Best Batsman
 

Based on their whole career, if you were choosing a team which batsman would you choose.

Anyone who doesn't think Rahul Dravid has accomplished more than any other batsman of the 1990s and 2000s is a dunce of the highest order.

I don't - AND you called me Einstein yesterday.

Lara, cause he is a joy to watch.

There is many ways you could look at this.
Lara - entertainment
Tendulkar - consistency (most of his career)
Dravid - detemination
etc

sorry..I must be a dunce of the highest order...because I dont think Dravid has accomplished more than say Tendulkar has!!!

Dravid has accomplished nowhere near as much as Lara or Tendulkar or even Ponting.
Lara -Highest test and first class score, leading test run scorer
Tendulkar - Most test centuries
Ponting - Only player to score a century in both innings of 100th match. Possibly Future leading run scorer and possibly future player with most test centuries.
Dravid - ?

The question mark over Dravid, for me, is that he has never really done all that well when both McGrath and Warne have been in the Aussie attack. His average, when those two have been present, is fairly small. Having said that, he's still a magnificent player. I wouldn't put him in the class of Tendulkar and Lara in overall career comparisons. I do think though that he is equal with Ponting and Kallis as the best player at this moment.

:wacko:

anyways i reckon ponting is!!!

Lara vs Australia - 52.12 average 9 hundreds 11 fifties
Dravid vs Australia - 51.03 average 2 hundreds 8 fifties
Tendulkar vs Australia - 53.11 average 7 hundreds 7 fifties
Inzamam vs Australia - 34.08 average 1 hundred 6 fifties
Kallis vs Australia - 35.38 average 2 hundreds 5 fifties

From those statistics you'd have to say that Lara and Tendulkar are at their best playing Australia. Dravid has a good average but hasn't been able to convert fifties to hundreds. Kallis and Inzamam have a dramatic drop in average when playing Australia. Are they overated?

In case you didn't realise, Ponting hasn't actually achieved those things you've mentioned...

hence the fact that he said the word "future"

I know but its pretty likely he'll end up at least with the most test centuries.

..but he put them under accomplishments. They're clearly not accomplishments if he hasn't done them yet! Thus, it's an utterly stupid reason to rate Ponting higher than Dravid. If you want to make a case from other reasons, that's fine, but rating one higher because he might in the future accomplish something is ridiculous.

Future isn't "accomplished." It's "will accomplish", or in Ponting's case "might accomplish"