Rahul Dravid - What would you do? Is he still one of India's 6 best batsman?

[Jono]

Rather than a lack of form, the reason I would see him not continuing past the NZ series (or even midway through it) is because the management has to combat this huge problem of retirement in the middle order. We have the younger batsmen to cover up and they need to be transitioned into the side soon, one by one, because when the big 3 leave, we don't want an inexperienced line up.

The South African series will provide so much valuable experience for the younger batsmen, playing against the likes of Steyn on pitches suited for bowlers. In the interest of the future of Indian cricket I think Dravid should go. He's had his time and he's past his prime.

He's a ****ing good player though, always defended him even when he was horribly out of form in 08, but I guess it's time.

Unless you think Vijay/Pujara or whomever would be better against South Africa, you are saying that we should sacrifice the South African series to give Vijay/Pujara experience.

 

[Jono]

I remember Sunil Gavaskar saying on T.V. once "It is always better to go when people say why, rather than why not."

This line of thinking is a pet hate of mine.

If Dravid averages 45 and is nothing like he used to be, but is still better than the other Indian batsman, he has no duty to retire because his career average will fall.

Dravid is playing first and foremost for Indian victories. If he is more likely to deliver them than another batsman, he should keep playing. Even if he's not what he used to be.

However if another batsman is better than him, he should be dropped.

 

[silentstriker]

The Indian domestic system is such that it is virtually impossible to tell if a player can average 40+ in SA by watching him bat. Dravid, even if he is guaranteed to average 30 might still be a "better bet". At some point, you have to make the plunge.

Ideally it'd be a home series where you could make that determination easier, so maybe give Dravid the SA series and then drop him for someone from domestic cricket.

 

[Contra]

The Indian domestic system is such that it is virtually impossible to tell if a player can average 40+ in SA by watching him bat. Dravid, even if he is guaranteed to average 30 might still be a "better bet". At some point, you have to make the plunge.

Ideally it'd be a home series where you could make that determination easier, so maybe give Dravid the SA series and then drop him for someone from domestic cricket.

What happens if Dravid ends up performing well in SA? Surely you can't drop someone if they happened to have a good series.

IMO he should still play in SA because he isn't really "out of form". He just finds ways to get out time and again. Even in SL he looked ok but a run out and a ball spinning back onto the stumps after he successfully defended it among others meant he didn't have a good series. And in the test matches so far he's gotten out to left handers. SA don't have a good spinner or any left armers. So I'd still back Dravid with his technique to come good in SA.

 

[silentstriker]

Obiously you don't drop him if he does well......

That was assuming he fails.

 

[Flem274*]

I think it will be a good time to drop Dravid for the NZ series.

1. He will face far more potent attacks in the domestic Cricket (No offense NZ fans...)

As popgun as we are, I find it very hard to believe the string of Indian 125kph domestic bowlers would be more challenging.

 

[Flem274*]

Is India playing NZ at home?? If so then I would play him all the more...good opportunity for him to gain some confidence by scoring some runs against a relatively easier opponent.

No need to be diplomatic. Dravid will massacre us if we pick the attack I suspect we'll pick.

That is unless Southee finds some swing or Tuffey continues his weird awesomeness against India.

 

[Flem274*]

India need to decide what they're doing before the NZ series tbh. He's more than likely to murder us. Along with Martin being near his wheelchair, Tuffey not his old self and the rest's inexperience, our bowlers will be shattered because 7 of our wickets will more than likely fall in the space of 20 overs.

Vettori especially will be half dead at the bowling crease because he would have just finished scoring our runs with Ryder and Taylor.

So runs against NZ in the subcontinent should be taken with a massive handful of salt. If this was 2006 or even back when we had O'Brien and Bond (so, just the one series) Dravid scoring against them would be fair enough but not against Martin mk II, Southee, Tuffey mk II, Franklin mk batsman, Arnel, Vettori the batting allrounder these days, McKay and Bennett.

South Africa's bowling is light years ahead.

 

[aussie]

Stick with him vs NZ. But if he fails/continues to struggle in SA, drop him.

 

[smash84]

If Dravid averages 45 and is nothing like he used to be, but is still better than the other Indian batsman, he has no duty to retire because his career average will fall.


Dravid is playing first and foremost for Indian victories. If he is more likely to deliver them than another batsman, he should keep playing. Even if he's not what he used to be.


.

But that is precisely the question. Is he really better than other Indian batsmen???? India have loads of batting talent at their disposal. How will they ever find out if the other batsman are good enough or not??? I remember the time when Rahul Dravid had come into the Indian side and there were questions whether he was good enough to be in the team. Especially the ODI team. He was considered too slow. Also Dravid too built his game after spending a good amount of time in the Indian team. I don't remember him to be a prodigy like Tendulkar or Lara.

If he is marginally more likely to deliver compared to other batsman I think he should step down and give others a chance so that others can benefit from the experience. After all he himself became a great player when he got many chances to play for India in the international team,

 

[TumTum]

As popgun as we are, I find it very hard to believe the string of Indian 125kph domestic bowlers would be more challenging.

That will easily be canceled out considering almost any Indian domestic spinner will be a tougher proposition to face than Vettori.

 

[TT Boy]

Definitely take him to RSA as he is one of the only Indian players with a good record there. If he fails there then dump him.

 

[Flem274*]

That will easily be canceled out considering almost any Indian domestic spinner will be a tougher proposition to face than Vettori.

Yeah, but there's only one Vettori to face and him vs. spin isn't really the issue when deciding whether to take him to South Africa.

 

[TumTum]

Yeah, but there's only one Vettori to face and him vs. spin isn't really the issue when deciding whether to take him to South Africa.

I know, just don't like Vettori

 

[TumTum]

Pictures can tell a 1000 words, so the best way to describe Dravid:

ATM he has many holes in his batting and I don't think they are reparable at his age. If for example a batsmen has lost his form in an attacking sense that can be repaired (like putting it away or changing it slightly) but when he breaks down defensive like Dravid is, I don't think there is any coming back. This reminds me of Hayden vs SA at home, not only was he not able to score, but he couldn't keep out the good balls. Sorry to say but it's bye bye.

 

[Flem274*]

I know, just don't like Vettori

Vettori>Hauritz

 

[vcs]

Definitely take him to RSA as he is one of the only Indian players with a good record there. If he fails there then dump him.

Averages 33.60 in SA. All our batsmen have fairly mediocre records there.

 

[TumTum]

Vettori>Hauritz

Not saying much tbh BTW statistically speaking Hauritz>Vettori

 

[aussie]

Averages 33.60 in SA. All our batsmen have fairly mediocre records there.

If you take out the 06/07 tour, when Tendulkar was in his decline/tennis elbow affected period. Tendy averages 42 @ his best in SA during the 92/93, 96/97 & 2001/02 tours.

 

[Jono]

India are one down and Pujara has been sent in ahead of Dravid.

Not a good sign at all.