What's new

Younis Khan vs Rahul Dravid in Tests

Lol one thing is sure my indian mates, Dravid vs Tendulkar is a far better comparaison than Younis Khan vs Dravid!
 
Just one question. An All Time Test XI is being picked, whom would you see in the team? Tendulkar or Dravid? Case in point, who made it to Cricinfo All Time Test XI recently, Tendulkar or Dravid?
 
Bublu Bhuyan said:
Just one question. An All Time Test XI is being picked, whom would you see in the team? Tendulkar or Dravid? Case in point, who made it to Cricinfo All Time Test XI recently, Tendulkar or Dravid?
Click to expand...

Tendulkar easily . Quite obvious that is .
 
King Cobra said:
Right and it only goes to show that a batsman has more centuries in losses when he is the lone warrior in the team , just like Dravid was during the England Series for which he is rightly appreciated till today .

Tendulkar on the other hand gets ridiculed whenever he scores a century and the team doesnt win instead of appreciating his one man heroics . Clear double standards .

Now count the number of Test centuries in lost causes by Tendulkar and Dravid and see for yourself who has been fighting more lone battles for India .

Only instance for Dravid would be the last series in England whereas SRT has been putting 1 Man shows since the early 90s till as recent as the last series in Sa .
Click to expand...

In the early 90s, Tendulkar was some what a lone warrior. I have never seen what you said ever since the arrival of Dravid, Ganguly, Sehwag, Laxman et al. During his peak years, Dravid ( 2000-2005) averaged like 63, how on earth did you imagine that Tendulkar was waging a lone battle every where?

1995-2000 - golden era of Tendulkar
2000-2005 - golden era of Dravid
2005-2010 - golden era of Sehwag
 
If anyone has seen enough Cricket in late 90s, he knows how Tendulkar absolutely stands out. The way he stood up to Aussies in 1999/00 test series, was pretty god damn heroic.
 
Bublu Bhuyan said:
Lara by quite some distance. Lara has a strike rate of 60 while Dravid has a strike rate of 41, plus they both average almost the same.
Click to expand...

Lara > Dravid > Tendu for me. Tendu never had the guts to leave his comfort zone, he never came out and batted at no:3 or above. Personal records and averages mean more to him than the teams cause. Dravid, on the other hand, played at every imaginable position when the team wanted.
 
IndianWillow said:
Lara > Dravid > Tendu for me. Tendu never had the guts to leave his comfort zone, he never came out and batted at no:3 or above. Personal records and averages mean more to him than the teams cause. Dravid, on the other hand, played at every imaginable position when the team wanted.
Click to expand...

And how is Lara better than Dravid for that matter ? Did Lara ever went to open the innings or did the windies had openers like Hayden/Langer so Lara preferred to bat at 3 ? And how do you ignore Lara's selfish knock such as 400 . Is i tunselfish k to keep on playing for 7 sessions to achieve personal milestones and leave no time for your bowlers ?
 
IndianWillow said:
Lara > Dravid > Tendu for me. Tendu never had the guts to leave his comfort zone, he never came out and batted at no:3 or above. Personal records and averages mean more to him than the teams cause. Dravid, on the other hand, played at every imaginable position when the team wanted.
Click to expand...

So Tendulkar with a strike rate of 56 looks for his average, but Dravid with a snail like strike rate of 41 plays for his team? It's been mentioned by the Team India camp before that they want their best batsman to bat at no. 4 in order to extract the maximum from him, that's why.
 
Last edited:
IndianWillow said:
Lara > Dravid > Tendu for me. Tendu never had the guts to leave his comfort zone, he never came out and batted at no:3 or above. Personal records and averages mean more to him than the teams cause. Dravid, on the other hand, played at every imaginable position when the team wanted.
Click to expand...

His 'opening' cost India at Karachi in 2006. I HATE HIM BECAUSE HE OPENED ON BOWLER FRIENDLY PITCHES WHEN HE WAS "OUR" BEST BAT. you are 'proud' of that? ridiculous.
and Lara himself was branded selfish by his 'country'men.
You know SRT missed many tests between 2001-2005? Dravid sucked in those matches except in WI.
where was your Dravid in 2004 when Aus was winning a test series here and SRT was injured? what happened to his matchwinning ability then? he missed Bichel,Bracken and Williams in those tests?
 
and yes , Why does Dravid mention his unhappiness on opening? he is so weak that he cannot question the management?
 
