Where does Ricky Ponting rank?

[Ikki]

As has been mentioned, its not about age. Playing international cricket for 18 years is quite different, on the body it really takes its toll. Sachin has been playing since age of 16, so despite being only slightly older, he has many more miles on it. And I'm glad you compared the prime of one player vs the downside of another. Makes complete sense.

Those stats are for the past 7 years mate. That means when Tendulkar was 25 and onwards. Even as Tendulkar started early, at age 25 it is plenty young enough for more good cricket. Now about that time, Ponting started gaining stature as Tendulkar started to diminish in his. So I don't really buy that argument. Yes, playing cricket will take it's toll but you can't exaggerate that fact. Ponting has played more cricket than the other 2 in these 7 years - so as you discount age then he has more case than either two for being poorer. Yet he is better. Overall, it's only 25 tests the difference.

I didn't mark the past 7 years to show one's prime and one's fall. It is from then on that it seems that bowling has become poorer and flat tracks have inflated everybody's scores. So if that's the case, I find it hard to believe a young, but experienced, Tendulkar will start to decline as the batting got easier.

So what does this leave? Either you can accept that the difference is not as huge as some try to make it out to be, or you can put a marker on exactly how much it has made a difference.

In your opinion, what does Ponting have to do to finish above Lara and Sachin? How many more centuries/fifties? How many more runs? How high the average? Does strike-rate matter? If he has to do more than his predecessors, how much more?

 

[C_C]

Aside from that anomaly (and I think it has to be regarded as such, given his record elsewhere), he's as good as anyone bar Bradman

You know very little cricket if you truly think that, i am sorry to say.

 

[PhoenixFire]

You know very little cricket if you truly think that, i am sorry to say.

Nah, he knows **** all about cricket if he thinks that.

 

[C_C]

Actually Tendulkar is not the older player today. Yes, Batsmen will peak at different times, just as they will struggle at others. Now either Tendulkar is really off form since he doesn't come near Ponting at the moment or Ponting is really on form - in which both cases rules out the 'condusive batting conditions'.

Well so what ? When nearing the end of his road, Viv was a much diminished batsman who was overshadowed by the likes of Richardson, Haynes, etc. Doesnt make them as good as Richards.
And yes, Tendulkar is the oldest player playing today when measured from the debut date. As i said, its a question of mileage.

Bottomline is, Ponting hasnt proved himself in half as many situations against half as many challenging bowlers like Lara or Tendulkar did in the 90s and regardless of whether Ponting gets the opportunity to or not, until he demonstrates he can carry a batting lineup all by himself or play bowling attacks significantly superior to his own, his numbers won't make him as good a batsman as Tendulkar or Lara.
Cricket is not about if and or buts- its simply about performance.

They are clearly better in the 90s, but quite behind in the 00s

Bowling + Pitch conditions of the 90s were a lot more challenging than in the 00s on average. Therefore, performance in the 90s for batsmen have more weight to them. Ponting's faced pretty much the worst bowling attack anyone's ever faced in post-war era over the 00s.

 

[Ikki]

Well so what ? When nearing the end of his road, Viv was a much diminished batsman who was overshadowed by the likes of Richardson, Haynes, etc. Doesnt make them as good as Richards.
And yes, Tendulkar is the oldest player playing today when measured from the debut date. As i said, its a question of mileage.

Then say he is the longest playing cricketer, he certainly isn't the oldest. If it is about Mileage, Ponting has only played 25 less tests. If it it's about age, he is only 1 year younger. Now how much do you think their overall record is incomparable? You mention Viv, I'm sorry to say, it was his decision to play further therefore it is his decision that reflects. For someone so hyped up on "overall" career stats when it suits you, this is a funny suggestion.

Bottomline is, Ponting hasnt proved himself in half as many situations against half as many challenging bowlers like Lara or Tendulkar did in the 90s and regardless of whether Ponting gets the opportunity to or not, until he demonstrates he can carry a batting lineup all by himself or play bowling attacks significantly superior to his own, his numbers won't make him as good a batsman as Tendulkar or Lara.
Cricket is not about if and or buts- its simply about performance.

You mean like the Ashes? I mention that because it's fresh. We saw how pitiful the bowling was from the Aussies in 05, his Batting wasn't good. Did you happen to see a test in OT, and more specifically, his knock? You talk about performance, Ponting is one of the best batsmen/strokesmen around. He makes scoring runs look easy.

He made the 2nd best side in test cricket look pitiful not too long ago. How many centuries did he score in that series?

Bowling + Pitch conditions of the 90s were a lot more challenging than in the 00s on average. Therefore, performance in the 90s for batsmen have more weight to them. Ponting's faced pretty much the worst bowling attack anyone's ever faced in post-war era over the 00s.

