[VIDEO] Kumar Sangakkara vs Rahul Dravid: Who is the better batsman?

[Kiri]

Here's a video put together by Lord's and they ask the dubious question: who is greater; Sanga or Dravid?

 

[Yatoo]

Sanga

 

[Sandeep]

Dravid for Indians and Sanga for Pakistanis

 

[Bhaijaan]

So, basically, after averaging 58 with so many runs and hundreds, Lords categorizes Sangakkara along with Dravid only. Something i have been doing for years and being hated for.

Its Tendulkar & Lara and then maybe Ponting

...then Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara all 3 in one boat

.... and then the rest.






PS: Dravid was 'GREATER', with all due respect to Sangakkara's numbers, impact wise he does not come anywhere near Rahul Dravid in any format.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Dravid for Indians and Sanga for Pakistanis

I highly doubt this statement.


Probably more Pakistanis choose Dravid over Sangakkara than even Indians perhaps who go overboard in trying to come across as 'nice'. You don't have to lie to pick Dravid over Sangakkara, and you shouldn't come across as biased either. Dravid has done more than Sangakkara for cricket and his teams over the years.

 

[Abdul]

Rahul Dravid.

 

[Bilal7]

Sangakarra was the better batsman for me, across formats. Dravid was a huge dud in ODIs due to his low SR and in tests, he was no better than Sangakkara. Very close between these two however and you can pick anyone over the other.

 

[Sandeep]

So, basically, after averaging 58 with so many runs and hundreds, Lords categorizes Sangakkara along with Dravid only.

Sorry, but something seriously wrong with this statement. "with Dravid only". Gosh..

 

[Sachin136]

Dravid for Indians and Sanga for Pakistanis

Many people from Pakistan like Dravid so that might not be the case.

 

[Sandeep]

Sangakarra was the better batsman for me, across formats. Dravid was a huge dud in ODIs due to his low SR and in tests, he was no better than Sangakkara. Very close between these two however and you can pick anyone over the other.

Dravid's role was different in ODIs.. He didn't need to 'accelerate' many a time as he was surrounded by Sehwag, Sachin, Ganguly, Yuvraj. He dropped the anchor and helped India achieve mammoth totals.

P.S. Dravid still holds the fastest Indian 50 in ODIs

 

[zabalestmsm]

Rahul Dravid.

 

[kamz]

Dravid and sanga both equal in terms of role.

Sanga edges it, as he had more shots than dravid. IF both are in form and I have to choose one, Id go with Sanga.

(dravid never had a pull or hook - he himself admits it, relied on cut shots for short deliveries. Sanga on the other hand did pull and hook, in addition to cut)

Both amazing middle orders regardless

 

[Slog]

Dravid for Indians and Sanga for everyone else

fixed

Dravid is an ATG but he is a level below Sanga imo

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Both formats included...gotta be Sanga.

If Tests only: I would be tempted to side with Dravid though I won't argue if someone picked Sanga for tests only too.

 

[as-95]

Sanga in Tests by small margin. Sanga in ODI's and T20 by miles.

 

[IndianWillow]

Got to be pretty close. In ODIs too, these two were very similar players for much of their careers, but Sanga edged it towards the end of his career. (but Dravid did not get play ODIs in this decade, so we don't know how he would have fared in the "T20" era of ODIs). But Dravid has some incredible and lesser known ODI stats - he has the one of the highest batting average in SA against top teams for visitors, averaging 54 in 20 ODIs with 10 fifties.

 

[Scrolln]

Kumar Sangakkara, by a whisker.

Would love to hear any arguments that suggest otherwise.

Talking about tests. In ODI's, it is Sangakkara quite comfortably.

 

[Buffet]

Got to be pretty close. In ODIs too, these two were very similar players for much of their careers, but Sanga edged it towards the end of his career.

Accurate assessment. Over all , I think in the test format Dravid was better and in the ODI format Sanga was better.

 

[dhump]

Sanga is better player overall, Dravid may take the cake in Test but not by much.

I think Sanga is superior with added Keeping skills much more valuable.

 

[Scrolln]

I would say Sanga edged ahead of Dravid at the end of his career , in tests as well as ODI's . In ODI's he was an absolute beast in the last 5 years, while he also sorted out his overseas stats in tests in the last 4-5 years.

