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

[sivaji]

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

Scored the double in NZ to put SL in strong position but SL bowlers suck.
Helped SL win first test in SA.
Helped register a series win in England.
It is not about averages.

 

[sivaji]

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.

Would habe like to see series changing innings or Laxmsn like innings from him. He doesnt have an innings that could define him.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I would pick Dravid for his performance on bouncy, seaming and swinging wickets (which is very difficult for SC batsman to adjust to).

Dravid averages 48.54 in Aus, Eng, SAF and NZ whereas Sanga averages 45.92. Not very significant difference but enough to pick one over another.

Sachin average 51.30 in Aus, Eng, SAF and NZ, and doesn't average below 46 in any of these countries (for example, Dravid had terrible time in SAF). The little guy was invincible anywhere around the world, for 25 years too.

 

[Midwinter13992]

Sanga was beast batsman in only later years of his carrier which was coincidentally weak bowling era or pitches made those days were easy to bat on...
Plus he often played weak teams like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe (Pakistan may be) on flat tracks compared to Dravid..
Dravid was equally good home and away...
I will take Dravid over him any day of week...

 

[yasir]

Without going into the stats and numbers discussion, they both were different types of batsmen...Dravid was more of a defensive player, solid technique but limited shots(like Gasvakar), where as Sanga was more well rounded batsman, but not in the league of Lara and SRT though, tad below them... From dependability perspective Dravid was even better than SRT, but not that attractive to watch...Azhar Ali is in the mould of Dravid,

I personally think that batsmen of 90s and beyond were never really tested against bumpers...I found all of them (Schin, Lara,Sanga,Dravid, Inzi even Ponting) not very strong against chin music, they should thank ICC, who clamp down seriously on bumpers after late 80s, they were worried about the rise of WI, for decade and half they rule the world so much that rules were changed to give batsmen breather...

Short pitch test is not just about one aspect but it effects your entire technique(both defense and back foot/front foot shorts), WI was so good in those days that they used to finish test in WACA within 3/4 days, AUS stop playing test with them on that venue, can you imagine that? - Look at Johnson's Ashes couple of years ago, now imagine you have to face 4 like that and for a whole decade, no wonder ICC changed the rules(too bad for us, it coincides with the rise of our bowlers)...

 

[yasir]

^ For those reason its hard for me to compare and rate SRT, Lara, Ponting higher than batsmen of 70s,80s, rules were relaxed a whole lot for them...Plus 4 fearsome bowlers, we have hardly seen any batsmen succeed against full blown WI in a series, that kind of test is not possible again after 1980s, it may never happen(simply rules and quality of that many bowlers in a team is hard to replicate)

Similarly, now flat pitches (thanks to global warming, T20 and whole lot of other reasons) and batsmen with no threat of bumpers cannot be compare, their averages will be higher... Good bowlers are not going to play test cricket in near future (if they are not already), again too many parameters that effect the cross era comparison...

 

[Stallion__]

Strong temptation to pick Sangakkara but I will stick with Dravid in Tests.

 

[Ab Fan]

Dravid in tests.

Sangakkara was a superior OdI player though. Got 4 back to back hundreds to his name.

 

[Mamoon]

^ For those reason its hard for me to compare and rate SRT, Lara, Ponting higher than batsmen of 70s,80s, rules were relaxed a whole lot for them...Plus 4 fearsome bowlers, we have hardly seen any batsmen succeed against full blown WI in a series, that kind of test is not possible again after 1980s, it may never happen(simply rules and quality of that many bowlers in a team is hard to replicate)

Similarly, now flat pitches (thanks to global warming, T20 and whole lot of other reasons) and batsmen with no threat of bumpers cannot be compare, their averages will be higher... Good bowlers are not going to play test cricket in near future (if they are not already), again too many parameters that effect the cross era comparison...

So if we cannot rate Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting etc. higher than batsmen of the 70s and 80s because of the relaxed rules, does this mean that we can also not rate the WI quartet higher than modern bowlers, since the rules were in their favor?

It should work both ways, otherwise it is a fallacious argument. If modern batsmen are inferior to the past batsmen of the rules, then modern bowlers are superior to the past bowlers because of the same rules.

Unfortunately, people want to have their cake and eat it too, i.e. they want to believe that both batting and bowling standards have declined in modern cricket, which of course is a very poor and ignorant argument.

 

[Tusker]

Short pitch test is not just about one aspect but it effects your entire technique(both defense and back foot/front foot shorts), WI was so good in those days that they used to finish test in WACA within 3/4 days, AUS stop playing test with them on that venue, can you imagine that? - Look at Johnson's Ashes couple of years ago, now imagine you have to face 4 like that and for a whole decade, no wonder ICC changed the rules(too bad for us, it coincides with the rise of our bowlers)...