^Valid Point there . Why would a selfless player bat at S/R of 41 by taking absolutely no risks to up the tempo , only content with occupation of crease ? why would he not try to bat at a higher S/R so that not only do runs come fast but also bowlers get more time to have a go at the opposition ?

It seems that batting at 3 with a S/r of 30 is selfless while batting at 4 with a s/r of 60 is selfish as if the number 4 comes to bat 50 overs after number 3 when the shine is gone , pitch is flat , scoring runs is a cakewalk .
 
lol at people bashing Dravid for low strike rate:facepalm:

there is a concept of playing out the new ball n tiring bowlers too.with our pathetic openers before Sehwag Dravid was almost always in early.he had to play out the new ball to make it easy for others.hence low S/R.he kept one end going allowing others to have that high SR at the other end.no wonder he was involved in so many big partnerships
 
Bublu Bhuyan said:
So Tendulkar with a strike rate of 56 looks for his average, but Dravid with a snail like strike rate of 41 plays for his team? It's been mentioned by the Team India camp before that they want their best batsman to bat at no. 4 in order to extract the maximum from him, that's why.
Click to expand...

Saurav said:
Dravid>>Lara for me
Click to expand...

Do all of you think INDIA WOULD WON THAT ADELAIDE TEST IN 2003-04 'WITHOUT' AGARKAR'S 6FER? or would it be only a draw?
Kumble and Srinath were credited for India's wins when SRT (and Azhar) used to get runs in 90s.
Why is it that matchwinning spells of sreesanth,Munaf,Rp singh,Irfan,Balaji are considered secondary to the batting expoilts of the fab4? because they became crap later on? e'g.so remember the 300 at Multan,270 at Rawalpindi but not what Irfan and Balaji did with the ball, even remember the 'declaration' lol.
I think I the only Indian who remembers Kapil the 'bowler' much more than Kapil the batsman or captain. (judging from the Indian replies when Kapil' bowling is bashed on this forum).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lethalweapon said:
Do all of you think INDIA WOULD WON THAT ADELAIDE TEST IN 2003-04 'WITHOUT' AGARKAR'S 6FER? or would it be only a draw?
Kumble and Srinath were credited for India's wins when SRT (and Azhar) used to get runs in 90s.
Why is it that matchwinning spells of sreesanth,Munaf,Rp singh,Irfan,Balaji are considered secondary to the batting expoilts of the fab4? because they became crap later on? e'g.so remember the 300 at Multan,270 at Rawalpindi but not what Irfan and Balaji did with the ball, even remember the 'declaration' lol.
I think I the only Indian who remembers Kapil the 'bowler' much more than Kapil the batsman or captain. (judging from the Indian replies when Kapil' bowling is bashed on this forum).
Click to expand...

wats ur point?we should have Aggy v Wasim thread?
 
IndianWillow said:
Lara > Dravid > Tendu for me. Tendu never had the guts to leave his comfort zone, he never came out and batted at no:3 or above. Personal records and averages mean more to him than the teams cause. Dravid, on the other hand, played at every imaginable position when the team wanted.
Click to expand...

So when a nightwatchman comes on to protect the better batsman's wicket, its an act of bravery? LOL Your allegations are childish. Those are decisions taken in best favour of the team. Tendulkar's designated as the most precious batsman. His duty is to pile up loads of runs at #4. Dravid's primarily used to see off the new ball.

Putting Tendulkar at 1 and Dravid at 4 would do no good to team's cause.
 
LW's got a good point there. Many of the test wins Dravid is credited for came because of good bowling performances as well whereas in past Tendulkar got let down time and again by Trundlindians.
 
Saurav said:
wats ur point?we should have Aggy v Wasim thread?
Click to expand...

expected reply. your Dravid would only be a match saver without that 6fer.
I want to see the day Indians learn to give equal credit to their bowlers in their wins and not over glorify their batsman. bowlers are only remembered for their failed careers here. Kumble has managed to rise over the 'batting bias' , but Srinath has not is totally unfair, people remember his negatives (his length was short,so he failed!) not that he matched likes of Donald playing against them.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
LW's got a good point there. Many of the test wins Dravid is credited for came because of good bowling performances as well whereas in past Tendulkar got let down time and again by Trundlindians.
Click to expand...