 

[Slog]

I would say Sanga edged ahead of Dravid at the end of his career , in tests as well as ODI's . In ODI's he was an absolute beast in the last 5 years, while he also sorted out his overseas stats in tests in the last 4-5 years.

I think Sanga's last 5 years and performances in away tests wins it for him as far as I am concerned.

Its funny some posters above are saying Sanga did not have match defining innings lol

 

[Buffet]

Kumar Sangakkara, by a whisker.

Would love to hear any arguments that suggest otherwise.

Talking about tests.

Why don't you try to present an argument for Sanga?

You can take gun knocks, 50+ average in different venues, performance against better bowling attacks, and so on... You will see some pattern.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

Dravid was really good and effective. Sanga was more stylish .Hard to pick , I like dravid a lot as a person so I guess dravid.

 

[Scrolln]

Why don't you try to present an argument for Sanga?

You can take gun knocks, 50+ average in different venues, performance against better bowling attacks, and so on... You will see some pattern.

All of his three tons in NZ. (I would consider his performance in 2006 NZ to be superior to Dravid's in Eng 2011, these are their best overseas tours ever IMO)

Hobart ton is Aus 2007.

232 vs SA in 2004.

I think all the above knocks came against excellent bowling attacks.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Dravid for Indians and Sanga for Pakistanis

Not really. I'm a Dravid fan and personally like him more. But Sanga is such a great batsman. Awesome average and test career. Too difficult to choose

 

[Buffet]

I would say Sanga edged ahead of Dravid at the end of his career , in tests ..

.

I think Sanga's last 5 years

I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:



As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

 

[Scrolln]

.


I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:

View attachment 61560

As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

Wow...those are some revealing stats.

I guess i may have been blind-sighted by his performances in NZ and Eng in his last two overseas tours.

 

[Slog]

.


I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:

View attachment 61560

As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

If you noticed I talked about his away performances in last 5 years.

They are as follows

His last tours to countries and average:
Aus: 51
Eng: 86
NZ: 54

Only in SA he failed you could say though he did score a century. He played quite a few times in UAE in last years of his career and has a great record.

 

[Pak Warrior]

Sanga all day, Dravid was good especially in tests...but I would choose Sri Lanka's Greatest Batsman Ever over one of the best batsman from India.

> Dravid

 

[Bhaijaan]

.


I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:

View attachment 61560

As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

Massive myth busting post.


Pretty sure it looks the same throughout his career as well. No wonder Sangakkara was never once considered in the same league to Tendulkar, Lara.

 

[SL_Fan]

In Tests overall nothing much between the two but after giving up the gloves tho Sanga was on a whole nother level for mine. In LOIs Sanga comfortably ahead. Last half of his career he showed that he can be more than just an accumulator and the T20 WC final was the cherry on top. Both top notch bats but if I had to pick one it’ll be Sanga.

 

[SL_Fan]

If you noticed I talked about his away performances in last 5 years.

They are as follows

His last tours to countries and average:
Aus: 51
Eng: 86
NZ: 54

Only in SA he failed you could say though he did score a century. He played quite a few times in UAE in last years of his career and has a great record.

Don't worry he does this sort of thing in every Sanga thread

 

[Buffet]

All of his three tons in NZ. (I would consider his performance in 2006 NZ to be superior to Dravid's in Eng 2011, these are their best overseas tours ever IMO)

Hobart ton is Aus 2007.

232 vs SA in 2004.

I think all the above knocks came against excellent bowling attacks.

No dispute here that both were gun knocks but we are doing a comparison right? Why not list for both and then see.

You can see what both did in terms of series and individual knocks against different tough oppositions or difficult conditions. I am 100% sure that it will be mighty hard to prove that Sanga did better in this aspect. Taking their entire career is the only way to judge two players when doing comparison.

 

[Hitman]

Sangakarra was the better batsman for me, across formats. Dravid was a huge dud in ODIs due to his low SR and in tests, he was no better than Sangakkara. Very close between these two however and you can pick anyone over the other.

Dravid has an SR of 71.24 in ODI cricket. Now compare them with the SR of guys like Ganguly and Inzamam who are considered great ODI batsmen by their countrymen. You'll find the difference to be not much.