Yes, let's say they are. How much do you think said scores are influencing Ponting's record? How much more does he have to do, compared to Brian and Sachin, to be considered? Because right now, regardless, he is unstoppable and blitzing it. With 25 tests less, he is only a few centuries off and about 1k off Sachin's record. Coincidently, it was a bit more than 25 tests that Sachin had played before Ponting arrived.

Comparing the two players since Ponting's arrival (from the same date onwards - 1995-12-08) these are the figures:

                [B]Mat  I   NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3    Ave  100  50   0[/B]
[B]Ponting[/B]        110  183  25  9368 257  242  207   59.29  33  36   8
[B]Tendulkar[/B]       97  162  15  8185 248* 241* 217   55.68  27  30  10

Again, ahead. So much how does playing 38 test matches REALLY drain on a player?

 

[PhoenixFire]

It's not all about averages really. Tendulkar and Lara both add that Aesthetic class to their play, and as much as I recognise Ponting does this, he doesn't do it with the same class that excites the neutrals like SRT and BCL do.

 

[Ikki]

It's not all about averages really. Tendulkar and Lara both add that Aesthetic class to their play, and as much as I recognise Ponting does this, he doesn't do it with the same class that excites the neutrals like SRT and BCL do.

Oh, is that it?

At the risk of opening a can of worms, does it happen to have anything with how the Australians are uncouth?

 

[marc71178]

Again, ahead. So much how does playing 38 test matches REALLY drain on a player?

Hmm, on top of the countless ODIs and the pressure of about a billion fans being almost solely on your shoulders?

Probably a fair bit.

 

[Ikki]

Hmm, on top of the countless ODIs and the pressure of about a billion fans being almost solely on your shoulders?

Probably a fair bit.

And that's not equated with the fact that Australia is expected to win every match, and comfortably? Yes, the Indians may have unreasonable expectations, but the Aussies also have expectations of excellence to a similar - if not greater - degree. Anyway, having seen Sachin in plenty of interviews it seems that it's not something that he lets bug him a lot. If he isn't making an excuse out of it, I don't think we can. Nevertheless, this point still doesn't make up much ground.

 

[Evermind]

Comparing the two players since Ponting's arrival (from the same date onwards - 1995-12-08) these are the figures:

                [B]Mat  I   NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3    Ave  100  50   0[/B]
[B]Ponting[/B]        110  183  25  9368 257  242  207   59.29  33  36   8
[B]Tendulkar[/B]       97  162  15  8185 248* 241* 217   55.68  27  30  10

Again, ahead. So much how does playing 38 test matches REALLY drain on a player?

These stats aren't terribly useful when you think about the fact that the players started at different times in their lives - not only in relation to each other. I pulled up some stats on cricinfo and found some interesting facts. Allow me to quote from there:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/guru?sdb=compare;playerid=2230;class=testplayer;filter=basic;team=0;opposition=0;notopposition=0;season=0;homeaway=0;continent=0;country=0;notcountry=0;groundid=0;startdefault=1995-12-08;start=1995-12-08;enddefault=2007-01-05;end=2007-01-05;tourneyid=0;finals=0;daynight=0;toss=0;scheduledovers=0;scheduleddays=0;innings=0;result=0;followon=0;seriesresult=0;captain=0;keeper=0;dnp=0;recent=;runslow=;runshigh=;batposition=0;dismissal=0;bowposition=0;ballslow=;ballshigh=;bpof=0;overslow=;overshigh=;conclow=;conchigh=;wicketslow=;wicketshigh=;dismissalslow=;dismissalshigh=;caughtlow=;caughthigh=;caughttype=0;stumpedlow=;stumpedhigh=;viewtype=com_compare;csearch=tendulkar;cplayerid=1934;comparetype=bat_length;compare=1;.cgifields=comparetype

This is the cumulative average of each player from his start.

As you can see, Tendulkar clearly peaked in his 12th year of international cricket:

93 148 15 7869 217 59.16 29 31 7 117 1 2nd Test v WI 2001/02 [1599]

His average was 59.16 (just about the same as Ponting's is, right now). He is currently in his 17th year of play: a good 5 years past his peak, arguably. His form has declined dramatically after his 13th year in international cricket.

Currently, it is Ponting's 11th year. His highest average so far has been 60.06: just about 0.9 runs more than Tendulkar's, at his peak (it has decreased very slightly since then).

Whatever conclusions people wanna draw from these stats, they are free to do so. However, there are certain things for sure:

- Ponting peaked earlier than Tendulkar, but he also started later, so it amounts to about the same.