Can you post some links to videos of WI fast bowlers from the 80s that you consider to be faster and more menacing than what Mitch was in that Ashes series ... there is plenty of videos on youtube available. Thanks.

 

[TestMatch]

Sanga had Dravid's patience and defense, but a better attacking game. Dravid was tested by slightly better bowling and had more iconic knocks, but Sanga was the better batsman. I feel he retired a year or two too soon. He looked in incredible nick before he left us.

 

[Messiah]

Sanga was the better batsmen by quite a margin for me. But dravid had that resilience and patience which u want in tests. I would choose dravid away and sanga in more familiar conditions.

 

[TestMatch]

Can you post some links to videos of WI fast bowlers from the 80s that you consider to be faster and more menacing than what Mitch was in that Ashes series

Just look for clips of Andy Roberts (fastest WI bowler behind Fidel Edwards I think). He used to swamp the opposition with hostile short pitch bowling, then sudden full deliveries.

 

[Buffet]

Sanga had Dravid's patience and defense, but a better attacking game. Dravid was tested by slightly better bowling and had more iconic knocks, but Sanga was the better batsman. I feel he retired a year or two too soon. He looked in incredible nick before he left us.

Not sure about it. If I recall it right then he was getting owned by Yasir and Ashwin in his last 7-8 innings. His last 8 innings resulted in 50, 18, 34, 0, 5, 40, 32, 18

 

[TestMatch]

Yeah, but he didn't fully play in either of those (Pak and Ind) Test series. He was clearly in a different zone after his New Zealand tour. He didn't seem to care and didn't really want to be playing. I don't think those 2 semi tours constitute a dip in form, especially when we saw how dominant he was in ODI's, T20s fetes and county cricket, just before and after those tours.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Dravid in Tests

Sangakkara in ODI's

 

[TestMatch]

The Ashwin/Yasir thing does make me wonder, though, what's the best spin Sanga has ever faced? Probably only Harbie Singh. What year did Warne retire?

 

[Buffet]

Yeah, but he didn't fully play in either of those (Pak and Ind) Test series. He was clearly in a different zone after his New Zealand tour. He didn't seem to care and didn't really want to be playing. I don't think those 2 semi tours constitute a dip in form, especially when we saw how dominant he was in ODI's, T20s fetes and county cricket, just before and after those tours.

May be true because he was surely not very interested. But in NZ he made one big score and other 3 inning he didn't even reach double digits.

He was surely playing well in ODI during WC, but generalizing it for the test format doesn't look right given what he did in his last 10-12 innings in the test format. I won't pay much attention to county to be honest. It's not the same as old days.

 

[Tusker]

Just look for clips of Andy Roberts (fastest WI bowler behind Fidel Edwards I think). He used to swamp the opposition with hostile short pitch bowling, then sudden full deliveries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2wrTJnsZFc

Is that faster and hostile than Mitch ? I dont think so.

 

[Buffet]

The Ashwin/Yasir thing does make me wonder, though, what's the best spin Sanga has ever faced? Probably only Harbie Singh. What year did Warne retire?

He played Warne in 2004 the last time. Total 5 tests involving Warne with average of 25 in those tests. Warne got him couple of times, but then Sanaga was not that great back then. I don't think he scored against Harbie in India, but he did score against him in SL. Anyway, he was not a bad player of spin, but not some one I will name as a batsman on rank turner.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

He played Warne in 2004 the last time. Total 5 tests involving Warne with average of 25 in those tests. Warne got him couple of times, but then Sanaga was not that great back then. I don't think he scored against Harbie in India, but he did score against him in SL. Anyway, he was not a bad player of spin, but not some one I will name as a batsman on rank turner.

Sanga's record in India is actually pretty poor. He wasn't really good on rank turners. Pakistan and UAE has the flattest tracks in the world for 2 decades, Sanga really did his feast against Pak

 

[Thivagar]

Nobody remember anything about what Dravid did in ODI apart from his 200 run partnership in like 1999.

 

[Tera Gawaandi]

Dravid was a huge dud in ODIs due to his low SR and in tests, he was no better

Both Dravid and Inzimam average 39 in ODI cricket
Both Dravid and Inzimam have similar SR at 72 and 74
Dravid has 12 100s from 344 games, Inzi has only 10 100s from 378 ODIs
Both Dravid and Inzimam have exact number of 50s at 83 each.

