Laxman

[Spark]

Yeah, that's the point. The reason he doesn't have hundreds is because he's not good at converting, not because he bats too low to have time to score hundreds.

 

[91Jmay]

Tendulkar, Dravid, Ponting, Kallis, Lara?

Would have to put Hayden and Gilchrist up there ahead of Laxman for my money as well.

Would consider Mohammad Yousuf, but probably take VVS as he turns it on more when the team is in the crapper.

 

[Cevno]

Yeah, that's the point. The reason he doesn't have hundreds is because he's not good at converting, not because he bats too low to have time to score hundreds.

That's fair when you compare him to other batsman who batted 6 too.

But the opening post was comparing him to all batsman who batted in higher positions, and some openers too in terms of centuries.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

That's fair when you compare him to other batsman who batted 6 too.

But the opening post was comparing him to all batsman who batted in higher positions, and some openers too in terms of centuries.

Yeah but openers face a new ball when the bowlers are fresh so it is all swings and roundabouts. Not as though Laxman is batting at 8 is it.

 

[Furball]

That's fair when you compare him to other batsman who batted 6 too.

But the opening post was comparing him to all batsman who batted in higher positions, and some openers too in terms of centuries.

Why would you do that though?

 

[Himannv]

Laxman > Tendulkar

And Dravid > Laxman

 

[Furball]

And Dravid > Laxman

I'd need to think about that one.