 

[SL_Fan]

Here's all of it btw

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting

Played only just one Test against a top side in 2013 (Pak) and had a horror showing against Eng and NZ at home where he averaged in single digits.

 

[IndianWillow]

Accurate assessment. Over all , I think in the test format Dravid was better and in the ODI format Sanga was better.

Agree here. I think Dravid had no reason to stop playing the anchor role in ODIs because this was a common team strategy back then. Dravid was surrounded by stroke makers like Sachin, Sehwag, Yuvi, Raina etc, all with 85+ strike rates - so India used Dravid as an anchor very effectively and Dravid was one of the reasons for India's ODI success in the previous decade.

Sanga on the other hand wasn't playing in a team full of stroke makers in the middle order. Infact, if Sanga had been a very good ODI batsman in the 2000s Srilanka would have been a terrific ODI outfit. If you take out openers Jaya and Dilshan (even Dilshan wasn't very formidable back then), Srilanka had an ordinary batting side in the 2000s, with most batsmen having strike rates in the low-mid 70s which included Sanga and Mahela.

 

[Scrolln]

Here's all of it btw

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting

Played only just one Test against a top side in 2013 (Pak) and had a horror showing against Eng and NZ at home where he averaged in single digits.

He had one horror series and one gun series against NZ and Eng (in NZ's case, one gun knock) so it evens out i guess

Imma just do a U-turn and change my test preference to Dravid. Sanag still ahead in ODI's though. Actually i believe even Sanga's pure bat statistics are not so special.

 

[Buffet]

If you noticed I talked about his away performances in last 5 years.

OK, If it was only about away tests then you are right on target. I mistook it for his last 5 years because many PPers make that comment without any supporting evidence.

Now, I am not denying that Sanga did well in the last 5 years when playing away despite not doing that well overall. Now his away performance was definitely good in this period. Since we are doing a comparison, I will simply put entire away career of Dravid. This is not Dravid's best 5 years for away or anything like that.

Dravid's entire away record:



Point I am trying to make is that if we are supposed to cite this last 5 years of a batsman as a great point to have an edge then it better look very impressive over other batsman. I took other batsman's career rather than picking any period here but you get my drift.

I don't have any issue if you rate Sanga over Dravid in general. I was mainly arguing about the last 5 years. I hear it often in PP and I find it puzzling. Yah, Sanga did well away but he was poor at home in the same period against many oppositions and that's why SL has such a bad record at home. I will personally not use the last 5 years argument much to prop up Sanga due to his over all performance not being that gun against most oppositions.

 

[SL_Fan]

He had one horror series and one gun series against NZ and Eng (in NZ's case, one gun knock) so it evens out i guess

Imma just do a U-turn and change my test preference to Dravid. Sanag still ahead in ODI's though. Actually i believe even Sanga's pure bat statistics are not so special.

Just pointing out the freak home series because they are the worst series for him by far throughout his entire career - ie outliers.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rse;template=results;type=batting;view=series

You can choose whoever you like. It's not as if there's much between the two as far as Tests are concerned. As for Sanga as a pure bat 9.3k runs @ 67 I'll take that thank you very much.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

 

[Scrolln]

Just pointing out the freak home series because they are the worst series for him by far throughout his entire career - ie outliers.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rse;template=results;type=batting;view=series

You can choose whoever you like. It's not as if there's much between the two as far as Tests are concerned. As for Sanga as a pure bat 9.3k runs @ 67 I'll take that thank you very much.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

7300 runs at 59.6 against non-minnows in 74 matches. Thats excellent but i am not mistaken Dravids stats looked similar after 120 tests.

 

[Hitman]

The difference between them is that Dravid started declining massively since the Test series in South Africa in late 2006. He did perform well in patches after that, but was never even 30% the player he was in his peak. While Sanga never declined and got better with time.

 

[SL_Fan]

7300 runs at 59.6 against non-minnows in 74 matches. Thats excellent but i am not mistaken Dravids stats looked similar after 120 tests.

Similar in what way. Excluding Bangla and Zim got to around the 54/55 mark for a bit and then dropped off drastically and ended up below the 50 mark.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

 

[Scrolln]

7300 runs at 59.6 against non-minnows in 74 matches. Thats excellent but i am not mistaken Dravids stats looked similar after 120 tests.

This may be off the mark.