- Neck to neck, Tendulkar performed much better during his first 6 years in test cricket, compared to Ponting. Only after year 6 has Ponting dramatically improved his performances, to equal and exceed Tendulkar's. Pitch issues (batsmen-friendly surfaces) and weaker bowling attacks? Quite possibly.

I'd say that statistically, there's practically NOTHING between them if taken at their respective peaks (assuming this period right now is Ponting's peak). However, all sorts of other issues (batsmen-friendly surfaces and weaker bowling attacks etc) are all arguable, and will definitely stack up in favour of Tendulkar.

Haven't tried with Lara yet, sorry.

 

[Ikki]

Yes mate, my point is that whilst Sachin is having a "drop in form" that is still his career. From 2000 onwards and these 'batsmen-friendly' conditions came into play he hasn't taken 'advantage' of them, Ponting has. My question is that to what extent do the pitch/bowling attacks hinder a player like Ponting's record? Because it should certainly do just as much to Sachin's post 2000 record - even if he is slumping.

 

[silentstriker]

Yes mate, my point is that whilst Sachin is having a "drop in form" that is still his career. From 2000 onwards and these 'batsmen-friendly' conditions came into play he hasn't taken 'advantage' of them, Ponting has.

Because he is not as good anymore! That's the point. If Alan Border came out of retirement and played and got two ducks in a row, would he now suck because he can't play on flat pitches, or would it be because age has taken its toll?

My question is that to what extent do the pitch/bowling attacks hinder a player like Ponting's record? Because it should certainly do just as much to Sachin's post 2000 record - even if he is slumping.

He has to have a better record than he has. If he can improve his average around 63-64, or if he can continue at his current pace for another 2-3 years, then I will agree with you. Also, averaging 12 in a country cannot happen, fluke or not. He has played eight tests there, so its not like Lillee and Pakistan (where only two were played).

 

[marc71178]

And that's not equated with the fact that Australia is expected to win every match, and comfortably? Yes, the Indians may have unreasonable expectations, but the Aussies also have expectations of excellence to a similar - if not greater - degree. Anyway, having seen Sachin in plenty of interviews it seems that it's not something that he lets bug him a lot. If he isn't making an excuse out of it, I don't think we can. Nevertheless, this point still doesn't make up much ground.

I guess I shouldn't have bothered trying any form of reasonable points with you - the yellow and green tint is pretty obvious.

But if you really think that Tendulkar's career hasn't been the most mentally exhausting of anyone then I'd like to know who has had a career which is worse.

 

[jammay123]

from what ive seen in cricket he is even the best player of current times.bar sachin and lara possibly. and it is hard to judge against other eras but hes without doubt not the best player ever. second best aus behind the don

 

[Smudge]

chimpanzee

Another quality contribution from CW's premium poster.

Ponting simply didn't get the chance to play against an attack of the quality of McGrath and Warne - I don't feel that should be held against him. Ponting's batting was a touch too impestuous and I felt he often went too hard at the ball - he still does that, but has tempered it to an extent. He's comfortably one of the greats of our time.

 

[Fiery]

Another quality contribution from CW's premium poster.

Thanks for the rap Voltman.

 

[Ikki]

Because he is not as good anymore! That's the point. If Alan Border came out of retirement and played and got two ducks in a row, would he now suck because he can't play on flat pitches, or would it be because age has taken its toll?

Because it's a really slim argument. It's not that he's played SO MUCH more than Ponting. Yet, if the batting standards are easier, it works against him that age 31 he is done and dusted.

He has to have a better record than he has. If he can improve his average around 63-64, or if he can continue at his current pace for another 2-3 years, then I will agree with you. Also, averaging 12 in a country cannot happen, fluke or not. He has played eight tests there, so its not like Lillee and Pakistan (where only two were played).

We'll see how he fares next time. That's just not the only issue. Tendulkar, the way he is going will end up averaging in the low 50s, if he retires in a year or two. You want ponting to average in the 60's to compare. That's your opinion, and that's fine. But to me that's ridiculous, it's not like these two played in two seperate eras. For all bar 5 years (30 tests or so) they played in the same era. If Ponting does end up keeping even his mid 50's average, he will have smashed most of Tendulkar's records.

 

[social]

You know very little cricket if you truly think that, i am sorry to say.

And that's why I qualified it with reference to "Australian"

Greg Chappell, Alan Border, Steve Waugh - all magnificent players but Pontings record is so superior to all of them that he has to be regarded as being at least as good.

 

[andyc]

LOL at SS quoting himself in his signature.

You saying there's something wrong with that?

 

[Smudge]

Thanks for the rap Voltman.

Making yourself comfortable down there in the sarchasm?