so we should thank Bhajji n Zak for winning Chennai test,Aus wen they toured us last,Kumble wen we beat Aus with SRT making 155* etc etc

its Sachin whos remembered,similarly its Dravid
 
Lethalweapon said:
expected reply. your Dravid would only be a match saver without that 6fer.
I want to see the day Indians learn to give equal credit to their bowlers in their wins and not over glorify their batsman. bowlers are only remembered for their failed careers here. Kumble has managed to rise over the 'batting bias' , but Srinath has not is totally unfair, people remember his negatives (his length was short,so he failed!) not that he matched likes of Donald playing against them.
Click to expand...

dude Srinath is given enough credit for the work he did.fact is he underperformed n never did well in Aus,Eng.


as for Dravid remaining a match saver in that game,even after Agarkar's six,we needed 230 to win which wouldnt hv been done without Dravid's 72.so Dravid is rightly credited for that.making 300 runs in a game isnt a joke
 
umm where does Younis Khan figure in the discussion

Dravid until 2008-09 was impossible to get out. there were only rare occassion where he would thhrow away the wicket whereas YK is more prone to do that
 
Saurav said:
dude Srinath is given enough credit for the work he did.fact is he underperformed n never did well in Aus,Eng.


as for Dravid remaining a match saver in that game,even after Agarkar's six,we needed 230 to win which wouldnt hv been done without Dravid's 72.so Dravid is rightly credited for that.making 300 runs in a game isnt a joke
Click to expand...

tha ttarget of 230 was because Aus were allout for 196. they would have kept a target of 400 , Dravid's 72 and 300 runs will be MATCHSAVING.
you mentioned s/r, SRT smashed bowlers in the 90s , the score 20/2 or 50/5 NEVER mattered to him. CHECK CAPETOWN 160 odd in 97, MCG ton in 99 and many many others , they were not Dravid like.
 
Saurav said:
so we should thank Bhajji n Zak for winning Chennai test,Aus wen they toured us last,Kumble wen we beat Aus with SRT making 155* etc etc

its Sachin whos remembered,similarly its Dravid
Click to expand...

there you go, it was Srinath and not Kumble who troubled Aus the most. you are proving me right.
Without Zak India's target would be 500. did you remember his spells in the test? How do you think Eng only managed 300 despite Strauss tons in both innings? you will be surprised to see Zaheer's figures in that test specially when India were set such a target.
 
Lethalweapon said:
ha ttarget of 230 was because Aus were allout for 196. they would have kept a target of 400 , Dravid's 72 and 300 runs will be MATCHSAVING.t
you mentioned s/r, SRT smashed bowlers in the 90s , the score 20/2 or 50/5 NEVER mattered to him. CHECK CAPETOWN 160 odd in 97, MCG ton in 99 and many many others , they were not Dravid like.
Click to expand...
the target was only 230 despite 196 because the lead we conced was just 35 despite Aussies making 550.wat happened to Agarkar in first innings.after Aussies 550 even a draw would hv been great but Dravid ensured we win by batting well in both innings

I already said Sachin>Dravid.Sachin could attack because he had special talent.infact they r remembered bcoz of that despite us losing.

Dravid did not hv special talent.so he overachieved with his limited talent while SRT underachieved despite his special talent
 
Lol the indian brigade can't talk about cricket for more than 10 minutes without bringing Sachin in the discussion!
 
PakPrince said:
umm where does Younis Khan figure in the discussion

Dravid until 2008-09 was impossible to get out. there were only rare occassion where he would thhrow away the wicket whereas YK is more prone to do that
Click to expand...

that is 2006 SA tour actually when Dravid starting looking miserable. he was nearly kicked out in 99-00 before that kolkata test.
Dravid was clueless vs Ajantha Mendis but YK got a 300 just 6-7 months later. SSC pitch is flat where Dravid was blown away and no one can blame the pitches really. rest like SRT,Ganguly were not better but they were dismissed by Murali. VVS did better despite struggling than Dravid.
 
Saurav said:
the target was only 230 despite 196 because the lead we conced was just 35 despite Aussies making 550.wat happened to Agarkar in first innings.after Aussies 550 even a draw would hv been great but Dravid ensured we win by batting well in both innings

I already said Sachin>Dravid.Sachin could attack because he had special talent.infact they r remembered bcoz of that despite us losing.