But the more i am comparing between the careers of both, the more i am convinced that Dravid was better. I think i may have gotten a bit carried away with Sanga's ODI exploits at the end of his career.

 

[Bilal7]

Dravid's role was different in ODIs.. He didn't need to 'accelerate' many a time as he was surrounded by Sehwag, Sachin, Ganguly, Yuvraj. He dropped the anchor and helped India achieve mammoth totals.

P.S. Dravid still holds the fastest Indian 50 in ODIs

You're right that he wasn't required to but I never saw him as someone who could accelerate and score a run a ball century or a quick-fire fifty, when needed.

That innings of his is an anomaly, just like Younis Khan's 50 off 30 balls against India in the Asia Cup match.

Dravid has an SR of 71.24 in ODI cricket. Now compare them with the SR of guys like Ganguly and Inzamam who are considered great ODI batsmen by their countrymen. You'll find the difference to be not much.

Inzamam and Ganguly could accelerate when needed and have played plenty of explosive innings throughout their careers. With Dravid, there was the fact that he couldn't really accelerated when needed.

 

[SL_Fan]

Should add that both played for roughly around 15 years btw.

 

[Scrolln]

Similar in what way. Excluding Bangla and Zim got to around the 54/55 mark for a bit and then dropped off drastically and ended up below the 50 mark.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

Yup, i just checked and i was statistically wrong.

But you gotta keep in mind that Dravid played Ambrose/Walsh/Donald/Pollock/Murali/McGrath at their peak during that phase. So i guess there is not much difference between Dravid's 55 avg and Sanga's 60 avg.

 

[SL_Fan]

Sorry wrong link there. This is the correct one.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...template=results;type=batting;view=cumulative

 

[SL_Fan]

Yup, i just checked and i was statistically wrong.

But you gotta keep in mind that Dravid played Ambrose/Walsh/Donald/Pollock/Murali/McGrath at their peak during that phase. So i guess there is not much difference between Dravid's 55 avg and Sanga's 60 avg.

Dravid's ave ended up below 50 against the top 7. Both played for roughly around 15 years.

 

[Scrolln]

Dravid's ave ended up below 50 against the top 7. Both played for roughly around 15 years.

Dravid averages 49.8 against top 7, Sanga averages 52.6.

I think Dravid made a bigger overall impact when playing overseas. Think England 2002,England 2011,Aus 2003/04, West Indies 2006 (not a great bowling attack, but very very tough conditions during that Kingston test that turned out to be a decider) He failed in SA/SL though.

 

[IndianWillow]

.


I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:

View attachment 61560

As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

I always thought Sanga the test batsman of the noughties was better than Sanga the test batsman of this decade, inspite of superior numbers this decade. But he has decimated Pakistan and Bangladesh. But Sanga as an ODI batsman was superior this decade.

 

[IndianWillow]

You're right that he wasn't required to but I never saw him as someone who could accelerate and score a run a ball century or a quick-fire fifty, when needed.

That innings of his is an anomaly, just like Younis Khan's 50 off 30 balls against India in the Asia Cup match.


Inzamam and Ganguly could accelerate when needed and have played plenty of explosive innings throughout their careers. With Dravid, there was the fact that he couldn't really accelerated when needed.

Then you missed Dravid's WC heroics in 1999 where he was the top run getter in difficult batting conditions at a high S/R. Dravid was certainly capable of scoring fast in ODIs though it was rarely required of him due to India's impressive openers and middle order. Dravid is the only ODI batsman to be involved in two triple hundred partnerships - no mean feat for someone dubbed an accumulator! Two of the three highest ODI partnerships in history involve Dravid - 331 and 318 in the company of Sachin and Ganguly.

 

[Buffet]

I always thought Sanga the test batsman of the noughties was better than Sanga the test batsman of this decade, inspite of superior numbers this decade.

This should be obvious to folks who watched him bat in both decades but many PPers have probably not seen his entire career. Numbers without context are meaningless but some PPers do cite numbers without looking at any break up. Sanga's best period was sometime in middle when he did well against all oppositions.

 

[SL_Fan]

Dravid averages 49.8 against top 7, Sanga averages 52.6.

I think Dravid made a bigger overall impact when playing overseas. Think England 2002,England 2011,Aus 2003/04, West Indies 2006 (not a great bowling attack, but very very tough conditions during that Kingston test that turned out to be a decider) He failed in SA/SL though.

