Mohd Yousuf vs Rahul Dravid In ODI's

[Sanz]

If you look at the results of the games involving Rahul and Yousuf against AUS, India has won 8 games ouuta 36 games(with Rahul playing). On the other hand Pak won 6 games
ouuta 24 games (with Yousuf playing) wich is marginally better than what India has done with Rahul playing.

And that proves is that Pakistan have performed better than India not Yousuf is better than Dravid.

Not only Yousaf has done better against AUS and will probably out run Rahul with # of runs and a much much better average but also team performed better too.

And that's an assumption not FACT.

Second thing to look at how both players peformed under the pressure situations of an Pak-India games. Rahul has scored 1800+ runs with 57 games with average of 35 and yousaf has scored 998 runs but has played 34 games (23 games less than rahul) and averages 33( 2runs less than Rahul)

And that is an edge Rahul has over Yousuf, Right ? So how are you treating it as a fact in Favor of Yousuf ?

If you look at the result of Indo-Pak games involving yousaf and Rahul, India has won 40% of games and lost 60% of games. Pak has won 61.7% of games (which is prett consistent with PAk's overall record against India). It is not hard to conclude that which one of the two is better for team in these though games.

In India-Pak Matches where India has won, Rahul Averages - 53.10
In India-Pak Matches Where Pak has won - Yousuf averages - 40.23

So It is obvious that Rahul has contributed more towards Indian win than Yousuf did towards Pakistani wins. Now why Pak's winning % is better than India's is a different topic all together and beyon the scope of this discussion.

 

[haroon510]

yousuf better than dravid in all form of the cricket.

yousuf has better average and most importantly better strik rate than Dravid in odi.

even in test i consider yousuf better than Dravid although he has average of 56 and dravid 57 despite dravid playing more test matches. yousuf has played less matches and manage to have a better strike rate than dravid and if he continues his 2006 form he would pass dravid's average too. strike rate is another factor that we should seriously consider when we are to campare two players. we have to see which players are watchable and which are not. for me dravid has never been watchable just because of his lack of stroke playing and slowness when he is batting.

 

[Sanz]

Very Well said, Haroon.

 

[Richard]

Mohammad Yousuf > Rahul Dravid in ODIs, but not by a hell of a lot.

 

[Perm]

yousuf better than dravid in all form of the cricket.

yousuf has better average and most importantly better strik rate than Dravid in odi.

even in test i consider yousuf better than Dravid although he has average of 56 and dravid 57 despite dravid playing more test matches. yousuf has played less matches and manage to have a better strike rate than dravid and if he continues his 2006 form he would pass dravid's average too. strike rate is another factor that we should seriously consider when we are to campare two players. we have to see which players are watchable and which are not. for me dravid has never been watchable just because of his lack of stroke playing and slowness when he is batting.

So Virender Sehwag is a better Test batsman than Kumar Sangakarra because he has a higher Strike Rate?

 

[Perm]

Rahul Dravid is more flexible in his ODI batting than Mohammad Yousuf IMO, and can adapt to the situation better. I voted for him.

 

[adharcric]

yousuf better than dravid in all form of the cricket.

yousuf has better average and most importantly better strik rate than Dravid in odi.

even in test i consider yousuf better than Dravid although he has average of 56 and dravid 57 despite dravid playing more test matches. yousuf has played less matches and manage to have a better strike rate than dravid and if he continues his 2006 form he would pass dravid's average too. strike rate is another factor that we should seriously consider when we are to campare two players. we have to see which players are watchable and which are not. for me dravid has never been watchable just because of his lack of stroke playing and slowness when he is batting.

I'm going to pretend we have a new award - an anti-Afridi of sorts. All yours mate.

 

[Laurrz]

As an Aussie, Dravid for sure..but Yousuf right now is better

 

[adharcric]

Averaging somewhere like 90? I think 2 seasons of 90's, and the remaining at 50+ beats Dravid at 50ish all the time.

Although yes, he's more reliable etc.

Nope. He needs to do it against quality attacks on tough pitches, on a consistent basis. We'll see then ... right now, it's Dravid easily.

 

[Richard]

Nope. He needs to do it against quality attacks on tough pitches, on a consistent basis.

And without being dropped near enough every innings.