Dravid did not hv special talent.so he overachieved with his limited talent while SRT underachieved despite his special talent
Click to expand...

i think sachin did justice to his talent.. to bad it was not good enough for 10 other players for most part of his career
i have seen enough matches i dont even feel like defending its stupid tht if some one scores hundred at good rate better then rate at which rest of ur team scored runs to me its pretty clear if team loses its not this fault and this was jsut for odis in tests
he started seeing those match winnign hundred no one remembers sachin's hundred while chasing in 4 th innings it was gr8 knock but we took it for granted ..
there are many tours where he out performed every body and dravid is my fav player let me make it clear..u know it saurav ;)
but still over all sachin is better player then him
there are many unbelievable hundreds which were not only hard to score but he scored them with flair he is very special player
 
amlafan79 said:
i think sachin did justice to his talent.. to bad it was not good enough for 10 other players for most part of his career
i have seen enough matches i dont even feel like defending its stupid tht if some one scores hundred at good rate better then rate at which rest of ur team scored runs to me its pretty clear if team loses its not this fault and this was jsut for odis in tests
he started seeing those match winnign hundred no one remembers sachin's hundred while chasing in 4 th innings it was gr8 knock but we took it for granted ..
there are many tours where he out performed every body and dravid is my fav player let me make it clear..u know it saurav ;)
but still over all sachin is better player then him
there are many unbelievable hundreds which were not only hard to score but he scored them with flair he is very special player
Click to expand...

I already said Sachin is better.by underachieving I meant he should've averaged 60+ to me.he has that special talent that I havent seen in anybody.

my intent is not to undermine Sachin n u know that too amlafan;-)
 
Saurav said:
the target was only 230 despite 196 because the lead we conced was just 35 despite Aussies making 550.wat happened to Agarkar in first innings.after Aussies 550 even a draw would hv been great but Dravid ensured we win by batting well in both innings

I already said Sachin>Dravid.Sachin could attack because he had special talent.infact they r remembered bcoz of that despite us losing.

Dravid did not hv special talent.so he overachieved with his limited talent while SRT underachieved despite his special talent
Click to expand...

1. Agarkar 6fer was VITAL for that win. Dravid runs could ONLY draw. this is something I have seen people prefer ignoring.
2.They are different batsman , SRT cannot stonewall like Dravid , he looks ugly. Dravid also will not survive if he starts slamming bowlers.
they can be equal not better than each other.
Sachin fans are 'evil', then why Dravid fans call him better than SRT when their styles are different?

we don't see Lara vs Chanderpaul or Ponting vs Steve Waugh , Do we?
 
freelance_cricketer said:
So when a nightwatchman comes on to protect the better batsman's wicket, its an act of bravery? LOL Your allegations are childish. Those are decisions taken in best favour of the team. Tendulkar's designated as the most precious batsman. His duty is to pile up loads of runs at #4. Dravid's primarily used to see off the new ball.

Putting Tendulkar at 1 and Dravid at 4 would do no good to team's cause.
Click to expand...

Lol at the night watchman analogy. Does Tendulkar need some one to shield him on a permanent basis?

The problem is not that he batted usually at no 4 - but that he never batted up the order even when required. He chickened out. Dravid when he opened the innings averages only 42 because that is not his comfort zone, but he did not have a problem with that because he put the team first. He batted every where when required. The best batsmen in the team usually bat at no:3, that should tell you a lot about Dravid. These decisions are taken in the best interests of the team, i.e, to protect Tendulkar's averages!!
 
Last edited:
Saurav said:
I already said Sachin is better.by underachieving I meant he should've averaged 60+ to me.he has that special talent that I havent seen in anybody.

my intent is not to undermine Sachin n u know that too amlafan;-)
Click to expand...

ye :D
but he did pretty good for long career..dravid averaged near 56 i think once see his rapid fall same with ponting
 
IndianWillow said:
Lol at the night watchman analogy. Does Tendulkar need some one to shield him on a permanent basis?

The problem is not that he batted usually at no 4 - but that he never batted up the order even when required. He chickened out. Dravid when he opened the innings averages only 42 because that is not his comfort zone, but he did not have a problem with that because he put the team first. He batted every where when required. The best batsmen in the team usually bat at no:3, that should tell you a lot about Dravid. These decisions are taken in the best interests of the team, i.e, to protect Tendulkar's averages!!
Click to expand...

lol trust me i dont think they even care abt averages and all like we all do
and thing is dravid's game is more suited to opening then tendulkar's
and u do need one of them in middle order
its same do u expect lara to open?
 