Now comes most critical stat in ODIs, performance in 5+ team tournaments -

Dravid 41 innings 1695 runs 53 average 75.70 SR 3 100s 13 50s

Inzi -- 43 innings 1081 runs 28 average 75.12 SR 1 100s 6 50s

Dravid averages almost twice in Major tournaments. Inzi does not have a single century in World Cup, Asia Cup, ICC Champions Trophy.

FYI Sanga averages 41 @SR 78. He has superior stats but in no way Dravid was dud.

 

[SL_Fan]

Sanga's record in India is actually pretty poor. He wasn't really good on rank turners. Pakistan and UAE has the flattest tracks in the world for 2 decades, Sanga really did his feast against Pak

Yeah when Sanga score it's flat and when Murali takes wickets it's a turner. Am I right?

 

[SL_Fan]

Yeah, but he didn't fully play in either of those (Pak and Ind) Test series. He was clearly in a different zone after his New Zealand tour. He didn't seem to care and didn't really want to be playing. I don't think those 2 semi tours constitute a dip in form, especially when we saw how dominant he was in ODI's, T20s fetes and county cricket, just before and after those tours.

Not the NZ tour but after the WC that came after. He had already signed a County contract thinking that he would retire after the WC but decided to stay on for a bit longer after being persuaded by Sana and co. He was actually going back and forth between Eng and SL and juggling County commitments during those Pakistan and India series towards the end. Was clearly in very good nick still but I guess he was done with international cricket and SLC and wanted to earn a few extra bucks before hanging up the boots for good.

 

[Snatch]

I would have thought it was Sangakkara quite comfortably to be honest.

Always thought Sanga, Ponting, Kallis, Tendulkar & Lara were a class above the likes of Dravid, Younis Khan and that next tier.

Of the modern batsmen obviously it comes down to personal batsmen since their records are so even, and in spite of Sangakkara having by far the best average out of those modern greats, I'd still go Lara for personal reasons. He could change a game in a session.

If I wanted two batsmen to bat for my life though it would be Sangakkara and Kallis though.

 

[SL_Fan]

Not really sure how someone can claim that Dravid did better than Sanga against the top teams.

Excluding Bangla and Zimboks

Dravid 263 innings 12k runs @ a bit under 50 with 30 tons Link
Sanga 206 innings 10k runs @ 53 with 29 tons that too after keeping wickets and batting in the top order in a third of em Link

Not to mention that Dravid overall wasn’t too flash against Aus and SA either, the two best sides during their time.

Dravid 102 innings 3.5k runs @ 37 with 4 tons
Sanga 53 innings 2.5k runs @ 47 with 4 tons

But hey what ever floats your boat I guess.

 

[Snatch]

Not really sure how someone can claim that Dravid did better than Sanga against the top teams.

Think you'll find that's generally Indian fans though. If you polled neutral fans, most would say Sanga was a class above Dravid, & I just mean Test cricket.

Obviously Sanga was a much better whiteball batsman too.

 

[SL_Fan]

Yeah no offence to the good ones but only hear this sort of talk from a certain section must be said. Not even Bradman is safe I guess so what chance has Sanga got Poor form really.

 

[Smbhayi]

Nobody remember anything about what Dravid did in ODI apart from his 200 run partnership in like 1999.

I remember he has involved in two triple hundred partnership and he's the only one to have two triple hundred partnership under his name IIRC. Dravid the ODI cricketer way underrated here.

 

[Buffet]

Of the modern batsmen obviously it comes down to personal batsmen since their records are so even, and in spite of Sangakkara having by far the best average out of those modern greats,

Avg needs to be seen against each bowling unit if you really want to see how any one did.

5 best bowling units during Sanga's time

Against SA - avg in 40s
Against Aus - avg in 40s
Against Eng - avg in 40s
Againast Pak - avg in 70s
Against NZ - avg in 40s

Ind and WI were good bowling units only at home

In Ind - avg 30s
In WI - avg 30s

So yah, Sanga has by far the best average , but it's not due to averaging 50+ against many good bowling units.

 

[SL_Fan]

Nice use of "40s" and as if India is not a strong side in the SC

Link

Seriously you got to stop manipulating numbers in every Sanga thread. Stop pretending to be a South African wouldn't hurt either.

 

[Buffet]

Nice use of "40s" and as if India is not a strong side in the SC

Link

Seriously you got to stop manipulating numbers in every Sanga thread. Stop pretending to be a South African wouldn't hurt either.

Answering points will be better use of time than attacking posters. Please add if you have anything to add to discussion.

 

[Buffet]

Bowling average against strong bowling units was the point. Who considers India as a strong bowling side outside of India?