Were we not talking about pure bat numbers. Sanga kept wickets and batted at no3 in a third of them so to ave 53 v top 7 overall is quite an achievement. As I said before overall in Tests nothing much between the two but as a pure bat Sanga was on another level.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...template=results;type=batting;view=cumulative

He was around the 70 mark v top 7 for around 5 years (mid 2006 to mid 2011) and then dropped off to around 60 towards the end. Dravid was around 54/55 v top 7 for around 3 years (early 2004 to early 2007) and then dropped off to under 50 towards the end. There's nothing "similar" about it.

 

[ChachaCricket]

There isn't much between the two. You can make an argument either way. This thread will go nowhere.

 

[SL_Fan]

I always thought Sanga the test batsman of the noughties was better than Sanga the test batsman of this decade, inspite of superior numbers this decade. But he has decimated Pakistan and Bangladesh. But Sanga as an ODI batsman was superior this decade.

I’m pretty sure ppl bring up his last few years mostly because he was able to cross off Eng and to a certain extent SA. Those two were the biggest question marks in his Test career at least imo. Also picked up his ODI game big time as well and of course the T20 WC final. So did tick off a fair few boxes as a batsman during his last few years.

 

[sivaji]

.


I frankly don't think that Sanga did anything special to go ahead of Dravid in his last 5 years. It's different thing to rate Sanga higher than Dravid in the Test format over their entire career but citing his 5 years makes it look like he did something brilliant.

Here is his last 5 years in the Test format. He could play only 7 non-minnows and he averages less than 50 against 5 out of 7.

Last 5 years of Sanga in the Test format:

View attachment 61560

As far as being brilliant goes, Sanga was brilliant in the ODI format in his last 2-3 years. I have seen this last 5 years argument without any supporting evidence. I am not saying that he was bad. He was good but trying to see performance in context.

Above is his combined performance against all teams. He did well outside but he slide down at home against many teams by a big margin. Him not being that great is the main reason for many teams pulling a series win or drawing in SL in the last 5 years. As a gun batsman, you can't win but you could surely help to secure a draw in individual tests if you bat well.

I don't know about averages. But Sanga is like Lara. He doesnt have perfect average against all teams to make stats people happy but he plays those important innings that stand out.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I don't know about averages. But Sanga is like Lara. He doesnt have perfect average against all teams to make stats people happy but he plays those important innings that stand out.

LOL That is exactly what he doesn't do. What is an important test knock anyway since there isn't much run rate pressure and all 4 innings being equally important in the context of the game. They are basically the knocks played against quality opponents in tough conditions. How many of those does Sanga have? NOT MANY!

Lara and Tendulkar are considered legends because of the phainty they dished out to best bowler.

 

[Nastradamus]

Very close call but Sanga if his keeping is considered

 

[IndianWillow]

I don't know about averages. But Sanga is like Lara. He doesnt have perfect average against all teams to make stats people happy but he plays those important innings that stand out.

Sanga's game is more comparable to the likes of Dravid/Kallis rather than Sachin/Lara. I am not trying to rank them this way (I personally think there is only minor difference in class between any of these players) but still Sanga is not similar to Lara. Nor do I think Sanga has played that many stand out innings comparable to Lara.

 

[Ab Fan]

Sanga's game is more comparable to the likes of Dravid/Kallis rather than Sachin/Lara. I am not trying to rank them this way (I personally think there is only minor difference in class between any of these players) but still Sanga is not similar to Lara. Nor do I think Sanga has played that many stand out innings comparable to Lara.

Actually in tests, there is not much difference in class between these six players.They have been greats because of their sole achievements and for serving their country in their own way.However, its odis where they aren't as good as Sachin, Lara, ponting and as a result they are rated a tier below. Same could be said about AB/Amla as its odi because of which AB gets rated quite higher than Amla Overall.

 

[IndianWillow]

Actually in tests, there is not much difference in class between these six players.They have been greats because of their sole achievements and for serving their country in their own way.However, its odis where they aren't as good as Sachin, Lara, ponting and as a result they are rated a tier below. Same could be said about AB/Amla as its odi because of which AB gets rated quite higher than Amla Overall.