Lethalweapon said:
1. Agarkar 6fer was VITAL for that win. Dravid runs could ONLY draw. this is something I have seen people prefer ignoring.
Click to expand...

lol every batsman runs can only draw.u need 20 wickets to win.so what we should stop recognising batsmen effort.?
2.They are different batsman , SRT cannot stonewall like Dravid , he looks ugly. Dravid also will not survive if he starts slamming bowlers.
they can be equal not better than each other.
Sachin fans are 'evil', then why Dravid fans call him better than SRT when their styles are different?

we don't see Lara vs Chanderpaul or Ponting vs Steve Waugh , Do we?
Click to expand...

lol its the other way.I m a Dravid fan n still say Sachin is better.its insecure Sachinistas like u who cant take Dravid or any other Indian being praised.case in point this is a DRAVID thread.had nothing to do with Sachin,yet u brought him up.u wont see Dravid fans bringing Dravid wen hes being praised in a thread?
 
Saurav said:
I didnt start.dunno why some Indians cant take Dravid being praised;-)
Click to expand...

Because SOME INDIANS AND SOME "CRICKET FANS " COULD NOT TAKE SRT'S FAILURES IN THE LAST DECADE, HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A LEEWAY, HIS 50S WERE CONSIDERED FAILURES.
INDIA NEVER DESERVED BOTH PLAYING TOGETHER.
I BASH DRAVID BECAUSE SRT HAS MANY BASHERS.
 
amlafan79 said:
ye :D
but he did pretty good for long career..dravid averaged near 56 i think once see his rapid fall same with ponting
Click to expand...

but to average 52 I think he still did well given his limited talent.not to mention his ODI career
 
Lethalweapon said:
and yes , Why does Dravid mention his unhappiness on opening? he is so weak that he cannot question the management?
Click to expand...

Because Tendulkar has never taken any responsibility in that direction ever. Somebody has become the victim, in the Indian team it is usually Dravid or Laxman.
 
Lethalweapon said:
Because SOME INDIANS AND SOME "CRICKET FANS " COULD NOT TAKE SRT'S FAILURES IN THE LAST DECADE, HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A LEEWAY, HIS 50S WERE CONSIDERED FAILURES.
INDIA NEVER DESERVED BOTH PLAYING TOGETHER.
I BASH DRAVID BECAUSE SRT HAS MANY BASHERS.
Click to expand...

SRT bashers are non Indian I would happily join u in defending him

bashing Dravid SRT has bashers?wat sort of logic is that?
 
amlafan79 said:
lol trust me i dont think they even care abt averages and all like we all do
and thing is dravid's game is more suited to opening then tendulkar's
and u do need one of them in middle order
its same do u expect lara to open?
Click to expand...

Tendulkar had plenty of chances to come in at 3 ( when Dravid batting first, or was injured etc), he did not. They would send in Laxman then who normally bats further down the order.
 
btw @ indianwillow the reasons u stated and many others are the reason why he is my fav player
he is very intelligent person he knew he cant be a good player any more and he declared.. even after having such a good year before australian tour
he was willing to keep... and also when i started watching test cricket seriously dravid was more dominant
still as a batsman purely sachin is better an its not like he is selfish or anything
he does contribute ato team a lot maybe we dont see it.. i rememb him helping yadav to change his length during australian tour
these guys are very well respected in team for some reason
if dravid was selfless character does not automatically make sachin selfish :-)
 
Saurav said:
lol every batsman runs can only draw. need 20 wickets to win.so what we should stop recognising batsmuen effort.?

I said 'Indians' are the ones who don't think like that , not the whole world.
lol its the other way.I m a Dravid fan n still say Sachin is better.its insecure Sachinistas like u who cant take Dravid or any other Indian being praised.case in point this is a DRAVID thread.had nothing to do with Sachin,yet u brought him up.u wont see Dravid fans bringing Dravid wen hes being praised in a thread?
Click to expand...

I prefer Ganguly and Sehwag over SRT despite their flaws. so
bashing Dravid makes me a Sachinist??
 
IndianWillow said:
Tendulkar had plenty of chances to come in at 3 ( when Dravid batting first, or was injured etc), he did not. They would send in Laxman then who normally bats further down the order.
Click to expand...

lol.. maybe team decided it?
also who said if ur no 3 is injured or playing as opener ur no3 needs to come up the order? i dont see the point
 
amlafan79 said:
btw @ indianwillow the reasons u stated and many others are the reason why he is my fav player
he is very intelligent person he knew he cant be a good player any more and he declared.. even after having such a good year before australian tour
he was willing to keep... and also when i started watching test cricket seriously dravid was more dominant
still as a batsman purely sachin is better an its not like he is selfish or anything
he does contribute ato team a lot maybe we dont see it.. i rememb him helping yadav to change his length during australian tour
these guys are very well respected in team for some reason
if dravid was selfless character does not automatically make sachin selfish :-)
Click to expand...

