Ricky Ponting vs Steve Waugh

[Craig]

Ricky Ponting isn't, has never been, and will never be, fit to knock in Steve Waugh's bat.

Waugh is possibly the greatest captain to have played the game, Ponting is nothing short of atrocious in that department, and Waugh beats most batsmen hands down to be honest, so it's no surprise that Ponting loses.

Don't feel like typing out a long winded post but I would say some of it I disagree.

 

[lionheart]

steve waugh wins hands down in both. all the people saying ponting is technically better etc. thats just stupid. for all the stylish stroke-play he has, ponting will never play an innings like waugh did when he scored 200 against the west indies, back against the wall and eye-ball to eye-ball with ambrose.

 

[deeps]

steve waugh wins hands down in both. all the people saying ponting is technically better etc. thats just stupid. for all the stylish stroke-play he has, ponting will never play an innings like waugh did when he scored 200 against the west indies, back against the wall and eye-ball to eye-ball with ambrose.

To be fair to ponting, he will never come up against bowling of that quality

 

[Run like Inzy]

Waugh was a much better captain. He made the Aussie team world beaters. Ponting was just given a great team, this worked for a while but the Ashes has shown cracks in the teams performane. Ponting is the better batsmen IMO.

 

[luckyeddie]

To be fair to ponting, he will never come up against bowling of that quality

His problem's not the bowling - it's the fielding.

 

[Ikki]

Another oldie. Waugh is probably still the better Captain, whilst Punter is the better batsmen.

 

[deeps]

I still back Waugh as the better batsman and captain.

Batting wise, Waugh faced FAR better bowling. I mean seriously, who are the premier bowlers in the world atm, besides the Australians?

Murali
Ntini
Kumble
Pollcok
hoggard
Bond
Clark
Asif
Flintoff
Shaoib Akhtar

That's the top 10 for test match cricket. That's pathetic in all honesty. Stuart Clark, Flintoff, Hoggard are all OK bowlers, go back about 10 years and they'd be considered nothing special.

Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Curtley Ambrose
Courtney Walsh
Allan Donald

are just some of the brilliant bowlers that Waugh played most of his career against. The significant drop in bowlers standards, as well as pitches being very batsman orientated, results in Pontings record looking far better than it is imo.

Put Punter against some good bowling on a fair pitch, and he'd struggle, whereas Waugh would gut it out and come out with a 100.

EDIT: To add more to that... Pollock and Kumble have been around for a number of years, and are both in decline. They were far better bowlers a few years previously. The fact that they still are right up there in the best bowlers lists says a lot. Mcgrath is another, who is definatly not the bowler he used to be, but just won the leading wicket taker award in the wc!

 

[Salamuddin]

I still back Waugh as the better batsman and captain.

Batting wise, Waugh faced FAR better bowling. I mean seriously, who are the premier bowlers in the world atm, besides the Australians?

Murali
Ntini
Kumble
Pollcok
hoggard
Bond
Clark
Asif
Flintoff
Shaoib Akhtar

That's the top 10 for test match cricket. That's pathetic in all honesty. Stuart Clark, Flintoff, Hoggard are all OK bowlers, go back about 10 years and they'd be considered nothing special.

Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Curtley Ambrose
Courtney Walsh
Allan Donald

are just some of the brilliant bowlers that Waugh played most of his career against. The significant drop in bowlers standards, as well as pitches being very batsman orientated, results in Pontings record looking far better than it is imo.

Put Punter against some good bowling on a fair pitch, and he'd struggle, whereas Waugh would gut it out and come out with a 100.

I'd agree with afair bit of that. Ponting's a good player but as Jono said succinctly "the game's about more than pure numbers"

 

[Johnners]

I still back Waugh as the better batsman and captain.

Batting wise, Waugh faced FAR better bowling. I mean seriously, who are the premier bowlers in the world atm, besides the Australians?

Murali
Ntini
Kumble
Pollcok
hoggard
Bond
Clark
Asif
Flintoff
Shaoib Akhtar

That's the top 10 for test match cricket. That's pathetic in all honesty. Stuart Clark, Flintoff, Hoggard are all OK bowlers, go back about 10 years and they'd be considered nothing special.

Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Curtley Ambrose
Courtney Walsh
Allan Donald

are just some of the brilliant bowlers that Waugh played most of his career against. The significant drop in bowlers standards, as well as pitches being very batsman orientated, results in Pontings record looking far better than it is imo.

Put Punter against some good bowling on a fair pitch, and he'd struggle, whereas Waugh would gut it out and come out with a 100.

Last i heard he was an Australian

 

[Perm]

Steve Waugh is much better than Ponting overall.

 

[pup11]

Tugga was definietly a natural leader and a gritty and determined batsman (and a good all-rounder in earlier half of his career), but Ricky is hands down a better batsman than Waugh because Ricky is a very gifted batsman and on the other hand Waugh was a batsman with limited talent but he made most of his talent with his mental toughness which is an obvious sign of greatness.


And as a captain Tugga is one of the best ever.

 

[Matt79]

Tugga was definietly a natural leader and a gritty and determined batsman (and a good all-rounder in earlier half of his career), but Ricky is hands down a better batsman than Waugh because Ricky is a very gifted batsman and on the other hand Waugh was a batsman with limited talent but he made most of his talent with his mental toughness which is an obvious sign of greatness.


And as a captain Tugga is one of the best ever.

Tugga is a player of limited talent who got by on grit alone? What a heap of steaming monkey crap!

I'd say Ponting is a more naturally gifted player, but Waugh was extremely talented. He took the deliberate decision that he was failing to deliver on that talent because he was letting himself mentally, and then went about removing the avenues that got him out. It not that he couldn't play shots like the hook, its just that he recognised that for him they were low percentage shots compared with the alternative of just getting out of the way. Its a gross disservice to describe him as having limited talent - I'd say he's had well above average (albeit not freakish in the category of a Lara) and that he wrung everything he could out of that.

 

[andyc]

Batsman: Ponting
Captain: Waugh

 

[pup11]

Comeon Matt79, i am not criticising Tugga all i am saying is that he wasn't the most naturally talented bloke going around as he had limited talent compared to other legendary batsmen of his time, but still he made a legendary career with his sheer grit and determination to do well.


His ability to bat with the tail and remain cool in almost every situation made him such a legend.

 

[deeps]

Comeon Matt79, i am not criticising Tugga all i am saying is that he wasn't the most naturally talented bloke going around as he had limited talent compared to other legendary batsmen of his time, but still he made a legendary career with his sheer grit and determination to do well.


His ability to bat with the tail and remain cool in almost every situation made him such a legend.

Wrong, Waugh definatly did not have limited talent. He had far more talent than most players of his time. Talent isn't judged by looking glorious when you play a shot, or being supremly stylish etc. In that case, Mark Waugh would be the most talented player in the world.

As I mentioned earlier, Waugh was once considered to be the next Stan McCabe. For this comparison to be made, he must have had alot of flair and talent about him. He chose to become a more determined gritty type player, but he definatlely had a bucket load of talent.

Some people mis-interpret classy looking shots, and attacking batting for talent.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Waugh's talent was having immense powers of concentration, and being able to stick it out for hours and hours at a time.

 

[haroon510]

Steve waugh

 

[silentstriker]

Next time someone implies that batting slowly means not having talent, I'm going to go insane.

Dravid is not necessarily less talented than Tendulkar just because he scores slower. Talent is different from your mentality. Different style does not mean less talented. I don't believe for a second Waugh was less talented than Ponting. Yes Ponting is more aggressive, but that does not somehow equate to talent.

 

[Nishant]

Next time someone implies that batting slowly means not having talent, I'm going to go insane.

Dravid is not necessarily less talented than Tendulkar just because he scores slower. Talent is different from your mentality. Different style does not mean less talented. I don't believe for a second Waugh was less talented than Ponting. Yes Ponting is more aggressive, but that does not somehow equate to talent.

Read the Dravid V Ponting thread!...now....

 

[open365]

Next time someone implies that batting slowly means not having talent, I'm going to go insane.

Dravid is not necessarily less talented than Tendulkar just because he scores slower. Talent is different from your mentality. Different style does not mean less talented. I don't believe for a second Waugh was less talented than Ponting. Yes Ponting is more aggressive, but that does not somehow equate to talent.

Just looking at them bat shows me that Ponting is the more naturaly talented, scoring rates can just be an indicator of this sometimes.

Ponting gets my vote easily.