Top 10 Indian Test Batsmen

[Pap Finn Keighl]

GRV ..not RGV ..sorry

 

[mr_mister]

Interesting Mankad getting a mention at all. I know, two double tons, but averages early 30s from plenty of tests. Clearly not super consistent

 

[h_hurricane]

Interesting Mankad getting a mention at all. I know, two double tons, but averages early 30s from plenty of tests. Clearly not super consistent

He got mentioned once or twice. He should be there as an overall cricketer, though hard to see a good case as a batsman alone.

 

[Logan]

Excluding dinosaurs and fixers.
My top ten

Tendulkar
Gavaskar
Dravid
Kohli
Sehwag
VVS laxman
Pujara
Gundappa vishwanath
Mohinder Amarnath
Vengsarkar/rahane

I would rate Pujara ahead of Laxman. Other than that, it is a very good list.

 

[Jack1]

I think if you're such a colossal dickhead that the selectors refuse to pick you despite you clearly having a ****load of natural talent and absolutely justifying Test selection on output, that should absolutely factor in to how you're ultimately rated as a batsman.

I don't. Pietersen was a dickhead, but probably England's ATG cross format batsman. Actually, not probably. More like definitely.

Interesting Mankad getting a mention at all. I know, two double tons, but averages early 30s from plenty of tests. Clearly not super consistent

Mankad's average is dreadful lol

 

[Dan]

Pietersen got picked for 104 Tests. Kambli didn't.

That's kinda my point.

 

[ma1978]

Kambli wasn't just dropped because he was a pain in the ass. He was a terrible batsman outside of Indian roads. He hit two double centuries which inflated his average but did nothing else of note.

And after 1996, the Indian middle order was Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Azhar (and later VVS). There was no room for him on playing grounds.

On reflection, Amarnath who is a fine player is not top 10.

10th slot for me some mix of Vengsakar / Umrigar / Azhar. This may be my 80s / 90s nostalgia but before the match fixing, Azhar was a superstar. A 45 average and 22 centuries in 99 tests in that era is no joke. And some damn fine centuries in England and South Africa. What a waste of talent.

 

[Jack1]

Kambli wasn't just dropped because he was a pain in the ass. He was a terrible batsman outside of Indian roads. He hit two double centuries which inflated his average but did nothing else of note.

And after 1996, the Indian middle order was Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Azhar (and later VVS). There was no room for him on playing grounds.

On reflection, Amarnath who is a fine player is not top 10.

10th slot for me some mix of Vengsakar / Umrigar / Azhar. This may be my 80s / 90s nostalgia but before the match fixing, Azhar was a superstar. A 45 average and 22 centuries in 99 tests in that era is no joke. And some damn fine centuries in England and South Africa. What a waste of talent.

He barely got a run in the side. He was treated like England used to treat test debutants once he had a dip in form. That was unfair in my view. He was not given a chance to work things out to the point he is India's highest average in test cricket still, which is a bit silly in my opinion.

 

[harsh.ag]

Azhar was played by this guy in a 90s movie