Amalafan, Tendulkar is one of my fav players. Who isn't it? I just don't happen to agree with the view that Tendulkar>Dravid in test matches, for the specified reasons. If it is be said that they are equal, fair enough. It is not without reason that Wisden did not include one Tendulkar 100 in their Wisden 100 list.
 
IndianWillow said:
Because Tendulkar has never taken any responsibility in that direction ever. Somebody has become the victim, in the Indian team it is usually Dravid or Laxman.
Click to expand...

you think SRT was asked to open at any time in his career? there was one occasion vs SL in 90s I think which proved useless and probably his great teammates also collapsed.
He has batted at 3, your criticism is valid but I DON'T WANT TO SEE EITHER OF THEM OPENING ON A GREEN PITCH LIKE KARACHI 2006.
 
amlafan79 said:
lol.. maybe team decided it?
also who said if ur no 3 is injured or playing as opener ur no3 needs to come up the order? i dont see the point
Click to expand...

He need not come in at 3, but could or should have, that is the key point. Most great batsman in history have played top knocks from this position. ( especially if their normal batting position is at 4).

Who in the team is in a position to force Tendulkar to bat at a position he does not prefer. He is too influential in the team, having played since 1989. Tendulkar was always avoiding the shining new ball, if possible, that is the only solid conclusion I can draw.
 
Saurav said:
bringing Sachin in a dravid thread does
Click to expand...

my posts in this thread have mentioned the bowlers Dravid faced + Dravid's failures specially vs aussies in 2004 , SRT came in because he 'missed' some tests of that series.
I mentioned my preference for Younis atleast twice.
 
Ravi Shastri and Gavaskar were once discussing that Tendulkar is the strongest pillar of Indian batting around whom rest of the 5 other Batsmen are expected to bat .

Just because the regular opener is injured doesnt mean that the whole batting line up should be altered . Dravid opening , Tendulkar at 3 , Laxman at 4 would mean that the complete top order gets changed hence it was necessary to make a few changes and keep some things unchanged .

We had opening problems from a long time and its not as if Dravid became a permanent opener . Just opening in 7 Matches out of 165 doesnt make him a selfless character . When opener gets injured it makes more sense to promote the number 3 batsman instead of number 4 batsman .

And why is this a big issue when considering that India always had poor openers , who are still poor while playing abroad ( Ftb ) how does it benefitted Tendulkar when on so many occasions he had to come into bat at 10/2 or 20/2 ?

Its not like India had solid openers who always set a 250-2 platform for SRT , this might be case for a team like Australia but never for India who got poor openers like Vikram Rathore , Raman , Mongia , Shastri , Shiv Sundar das , Ramesh , Gandhi, Das Gupta , Chopra , Sehwag in Overseas conditions , Badani , Mukund , Murali Vijay that always gave flying start at top order .
 
IndianWillow said:
He need not come in at 3, but could or should have, that is the key point. Most great batsman in history have played top knocks from this position. ( especially if their normal batting position is at 4).

Who in the team is in a position to force Tendulkar to bat at a position he does not prefer. He is too influential in the team, having played since 1989. Tendulkar was always avoiding the shining new ball, if possible, that is the only solid conclusion I can draw.
Click to expand...

you know he did that in the 90s because score used to 20/2 in most of the matches even at home.
make it clear , your criticism is for whole career(it is unfair then) or only last decade?
 
eradicator said:
Ravi Shastri and Gavaskar were once discussing that Tendulkar is the strongest pillar of Indian batting around whom rest of the 5 other Batsmen are expected to bat .

Just because the regular opener is injured doesnt mean that the whole batting line up should be altered . Dravid opening , Tendulkar at 3 , Laxman at 4 would mean that the complete top order gets changed hence it was necessary to make a few changes and keep some things unchanged .

We had opening problems from a long time and its not as if Dravid became a permanent opener . Just opening in 7 Matches out of 165 doesnt make him a selfless character . When opener gets injured it makes more sense to promote the number 3 batsman instead of number 4 batsman .