In ODIs it goes without saying that the likes of Sanga and Dravid are a tier or two below the likes of Sachin, Ponting etc. Lara himself maybe a tier below Sachin in ODIs.

 

[Bhaijaan]

In ODIs it goes without saying that the likes of Sanga and Dravid are a tier or two below the likes of Sachin, Ponting etc. Lara himself maybe a tier below Sachin in ODIs.

In tests too.

What has Sangakkara done better than Tendulkar except for hitting more double hundreds? Tendulkar's been more quality on more occasions against better opponents. Same with Lara or Ponting. The trinity is way above Sangakkara and slightly above Kallia/Dravid


1. Tendulkar Lara
1.5. PONTING
2. Kallis Dravid
3. Sangakkara Chanderpaul KP

 

[Mobashir]

In tests too.

What has Sangakkara done better than Tendulkar except for hitting more double hundreds? Tendulkar's been more quality on more occasions against better opponents. Same with Lara or Ponting. The trinity is way above Sangakkara and slightly above Kallia/Dravid


1. Tendulkar Lara
1.5. PONTING
2. Kallis Dravid
3. Sangakkara Chanderpaul KP

KP also rates Ponting higher than Tendulkar.

 

[Mobashir]

On topic, I will say they are about the same level. Sanga has just got more class.

 

[Ab Fan]

KP also rates Ponting higher than Tendulkar.

Ponting didn't showed consistency level throughout his whole career.A mediocre first four year ended up with another mediocre last four years.. Most Aussies expert and even the Aussie crowds regard Sachin very highly and rate him higher than ponting..

 

[IndianWillow]

In tests too.

What has Sangakkara done better than Tendulkar except for hitting more double hundreds? Tendulkar's been more quality on more occasions against better opponents. Same with Lara or Ponting. The trinity is way above Sangakkara and slightly above Kallia/Dravid


1. Tendulkar Lara
1.5. PONTING
2. Kallis Dravid
3. Sangakkara Chanderpaul KP

But often failed to deliver when it mattered. Do you remember an instance in his 200 match career where India had to fight hard for two days to stave off defeat and Tendulkar digging in deep and saving India from defeat? Do you remember once instance where Sachin decided to take control of a match by moving up the batting order? I am sure a batsman who is heads and shoulders above others would be capable of doing these feats. Each of the top test batsmen have their own strengths and weaknesses, which is why none of them are way above any others. Sachin and Lara are a bit higher than others but only just a bit.

 

[Scrolln]

But often failed to deliver when it mattered. Do you remember an instance in his 200 match career where India had to fight hard for two days to stave off defeat and Tendulkar digging in deep and saving India from defeat? Do you remember once instance where Sachin decided to take control of a match by moving up the batting order? I am sure a batsman who is heads and shoulders above others would be capable of doing these feats. Each of the top test batsmen have their own strengths and weaknesses, which is why none of them are way above any others. Sachin and Lara are a bit higher than others but only just a bit.

Can you give me examples of some batsmen doing this? Because i'm not quite sure who is the ultimate test batsman you're comparing SRT to. I think SRT never moving up the order might have been a great thing for India in the long run. Considering he has the most well rounded record at no.4 in test history, there was no reason to tinker around with his position.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Guys i think there is no need to turn this thread into Tendulkar one

 

[Bhaijaan]

KP also rates Ponting higher than Tendulkar.

Fair enough.

Don, Viv, Sobers, Lara, Barry, Hadlee, Haneef, Nasser all rate Tendulkar higher.

 

[sivaji]

Sanga's game is more comparable to the likes of Dravid/Kallis rather than Sachin/Lara. I am not trying to rank them this way (I personally think there is only minor difference in class between any of these players) but still Sanga is not similar to Lara. Nor do I think Sanga has played that many stand out innings comparable to Lara.

No. I think you misunderstood me. I'm not talking about the nature of their batting.. but if you are talking about it, then Sanga is not like Lara or Sachin or Dravid or anyone. He sits between the Lara and Dravid. He could be do both roles but Lara and Dravid are better in their roles.

What I meant is that Lara doesn't have perfect record like Sachin but he has played some outstanding innings that could win matches single handedly. Sachin is consistent but making big scores almost guarantee a win for you if other things fall in place. Sanga is in that Lara mould. He plays those long big innings that guarantee a win for SL if other things fall in place for them.

