formats.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Wrong comparison. People should compare Kallis and Inzi.

 

[Buffet]

Gap in the test format is not that much, but it's huge in the ODI format to be an even comparison.

 

[DRsohail]

Abd.

 

[CanadianG00se]

Abd. Its not even a comparison. Inzi is nowhere near ABD.

 

[Ted123]

I think in tests, it is very close between the two although AB takes this in ODIs.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

ABD in all formats.

 

[Ab Fan]

In tests, it is close. Inzy is underrated in tests. He has some fantastic performance vs WI who had Ambrose and Walsh at their peak.

In contrast, AB had a premature retirement. However, I think after AB's performance vs Johnson/Harris in 2014 and Starc/Cummins/Hazlewood/Lyon in 2018 means that he has faired better than Inzy against top bowlers and has done enough to be rated superior to Inzamam even in longer format.

 

[todfod 11]

Inzi all the way.. what has abd achieved for South africa.. any match under he is the first batsmen in s africa to get out to a fooolish shot.
Inzy has won numerous matches for Pakistan on his own.
184 against india in bangalore
that hundred against India where they chased down 330 odd runs against India
Match he won against bangladesh (test match)
against nz in 92 and many more...
Abd doesnt even come close to the class of Inzy. Inzy achieved every thing even being over weight for most of his career.

 

[Robert]

ABDV. He reminded me of Viv Richards at times.

Inzi should have scored far more runs, but wasted his ability by not being able to control his weight and running out so many team-mates.

 

[Hasan123]

AB De Villiers

 

[Ab Fan]

OP has made comparison on basis of tests.

 

[mohan11]

Has someone seen abd fielding ?

 

[msb314]

de Villiers is better than the "greatest match-winner".

Interesting you say that - care to elaborate?

 

[Sin Nombre]

AB finished his career with emphatic performances in test series wins against India and Australia.

Where is this nonsense about Inzy in tests coming from?

 

[hadi123]

Could mods perhaps add a poll here please?


I think it's fair to compare them now as they are both retired. For Tests, I would have to say Inzamam-ul-Haq, first of all, he played in an era where bowling quality was greater and pitches were not as easy as they were for the majority of AB de Villiers' career. And let's not forget AB ran away from the big series against England, which I didn't agree with, if I was a SA fan I would have been livid with him.


On top of that, let's not forget Inzamam had to deal with the burdens of captaincy for the majority of his career and some of his best innings have been the difference. Let's not forget where he singlehandedly saved us from an embarrasment against Bangladesh, and many other great innings he has played.

To conclude, I am going with Inzamam as the better TEST player (as OP states Tests) and the main reason is probably to the era he played the bulk of his career in as AB de Villiers has played some great innings too, such as his double century in India, but I think if I had to choose one, Inzamam would just about win.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Having watched both play live, I'd pick Inzamam as the better test player. The lad played numerous knocks that were of the highest quality: (Antigua 1993, Lord's 1996, vs the West Indies at Peshawar 1997, Hobart 1999, Old Trafford 2001, vs Bangladesh at Multan 2003, vs India at Lahore 2004, vs India at Bengaluru 2005, and my all-time favourite vs South Africa at Port Elizabeth in 2007). Anyone who saw him bat during these matches will know what I'm trying to say.

De Villiers is comfortably the better player in limited overs matches.

 

[Mamoon]

Interesting you say that - care to elaborate?

Watched both. As great a player as Inzamam was, de Villiers was simply better. He was just below the league of Tendulkar, Ponting, Lara and Kohli.

Inzamam was some way below that class. He was phenomenal on his day, but he had a persistent weakness against Australia and South Africa - two of the best fast bowling attacks of his era.

Yes he did very well against a West Indian attack led by Ambrose and Walsh, but the Caribbean pitches from the late 90’s onwards have been pretty slow.

He has only one century against Australia and South Africa across formats in over a hundred innings. I can’t imagine de Villiers struggling so much against those Australian and South African attacks.

The gap between Inzamam and de Villiers is not big in Tests, but it is humongous in ODIs. Overall, de Villiers was comfortably the better batsman.