And why is this a big issue when considering that India always had poor openers , who are still poor while playing abroad ( Ftb ) how does it benefitted Tendulkar when on so many occasions he had to come into bat at 10/2 or 20/2 ?

Its not like India had solid openers who always set a 250-2 platform for SRT , this might be case for a team like Australia but never for India who got poor openers like Vikram Rathore , Raman , Mongia , Shastri , Shiv Sundar das , Ramesh , Gandhi, Das Gupta , Chopra , Sehwag in Overseas conditions , Badani , Mukund , Murali Vijay that always gave flying start at top order .
Click to expand...

he was good , he making consistent against good attacks too like Pak and Vaas in SL. why was he dropped?

Indiawillow probably wanted India to be allout under 100 in the 90s in every away match, so he wanted SRT to open:)
 
Lethalweapon said:
you know he did that in the 90s because score used to 20/2 in most of the matches even at home.
make it clear , your criticism is for whole career(it is unfair then) or only last decade?
Click to expand...

Let us not speculate. What is the average first wicket and second wicket partnerships India have had over the years, home and away? I think that 20/2 occurs only in 10% of the matches.
 
Lethalweapon said:
he was good , he making consistent against good attacks too like Pak and Vaas in SL. why was he dropped?

Indiawillow probably wanted India to be allout under 100 in the 90s in every away match, so he wanted SRT to open:)
Click to expand...

I never said Sachin should open. I said he had the chance to come in at 3 many times and he did not, instead an even weaker Laxman was often sent in at no 3. Do you agree Sachin is better at facing seam bowling than Laxman? Then why would Laxman be sent in ahead of Tendulkar if Dravid was not available at 3? The best batsman should be bold and bear the brunt of the difficult phases - that did not happen in Sachin's case.
 
IndianWillow said:
I never said Sachin should open. I said he had the chance to come in at 3 many times and he did not, instead an even weaker Laxman was often sent in at no 3. Do you agree Sachin is better at facing seam bowling than Laxman? Then why would Laxman be sent in ahead of Tendulkar if Dravid was not available at 3? The best batsman should be bold and bear the brunt of the difficult phases - that did not happen in Sachin's case.
Click to expand...

I did say that your SRT's criticism is valid but it is only vs Eng that VVS is poor. he bats at 3 for Hyderabad and is a good choice against most teams, Dravid batted at 5 in WI despite the 'experience' of kaif and Yuvraj and VVS at 3.
his (actually Dada + Wright's)decision to keep- did we need Dinesh Mongia then, don't think so.
p.s SRT had an issue with inswinger's when he was struggling with fitness levels and form which equalled VVS 4-5 years ago.
 
Last edited:
IndianWillow said:
He need not come in at 3, but could or should have, that is the key point. Most great batsman in history have played top knocks from this position. ( especially if their normal batting position is at 4).

Who in the team is in a position to force Tendulkar to bat at a position he does not prefer. He is too influential in the team, having played since 1989. Tendulkar was always avoiding the shining new ball, if possible, that is the only solid conclusion I can draw.
Click to expand...

man i already said there is no reason for no 4 to go to no 3 if ur no 3 opens
yes ok one guy is sacrificing and playing uncomfortably why do u want another guy to also play at unusual position i honestly dont see the point
and abt laxman in eden he was the only man who scored runs in first innings so made sense and after tht 281 u have to admit he would be better choice then tendulkar :)
and no ur best bat does not play at no 3 problem is all "best" batsmen are same...if he is suited to play at no 3 or opening position he will abt there and if he is not he will bat at some other place
 
IndianWillow said:
Amalafan, Tendulkar is one of my fav players. Who isn't it? I just don't happen to agree with the view that Tendulkar>Dravid in test matches, for the specified reasons. If it is be said that they are equal, fair enough. It is not without reason that Wisden did not include one Tendulkar 100 in their Wisden 100 list.
Click to expand...

The same Wisden which puts Sachin as no 2 test batsman of all times after Bradman?
 
IndianWillow said:
Amalafan, Tendulkar is one of my fav players. Who isn't it? I just don't happen to agree with the view that Tendulkar>Dravid in test matches, for the specified reasons. If it is be said that they are equal, fair enough. It is not without reason that Wisden did not include one Tendulkar 100 in their Wisden 100 list.
Click to expand...

It's the exact same WISDEN that rated him the 2nd greatest test batsman after Don in 2002.
 
A legendary innings in which he was out caught for 9.
 