 

[sivaji]

LOL That is exactly what he doesn't do. What is an important test knock anyway since there isn't much run rate pressure and all 4 innings being equally important in the context of the game. They are basically the knocks played against quality opponents in tough conditions. How many of those does Sanga have? NOT MANY!

Lara and Tendulkar are considered legends because of the phainty they dished out to best bowler.

I think it's hard for Sachinitas to understand logic in cricket. If all runs are runs and equally important then the guy with the best average is the better batsman. While first innings hundred and last innings hundred are equal in terms of actual value but anybody who know a thing or two about cricket know it's harder to score a hundred in the fourth innings.

 

[sivaji]

Can you give me examples of some batsmen doing this? Because i'm not quite sure who is the ultimate test batsman you're comparing SRT to. I think SRT never moving up the order might have been a great thing for India in the long run. Considering he has the most well rounded record at no.4 in test history, there was no reason to tinker around with his position.

he has played 200 test matches. Can you give me two examples of him leading his team to a big win the fourth innings? pls

 

[IndianWillow]

Can you give me examples of some batsmen doing this? Because i'm not quite sure who is the ultimate test batsman you're comparing SRT to. I think SRT never moving up the order might have been a great thing for India in the long run. Considering he has the most well rounded record at no.4 in test history, there was no reason to tinker around with his position.

No particular test batsman actually. It is often claimed by FC and others on this forum that there is no comparison between Sachin and others. While I generally tend to agree that Tendulkar is a genius and perhaps the most gifted batsman ever, I am actually looking for a clear reason why Sachin was far ahead of his peers in terms of performance on the field. 1) Did Sachin play an outstanding all time best knock like Laxman 281? 2) Did Sachin ever rescue India from defeat by for batting hours and hours like Gambhir at Napier? 3) Did Sachin ever seize the initiative by batting up the order? etc

India rarely got chances of winning abroad during the 90s, and when one of those rare opportunities presented itself with India needing a mere 100 odd to win the match, Sachin at the peak of his prowess surrendered meekly like every other batsman - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63747.html. A batsman claimed to be head and shoulders above others must surely be capable of taking down such important matches, isn't it? Tendulkar missed a few other rare opportunities like this, with the result that India could not win a single overseas match during the 90s with Sachin at the peak of his prowess - he wasn't your go to man under pressure. We tend to blame our bowlers, but batsmen like Sachin have squandered easy winning chances even when the bowlers gave us the advantage.

All these top batsmen are ATG in their own right - they have their strengths and weaknesses. But I still see no reason why Sachin should be ranked a tier ahead of the likes of Ponting, Kallis, Dravid or Sanga. Sachin and Lara were perhaps the best of the lot, but they too didn't put a large gap between themselves and any other batsman in this list.

 

[London_Lahori]

This is very close, I think the way Sanga ended his career means he probably edges it.

 

[sivaji]

No particular test batsman actually. It is often claimed by FC and others on this forum that there is no comparison between Sachin and others. While I generally tend to agree that Tendulkar is a genius and perhaps the most gifted batsman ever, I am actually looking for a clear reason why Sachin was far ahead of his peers in terms of performance on the field. 1) Did Sachin play an outstanding all time best knock like Laxman 281? 2) Did Sachin ever rescue India from defeat by for batting hours and hours like Gambhir at Napier? 3) Did Sachin ever seize the initiative by batting up the order? etc

India rarely got chances of winning abroad during the 90s, and when one of those rare opportunities presented itself with India needing a mere 100 odd to win the match, Sachin at the peak of his prowess surrendered meekly like every other batsman - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63747.html. A batsman claimed to be head and shoulders above others must surely be capable of taking down such important matches, isn't it? Tendulkar missed a few other rare opportunities like this, with the result that India could not win a single overseas match during the 90s with Sachin at the peak of his prowess - he wasn't your go to man under pressure. We tend to blame our bowlers, but batsmen like Sachin have squandered easy winning chances even when the bowlers gave us the advantage.

All these top batsmen are ATG in their own right - they have their strengths and weaknesses. But I still see no reason why Sachin should be ranked a tier ahead of the likes of Ponting, Kallis, Dravid or Sanga. Sachin and Lara were perhaps the best of the lot, but they too didn't put a large gap between themselves and any other batsman in this list.

couldn't agree more.

