Steve Waugh or Rahul Dravid, who is the better Test match batter?

[Hasan123]

2 of crickets greatest batsmen and fighters. Both have faced some of the best bowlers and scored runs in difficult conditions and in a fashion that may not be pleasing on the eye.

In your opinion who is the better test player?

I'll go with Waugh just by a fraction.

 

[Ab Fan]

Waugh peak average was 52-53 while Dravid at his peak was averaging 58..

Dravid had issues vs ATG bowlers like Mcgrath, Donald, Warne, Murali and his record wasn't great in Aus and SA.

Waugh 4th inning record is shabby and wasn't so pleasant to watch.Dravid was pleasant to watch but you know even his tuk-tuk can't be survived watching for so long just on the entertainment basis.

I would give an edge to Dravid here for his clutch knocks simply as a test batter but its still a close call IMO.

Won't go wrong either way..

Waugh has a legacy as a captain too.Both were great catchers though.

 

[Hasan123]

Waugh peak average was 52-53 while Dravid at his peak was averaging 58..

Dravid had issues vs ATG bowlers like Mcgrath, Donald, Warne, Murali and his record wasn't great in Aus and SA.

Waugh 4th inning record is shabby and wasn't so pleasant to watch.Dravid was pleasant to watch but you know even his tuk-tuk can't be survived watching for so long just on the entertainment basis.

I would give an edge to Dravid here for his clutch knocks simply as a test batter but its still a close call IMO.

Won't go wrong either way..

Waugh has a legacy as a captain too.Both were great catchers though.

Waughs away average is higher than his career average. In clutch situations he was one of crickets greats.

 

[Buffet]

Waugh was ordinary batsman in his first 40-50 tests. Till end of 1992, he played 46 tests with average of 35. Then he became a gun test batsman. After 1993, he played additional 107 tests with an average of 56.

Dravid was a gun batsman from the get go in his career. In his first 40 tests, he averaged 53. If you take overlapping period then Waugh retired in 2004 and at the end of 2004, Dravid was averaging 57.

Comparison reminded me one thing. Dravid saw Waugh as his role model during his playing days. That's why both used to put very high price on their wickets.

 

[Rayyman]

I think Dravid is better.

 

[Faisalabadimunda]

Dravid any day

 

[Smbhayi]

The Wall.

 

[Justcrazy]

Dravid was more talented and better batsman.

Waugh had great determination and gutts.

 

[Pantani]

Dravid was the better strokemaker, but Steve Waugh has got to be one of the toughest cricketers of all time. How badly Australia could use someone with that kind of spine.

 

[Protea Fan]

Dravid is a better batsman,He did have a more textbook technique along stride forward, militarily straight bat etc and he hardly ever played away from his body.Whilst teaching a school boy u can easily refer him Moreover dravid always bailed out the team in difficult situations

Waugh was a great ambassaodor for Aus cricket. But Rahul still stands out to me in this comparison

 

[The_Odd_One]

Dravid was a better batsman. Steve Waugh is a level below the likes of Dravid, Ponting, Kallis, etc.

 

[OS_89]

I'd say Dravid, but it's close. Waugh was phenomenal in the 90s (3 best in the 90s were Sachin, Lara dn Waugh. No one else came close) but for his first 40 tests or so, he was mediocre. Both performed superbly on some difficult tracks. Waugh also had the luxury of batting down at 5 in one of the strongest batting lineups ever.

 

[CricFan2012]

Dravid because he didnt get to feast on indian bowling while Waugh did and was lucky not to play against McGrath and Warne

 

[sshakir411]

Dravid was a better batsman. Technically solid and beautiful to watch. Steve was tough..probably achieved more than his actual ability. Overall, Steve was the better cricketer but Dravid is still one of my fave bats.

 

[jusarrived]

Dravid , but rate Steve Waugh very highly too .

 

[soso_killer]

Waugh by a "fraction"?
I'm not so sure, Waugh thrived against the best bowlers. That wouldn't amount as a fraction.
Just my opinion.

 

[soso_killer]

Dravid was a better batsman. Steve Waugh is a level below the likes of Dravid, Ponting, Kallis, etc.

No he wasn't, i don't have the stats but i think Waugh thrived against the likes of Donald etc..
I rate him above all the players you've listed.
One of the gutsiest players in all of sports I've ever seen. It takes extraordinary courage and leadership to drop an ego maniac like Warne.
This guy had temperament on and off the field. A true leader.

 

[Mamoon]

Steve Waugh is the most underrated Test batsman on PP. Rarely makes the discussion when people talk about the best Test batsmen.

Ambrose is highly underrated as well.

 

[Dulex9]

Steve Waugh by a whisker, completely changed in career from the early 90s on wards and consistently a clutch player for Australia.

 

[soso_killer]

Dravid was a better batsman. Technically solid and beautiful to watch. Steve was tough..probably achieved more than his actual ability. Overall, Steve was the better cricketer but Dravid is still one of my fave bats.

Waugh had all the shots in the book. It's actually when he limited his shot range that he actually fulfilled his true potential.
In terms of natural ability he is up the with the likes of AB de Villiers and co.
The difference is that he has a bigger IQ than all the naturally talented players who have played the game.
This guy was pretty good.

 

[Dead Ball]

Steve Waugh has some superb performances against Ambrose/Walsh/Donald/Wasim/Waqar.

Can't say the same for Dravid who was largely underwhelming against ATG attacks.

So, SR Waugh for me.

 

[Zaz]

Id say steve waugh

He was the one of the main reasons why aus went on to become a great test team

His efforts in landmark series wins in the Wi and england in the mid 90s were huge

 

[Hasan123]

Steve Waugh is the most underrated Test batsman on PP. Rarely makes the discussion when people talk about the best Test batsmen.

Ambrose is highly underrated as well.

Yes I agree with this. Ambrose is very underated, don't know why.

 

[Hasan123]

Waugh by a "fraction"?
I'm not so sure, Waugh thrived against the best bowlers. That wouldn't amount as a fraction.
Just my opinion.

Dravid has a good overseas record as well, that's why I said fraction.

 

[Saurav]

Waugh.Tough as nails.

Very underrated

 

[The_Odd_One]

No he wasn't, i don't have the stats but i think Waugh thrived against the likes of Donald etc..
I rate him above all the players you've listed.
One of the gutsiest players in all of sports I've ever seen. It takes extraordinary courage and leadership to drop an ego maniac like Warne.
This guy had temperament on and off the field. A true leader.

Of course, Waugh is a better cricketer and captain. My opinion was based on batting skills mainly. Dravid mostly batted at #3 so he gets some bonus points.