Fascinating! (see in Update form)

[mcgillianaire]

R Dravid 86 146 18 7363 270 57.52 18 35 119 - IND
WR Hammond 85 140 16 7249 336* 58.45 22 24 110 - ENG

GS Chappell 87 151 19 7110 247* 53.86 24 31 122 - AUS

Wally Hammond was considered the English Don Bradman of his time, and indeed played in the same era as him but unfortunately always finished 2nd best. Rahul Dravid is often considered to be one of the best in the modern era but when comparing his stats with some of the best, including Hammond, he doesn't fall behind by much. On the overall list, Dravid fills in as No.21 in terms of total test-runs scored.

----

Other similar pairs:

Javed Miandad 124 189 21 8832 280* 52.57 23 43 93 1 PAK
IVA Richards 121 182 12 8540 291 50.23 24 45 122 - WI

----

JH Kallis 86 145 23 6689 189* 54.82 19 34 82 - RSA
RT Ponting 85 138 18 6657 257 55.47 21 26 101 - AUS

----

ST Jayasuriya 94 160 13 6388 340 43.45 14 29 69 - SL
PA de Silva 93 159 11 6361 267 42.97 20 22 43 - SL

http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/STATS/TESTS/BATTING/TEST_BAT_MOST_RUNS.html

Comments

[brahe.livejournal.com]

He's one of my favorite players. If you look at the test matches he's played, the only one ahead of him who would match him in terms of a similar number if Gary Sobers (even then, it's more). Comparing with Bradman will always be hard... the guy only played 52 matches for his records!

[mcgillianaire.livejournal.com]

Is this Dravid you're talking about?

[pappubahry.livejournal.com]

The current era is one where bowling is weak. Fifteen years ago bowling was strong. I know it's a cliche that you can't compare eras, but if you're going to do it, you need to look at team totals, other players of the era, strength of opposition, etc. Also important is when the runs are scored. Keith Miller often used to throw his wicket away cheaply in unimportant first class matches, for instance.

And saying that Dravid is #21 in most runs is obviously meaningless when comparing eras.

Hammond > Chappell > Dravid. :)

[mcgillianaire.livejournal.com]

You maybe right, but I still think it's just too difficult to compare eras, especially if you've not been able to watch/follow each of them than depend on statistics, what people have said about the past and the odd clip here and there.

I always did think Hammond was definitely right up there, but when I chanced upon the stats yesterday I was quite shocked to see Dravid matching him in just about every department.

[pappubahry.livejournal.com]

It doesn't shock me, when you consider that until his recent slump (only averaging just over 40 in the past year, I think) Hayden was averaging high-50's, Ponting's still averaging over 55, and Gilchrist was averaging 60.

Without Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Marshall, Patterson, Donald et al, batting has become easier.

[lirannutian.livejournal.com]

You know what's the saddest part about this? People tend to underate Dravid...and he has to often live in Tendulkar's shadow...

IMHO I think that Rahul Dravid is a tad more consistenet than Tendulkar.

[mcgillianaire.livejournal.com]

In recent times Dravid has indeed been more consistent but one must not forget that Dravid's only been on the international circuit for 9 years now whereas Tendulkar's been there for 15. It's only been in the last year or two that Tendulkar's not been as consistent but he's making up for it and maintaining the same average by scoring BIG when everything click, which is what didn't happen before.

What I always find interesting is that Sachin and Sourav both made it into the team when they were really, really young (16 and 18 respectively) but only Sachin was able to hold his own and do very well. Dravid, too was a teenage wonder but has ALWAYS lived in the shadow of the other two that it wasn't until 1996 that he was finally able to find a place in the team!

If you go thru the late 1980s domestic database on Cricinfo, you'll notice that in all the Under-14, 15, 16 and 19 matches Rahul, Sourav and Sachin were playing together!!

[lirannutian.livejournal.com]

I meant in the recent times only. And Tendulkar is a genius..But yes it's quite interesting only Tendulkar in all his time as a cricketer has reminded uniformly consistent.

I must go through the databases then