 

[Richard]

So Virender Sehwag is a better Test batsman than Kumar Sangakarra because he has a higher Strike Rate?

Haha. Cunning stuff.

 

[Turbinator]

yousuf better than dravid in all form of the cricket.

yousuf has better average and most importantly better strik rate than Dravid in odi.

even in test i consider yousuf better than Dravid although he has average of 56 and dravid 57 despite dravid playing more test matches. yousuf has played less matches and manage to have a better strike rate than dravid and if he continues his 2006 form he would pass dravid's average too. strike rate is another factor that we should seriously consider when we are to campare two players. we have to see which players are watchable and which are not. for me dravid has never been watchable just because of his lack of stroke playing and slowness when he is batting.

 

[Perm]

Averaging somewhere like 90? I think 2 seasons of 90's, and the remaining at 50+ beats Dravid at 50ish all the time.

Although yes, he's more reliable etc.

Let's wait until he starts making runs against Australia (best team in the world), Sri Lanka (arguably the best spinner in the world) and South Africa (bouncy, green wickets) until we even start to compare Mohammad Yousuf to Rahul Dravid as a Test batsman.

 

[Johnners]

I'd take Dravid in both forms of the game, admittedly i have seen a lot more of Dravid play and Yousuf, but Sanz's analysis of the 2 in ODI's removed any doubt of whos is the superior ODI player. I can't say i've ever felt entirely comfortable about the situation of an Ind. vs Aust. game whilst Dravid is still at the crease, not because of his attacking prowess, but because of his ability to get his team over the line.

 

[R_D]

Rahul Dravid is more flexible in his ODI batting than Mohammad Yousuf IMO, and can adapt to the situation better. I voted for him.

what he said..

 

[Manee]

Yousuf has had average, hundred and fifty count boosted by playing Bangladesh, Kenya and Zimbabwe, matches in which, usually, the result does not come into the equation. Obviously Bangladesh are more of a threat but werent when he scored so many runs against them. Dravid on top, Yousuf on bottom.

                       1    1   0    15  15    -    -   15.00   0   0   0
v Kenya               11    9   4   358 104*  68*  49   71.60   1   1   0

v Zimbabwe            32   27   3   885  85   84   72*  36.87   0   8   0
                      20   18   6   810 141* 100*  88   67.50   2   6   1

v Bangladesh          10    7   1   197  60   53   42*  32.83   0   2   0
                      11   10   3   633 112* 106   94*  90.42   2   4   0

Since is conversion in 2005, Yousuf has been a test run machine, but people have missed how Dravid has outperformed him overrall in the last four years.

2004                  31   28   2  1025 104   99   84   39.42   1  10   2
                      27   25   4   768 107*  88*  88   36.57   1   4   2
2005                  30   30   7  1092 104  103*  86   47.47   2   9   2
                      26   25   2   885 105   72   71   38.47   1   8   1
2006                  27   27   1   919 105   92   69   35.34   1   8   2
                      21   19   3   627  83*  71   67   39.18   0   5   0
2007                  13   11   3   427  78   66   60   53.37   0   5   0
                      14   14   1   473 101*  79   66   36.38   1   3   0

Dravid seems to be equal in career batting averages with runs against the better teams, he is also in better form than Yousuf. There is yet another dimention though. 20s and 30s don't win or have much of an impact on 50 over games, 50s and 100s are what counts.

In a ratio per innings for fifties and hundreds it goes.

Dravid: 2.92 innings per fifty or hundred
Yousuf: 3.47 innings per fifty or hundred.

In conclusion, I pick Dravid because he scores more runs against the good teams, better recent form, and his better ratio of innings per fifty or hundred.

 

[Beleg]

Dravid, and not because of Manee's analysis, which is among the more canny selective statistical analysis which I have seen on the board for a while.

Dravid is just a better batsman then Mr. Yousuf.

 

[Manee]

Dravid, and not because of Manee's analysis, which is among the more canny selective statistical analysis which I have seen on the board for a while.

Dravid is just a better batsman then Mr. Yousuf.

What do you mean by canny, did I do something wrong?

 

[Richard]

Nope, quite the opposite.

The ability to break stats down and reveal patterns not obvious at face-value is what stats are all about.

 

[Manee]

Cool, thanks for the compliments Richard and Beleg.