FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Lara is the best of those mentioned, fairly comfortably in my view. The best batsman of my lifetime, ahead of Steve Waugh.
Houston, We have a Problem here.Swervy said:sorry..I must be a dunce of the highest order...because I dont think Dravid has accomplished more than say Tendulkar has!!!
I think Aussie batsmen should by default be eliminated from "best batsman" discussions, because they never have to face the best bowlers in the world.oz_fan said:A while ago Wisden chose the best batter between 1996 and 2005.
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,18347898-23212,00.html
Suprisingly Hayden beat out Waugh, Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Dravid, etc
A bit hard for Tendulkar and Lara to be chosen when amount of test wins is a criteria.oz_fan said:A while ago Wisden chose the best batter between 1996 and 2005.
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,18347898-23212,00.html
Suprisingly Hayden beat out Waugh, Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Dravid, etc
Good point but they do have to face the best bowlers in the world, just not a lot of good bowlers in the same team.adharcric said:I think Aussie batsmen should by default be eliminated from "best batsman" discussions, because they never have to face the best bowlers in the world.
It's the quality of the attack that really matters. The Aussies can play off Kumble and shred Zaheer and AA to pieces, that's just one example.oz_fan said:Good point but they do have to face the best bowlers in the world, just not a lot of good bowlers in the same team.
Murali, Pollock, Kumble, Vaas, Flintoff, etc
Yeah but he did beat Ponting who is thrashing him 6 votes to none.Jono said:A bit hard for Tendulkar and Lara to be chosen when amount of test wins is a criteria.
Ah yes good point.oz_fan said:Yeah but he did beat Ponting who is thrashing him 6 votes to none.
"might"...isn't this the same notion applied to another player we may know?Dasa said:..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.
Yeah at the moment whenever Dravid, Ponting or Kallis come to the crease you expect a big innings from them and you know their reliable. Lara throughout his career has always been eratic, 200 one day and 0, 5, 4, 2 in the next few innings. Tendulkar never used to be like this, you could always expect a fifty from him but rececntly his become more and more like Lara.Robertinho said:I chose Dravid, simply because he'd be the "rock" of the lineup. Though, Ponting if he would be in his current form, Tendulkar if he was back at his best...
You really are a **** of the highest order, aren't you?Richard said: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.
Another dunce because I'd go for Lara.Swervy said:sorry..I must be a dunce of the highest order...because I dont think Dravid has accomplished more than say Tendulkar has!!!