Best Defensive Batsman: Gavaskar vs Dravid

[Maximus0723]

Never watched Gavaskar but have heard many things about his defense and how much he valued his wicket.

Choose one: Gavaskar vs Dravid.

 

[Anil]

gavaskar, clearly...dravid has certainly done enough to get into the discussion but gavaskar had just the perfect defensive technique and an enormous reservoir of focus, concentration...i have seen him play really long, high-pressure innings on absolute minefields without getting beaten even once....

 

[Sanz]

36 Runs in 60 overs. I dont think that can be beaten.

 

[rahul_m]

Gavaskar imo. Must have had a solid defence if he had to make runs against the West Indies pacers.

 

[Evermind]

Compared to Gavaskar, Dravid is Afridi. So Dravid. He can defend without putting the audience in a coma.

 

[ret]

SMG .... I have heard that he cut down on hooking as it got him out on a few occasions .... the bowlers must have hated him

 

[ret]

Dravid's case is a bit strange in a way that he sometimes goes in to a shell when there is no need and fails to rotate strike

 

[bagapath]

according to cricinfo's statsguru gavaskar scored at a faster clip compared to dravid. even i remember the gavaskar of the 80s as solid batsman not a bore. as for the question posed here, its too difficult to choose. pretty even for me. would back either of them to bat for a draw on a tough pitch.


SM Gavaskar (India) 1971-1987 125 214 16 10122 236* 51.12 15327+ 44.42* 34 45 12

R Dravid (ICC/India) 1996-2009 134 233 27 10823 270 52.53 25934 41.73 26 57 8

 

[silentstriker]

That's an estimated S/R, I'm sure the margin of error there means that it could probably be the same. For practicle purposes, it most certainly would be.

 

[bagapath]

That's an estimated S/R, I'm sure the margin of error there means that it could probably be the same. For practicle purposes, it most certainly would be.

well, may be. but i dont see it or any other factual info available supporting the theory that gavaskar was more boring than dravid. i dont think he was sand whatever available info we have doesnt prove my assumption wrong.