 

[Scrolln]

No particular test batsman actually. It is often claimed by FC and others on this forum that there is no comparison between Sachin and others. While I generally tend to agree that Tendulkar is a genius and perhaps the most gifted batsman ever, I am actually looking for a clear reason why Sachin was far ahead of his peers in terms of performance on the field. 1) Did Sachin play an outstanding all time best knock like Laxman 281? 2) Did Sachin ever rescue India from defeat by for batting hours and hours like Gambhir at Napier? 3) Did Sachin ever seize the initiative by batting up the order? etc

India rarely got chances of winning abroad during the 90s, and when one of those rare opportunities presented itself with India needing a mere 100 odd to win the match, Sachin at the peak of his prowess surrendered meekly like every other batsman - http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63747.html. A batsman claimed to be head and shoulders above others must surely be capable of taking down such important matches, isn't it? Tendulkar missed a few other rare opportunities like this, with the result that India could not win a single overseas match during the 90s with Sachin at the peak of his prowess - he wasn't your go to man under pressure. We tend to blame our bowlers, but batsmen like Sachin have squandered easy winning chances even when the bowlers gave us the advantage.

All these top batsmen are ATG in their own right - they have their strengths and weaknesses. But I still see no reason why Sachin should be ranked a tier ahead of the likes of Ponting, Kallis, Dravid or Sanga. Sachin and Lara were perhaps the best of the lot, but they too didn't put a large gap between themselves and any other batsman in this list.

SRT has played some outstanding test knocks (His first hundred in England, saved India the blushes after he came in at 180/6 on the final day to help secure a draw) . What was the most important aspect for India's win in Adelaide? Was it Dravid's superb double hundred or Agarkar's once-in-a-lifetime spell? In case of Laxman, Harbhajan Singh had the greatest series a spinner has ever had in test history. A lot of factors need to come together for an outstanding great knock to become ATG.

Factors like longevity, strong performances against all types of bowling attacks, on all kinds of surfaces made SRT stand out.

Apart from Bradman, there exists no batsman in test history who was significantly better than his peers and played all kinds of knocks that you specified. But there are certain factors like peer-appreciation, performance against the best that can be taken into consideration to adjudge who was the best of the era. What do you think made Richards the best of the eighties? Allan Border had better all round statistics than him, against the best bowlers in the world, some of whom Richards never had to face in his career. And unlike WI of the 80's who could win a series without any contribution from Richards, Aus of the 80's was heavily reliant on Border so he had to deal with more pressure.
It was his Richard's flair and fast paced scoring (not necessarily a great thing in tests) that made him stand out.

 

[Mamoon]

Would have been a straightforward call 2-3 years ago, but Sangakkara reached the zenith of batting in the twilight of his career. I'll take him now.

 

[Scrolln]

Would have been a straightforward call 2-3 years ago, but Sangakkara reached the zenith of batting in the twilight of his career. I'll take him now.

I thought so too, but he did not do anything special in tests during his last 5 years. Refer post 26. It was in ODI's that he truly became a beast post 2009/10

 

[Mamoon]

I thought so too, but he did not do anything special in tests during his last 5 years. Refer post 26. It was in ODI's that he truly became a beast post 2009/10

Without looking at stats, I consider him as the best Test batsman of the last 7-8 years (only slightly ahead of Amla), and I am perhaps a bit biased in this regard because of his domination vs. Pakistan and how Ajmal couldn't get past his defenses even by chucking >40 degrees.

Also, his tremendous appetite to score big and masterful temperament, but he took his ODI game to the next level and is one of the greats from the subcontinent in this format as well, even though he was nothing special for most of his career.

That's why I'd take him over Dravid who was a very good ODI player of his generation too.

 

[Scrolln]

Without looking at stats, I consider him as the best Test batsman of the last 7-8 years (only slightly ahead of Amla), and I am perhaps a bit biased in this regard because of his domination vs. Pakistan and how Ajmal couldn't get past his defenses even by chucking >40 degrees.

Also, his tremendous appetite to score big and masterful temperament, but he took his ODI game to the next level and is one of the greats from the subcontinent in this format as well, even though he was nothing special for most of his career.

That's why I'd take him over Dravid who was a very good ODI player of his generation too.

Fair enough.