Similarly, SL is a good bowling side in SL but pretty poor when they step outside of SL.

It should be obvious to anyone watching cricket. You don't have to be SA or Indian or pretend to be anyone to observe that and comment, but hey let's attack the poster despite him not saying anything offensive to you.

 

[street cricketer]

Roughly the same for me.

Dravid was the better outside asia and Sangakarra was better in asia even though both players were good in their own right in the reverse conditions also.

Dravid was phenomenal for 10 years from 95-05 when he averaged 60+. He was arguably the best batsman in the world in overseas conditions during that period. However he had a slump for the next 5 years averaging around 45. The England series in 2011 was his final swansong in which he was outstanding and the series was pretty much England vs Dravid. But he was poor in the next series in Australia getting bowled through the gate in very uncharacteristical fashion a lot which is when he called it a day.

Sangakarra had a completely different trajectory. He was merely a good batsman at the start of his career but kept on improving especially towards the last 3-4 years of his career when he sealed his legacy as a truly great batsman. He was very average when he kept in the first 5 years of his career but improved drastically in the next 5 years from 2005-2010 when he became one of the top batsmen in the world. Still his overseas record was a bit unflattering (2 or 3 great knocks notwithstanding) but he improved on that in the last 3-4 years of his career when he played great knocks in England, NZ and South Africa.

Sangakarra never had a decline towards the end of his career unlike Dravid (if you ignore his last series) and kept improving like fine wine. Dravid, in comparison, had a beast like 10 years averaging nearly 60 but then fell off a bit during his slump and final decline. Overall if I were to compare both, Sangakarra was very good outside asia but Dravid was a bit better. Similarly Dravid was very good in asia but Sanga was a bit better and more dominant. I would rate them at the same level like a few have mentioned before and you wouldn't go wrong with both.

I rate post 1990 players roughly as:

Tier 1: SRT/Lara/Ponting.
Tier 2: Dravid/Sanga/Kallis/Waugh.

 

[street cricketer]

I assume the question is for test cricket only.

Combining all formats, Sangakarra was the better batsman.

 

[Bilal7]

Both Dravid and Inzimam average 39 in ODI cricket
Both Dravid and Inzimam have similar SR at 72 and 74
Dravid has 12 100s from 344 games, Inzi has only 10 100s from 378 ODIs
Both Dravid and Inzimam have exact number of 50s at 83 each.

Now comes most critical stat in ODIs, performance in 5+ team tournaments -

Dravid 41 innings 1695 runs 53 average 75.70 SR 3 100s 13 50s

Inzi -- 43 innings 1081 runs 28 average 75.12 SR 1 100s 6 50s

Dravid averages almost twice in Major tournaments. Inzi does not have a single century in World Cup, Asia Cup, ICC Champions Trophy.

FYI Sanga averages 41 @SR 78. He has superior stats but in no way Dravid was dud.

Dravid wasn't fit to tie Inzi's boots in ODIs. Just because the stats are similar doesn't mean that they were equally good (or bad, in Dravid's case).

 

[Snatch]

Yeah no offence to the good ones but only hear this sort of talk from a certain section must be said. Not even Bradman is safe I guess so what chance has Sanga got Poor form really.

Haha, great point

I'd never heard any serious cricket fans suggest Bradman wasn't clearly number 1 before coming to this forum, so yeah what chance does Sanga have

Back to reality though, I do think there's a general consensus that Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Sangakkara and Kallis were a class above the next tier of Dravid, Y Khan, Jayawardene & Pietersen.

Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar, Sanga & Kallis were the big 5 of the modern era. Since it's basically impossible to say anyone of them are better, it simply comes down to personal preference & probably a natural bit of bias.

 

[SL_Fan]

In Tests I would defo put Dravid right up there as well not much separating Ponting, Sanga, Kallis and Dravid for mine. Lara and Sachin just a tad ahead. As for Bradman not really sure how any one could genuinely dispute his credentials but hey it’s good for a laugh I guess

 

[SL_Fan]

Bowling average against strong bowling units was the point. Who considers India as a strong bowling side outside of India?

Similarly, SL is a good bowling side in SL but pretty poor when they step outside of SL.

It should be obvious to anyone watching cricket. You don't have to be SA or Indian or pretend to be anyone to observe that and comment, but hey let's attack the poster despite him not saying anything offensive to you.

Well what exactly is there to discuss apart from you pretending and time and time again manipulating numbers and whatever else as you see fit?

If you are talking about how they have fared against decent attacks then I’m sure you have seen this before. You know a proper objective inning by inning analysis as opposed to your bogus manipulated figures.

Case closed.