From YK vs RD to RD vs SRT to where it is now..the thread has really served its purpose and should be locked before it gets derailed further..
 
back to topic,

if YK wins us this match......there's no doubt he's better than Dravid

but i doubt even :don can save this match now
 
This has been a good knock from YK. Will need a few of those in next 92 tests to be rated higher than Dravid :yk
 
Gone on 87 just as i posted my reply.


The unlucky Aussie number
 
I really dont see what we're rating this innings for. 2 days left, a humongous target, an 87 and gone on the very same day is nothing to appreciate.
 
LegCutter said:
It's not that unfair actually. On first glance, stats would make it seem like they're both roughly equal.

Averages
Younis: 52.4
Dravid: 52.3

Younis Khan has 20 100s in 76 matches, which rougly equates to a century in every 3.8 matches.

Dravid has 36 centuries in 164 matches which is a century in every 4.5 matches.

vs England

YK: 43
Dravid: 41

Equal for sake of discussion

vs Australia

YK: 31
Dravid: 38

Winner: Dravid

vs Saffers

YK: 47
Dravid: 35

Winner: YK

vs Sri Lanka

YK: 52
Dravid: 48

Winner: YK slightly

vs New Zealand

YK: 60
Dravid: 45

Using these stats, one would think Younis Khan is statistically superior to Dravid, except against Australia where Dravid has pulled his weight; whereas YK takes the cake in Africa, SL and New Zealand

Having said that, Dravid has played twice the number of matches that YK has, so obviously stats would not tell the whole story, but looking at whatever numbers we have, we have to accept that YK wins this one, or if going for the benefit of doubt, we can change the verdict to:

Verdict: Younis Khan is statistically equal to, or marginally superior to Rahul Dravid

And to be honest, I wasnt expecting this; I was expecting Dravid to win this one by a landslide when I started stat-hunting. Stats are a funny thing :dav
Click to expand...


vs England

YK: 43
Gambhir: 46

Winner: Gambhir

vs Australia

YK: 31
Gambhir: 37

Winner: Gambhir

vs Saffers

YK: 47
Gambhir: 41

Winner: YK

vs Sri Lanka

YK: 52
Gambhir: 40

Winner: YK

vs New Zealand

YK: 60
Gambhir: 68

Winner: Gambhir


This proves Gambhir is better than Younis Khan against 3/5 countries.

Stats are, sure, a funny thing. :)
 
par said:
This proves Gambhir is better than Younis Khan against 3/5 countries.

Stats are, sure, a funny thing. :)
Click to expand...

I do rate Gambhir very highly btw. If he manages to keep his performances up, then I'm sure he'll go very far but his downhill slope has started already and his average has plummeted to 45 even before hitting the 50 tests landmark.

But yeah I get your point :)
 
par said:
vs England

YK: 43
Gambhir: 46

Winner: Gambhir

vs Australia

YK: 31
Gambhir: 37

Winner: Gambhir

vs Saffers

YK: 47
Gambhir: 41

Winner: YK

vs Sri Lanka

YK: 52
Gambhir: 40

Winner: YK

vs New Zealand

YK: 60
Gambhir: 68

Winner: Gambhir


This proves Gambhir is better than Younis Khan against 3/5 countries.

Stats are, sure, a funny thing. :)
Click to expand...

In Aus GG averages 22 YK 43
In Eng GG averages 17 YK 52.
 
saeed-sohail said:
In Aus GG averages 22 YK 43
In Eng GG averages 17 YK 52.
Click to expand...

He's not trying to argue that Gauti is a better player than YK. That would be silly. He's saying that there is more 2lyf (and cricket) than gimpy spreadsheet analyses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RidiculousMan
Younis Khan vs Virat Kohli (Test Comparison)
Replies
31
Views
2K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
RidiculousMan
Shan Masood versus KL Rahul in Tests
Replies
14
Views
497
Unbiased-Fan
Unbiased-Fan
M
  • Poll Poll
Would Younis Khan be included in all-time India Test XI if he was from India?
2
Replies
139
Views
2K
Van_Sri
Van_Sri
BouncerGuy
  • Locked
Australia vs India | 4th Test | Melbourne | Dec 26-Dec 30 | Pre-Match Discussion
2
Replies
159
Views
4K
DeadlyVenom
D
Cricket Warrior
Pakistan's ICC Champions Trophy 2025 campaign comes to a disappointing end after washout against Bangladesh in Rawalpindi
2 3
Replies
160
Views
3K
Hellion
H
Back
Top