Tendulkar vs Ponting - who will win the battle of 100's?

[Laurrz]

Tendulkar* 137 tests
37 hundreds
avg. 55.44

Lara 131 tests
34 hundreds
avg. 52.89

Gavaskar 125 tests
34 hundreds
avg. 51.12

Ponting 110 tests
33 hundreds
avg. 59.29

-----------------------------

its going to be close

(as of June 22)

Tendulkars age:
Current age 34 years 59 days

Pontings age:
Current age 32 years 185 days

about 1 and a half years difference, that surprised me, i thought the gap would be more

going to be an awesome contest between these two in the Border-Gavaskar series and this time Tendulkar doesn't have the disadvantage of playing against McGrath and Warne (particularly McGrath )

 

[Laurrz]

oh yea, i picked Ponting ..

1) he's in unreal form and i hope it continues.. im confident it will.. also Aus play a truckload of tests

2) im a biased aussie

 

[GIMH]

I think Ponting will end up with more hundreds than anyone tbh

 

[Richard]

Who'll win the battle of the 100s? Ponting I'm almost certain.

Whose career has been more notable? Tendulkar by quite a bit...

 

[Johnners]

Who'll win the battle of the 100s? Ponting I'm almost certain.

Who's the better batsman? Tendulkar by quite a bit...

I think it'd be fair to say that if Ponting ended with a significant gap between himself and Sachin in terms of centuries, that A) Ponting has continued his stunning form and his all time great stocks will have significantly increased, and B) You'd be able to rid of the "quite" for the aforementioned reason, or i'd even suggest they could be compared as equals.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

The only thing that can stop Ponting winning is if he were to fall down a manhole and break both his legs.

Which isn't likely.

 

[Richard]

I think it'd be fair to say that if Ponting ended with a significant gap between himself and Sachin in terms of centuries, that A) Ponting has continued his stunning form and his all time great stocks will have significantly increased, and B) You'd be able to rid of the "quite" for the aforementioned reason, or i'd even suggest they could be compared as equals.

Nah. Ponting was scoring well when Tendulkar was scoring stupendously - against generally better bowling attacks than of late. Ponting started scoring stupendously just when the quality of the bowling deteriorated. Sadly for Tendulkar, his skill declined not so long after that, so he was not able to cash-in the way Ponting (and a few others) have.

IMO, Tendulkar therefore was the better player, even if Ponting is now. But Tendulkar was sensational for 11 years, so it doesn't really matter too much to me if he's gone downhill afterwards.

PS, hope this doesn't attract C_C back.

 

[Richard]

The only thing that can stop Ponting winning is if he were to fall down a manhole and break both his legs.

Which isn't likely.

He could turn to Roman Catholicism and lose all desire for cricket too, y'know.

 

[Fiery]

Who's the better batsman? Tendulkar by quite a bit...

IMO, Tendulkar therefore was the better player, even if Ponting is now.

Maybe should have said "Who was the better batsman?" and you wouldn't have this contradiction

 

[Richard]

Whose career has been more notable, would have been the best thing to say, really.

 

[Johnners]

Nah. Ponting was scoring well when Tendulkar was scoring stupendously - against generally better bowling attacks than of late. Ponting started scoring stupendously just when the quality of the bowling deteriorated. Sadly for Tendulkar, his skill declined not so long after that, so he was not able to cash-in the way Ponting (and a few others) have.

IMO, Tendulkar therefore was the better player, even if Ponting is now. But Tendulkar was sensational for 11 years, so it doesn't really matter too much to me if he's gone downhill afterwards.

PS, hope this doesn't attract C_C back.

One could argue though, that if Tendulkar was previously so vastly superior, that even with his decline, he still should've been closer to Pontings level of play since '03. Don't get me wrong, I agree that at this stage, in terms of what both have achieved in their careers, that Tendulkar > Ponting. However, i'll argue till death does me part, that the difference between Ponting & Sachin isn't as vast as some people make out, and it would be foolish imo, to rule out the possiblity, that when both their careers come to an end, they can be talked about on an even keel.

 

[Fiery]

One could argue though, that if Tendulkar was previously so vastly superior, that even with his decline, he still should've been closer to Pontings level of play since '03. Don't get me wrong, I agree that at this stage, in terms of what both have achieved in their careers, that Tendulkar > Ponting. However, i'll argue till death does me part, that the difference between Ponting & Sachin isn't as vast as some people make out, and it would be foolish imo, to rule out the possiblity, that when both their careers come to an end, they can be talked about on an even keel.

Yep, not much between the two of them imo

 

[Richard]

One could argue though, that if Tendulkar was previously so vastly superior, that even with his decline, he still should've been closer to Pontings level of play since '03. Don't get me wrong, I agree that at this stage, in terms of what both have achieved in their careers, that Tendulkar > Ponting. However, i'll argue till death does me part, that the difference between Ponting & Sachin isn't as vast as some people make out, and it would be foolish imo, to rule out the possiblity, that when both their careers come to an end, they can be talked about on an even keel.

Not neccessarily. Tendulkar has declined to such a level that he couldn't even be relied upon to score too heavily against popgun attacks on flat subcontinent wickets in 2004\05 and 2005\06. That tells me that, since 2003, he's not been a particularly notable batsman. Hence, I'm not inclined to read a great deal into his performances of the time.

Why he should have declined so much, so quickly, is not something that I can explain, but nothing will ever convince me that the 1990-2002 Tendulkar is not >>> the 2001-current-day Ponting.

 

[R_D]

its the injuries that have slowed Tendulkar down so much.. don't think he's been able to stay fit for more than just couple of months in last 3 or 4 years. These little niggles he keeps on getting have slowed down his reaction heaps hence doesn't seem to pick the ball so early like he used to.
Ponting to get ahead of Sachin within this year i reckon.. fair few test matches for this coming up season so i can see him passing Tendulkar.

 

[Richard]

its the injuries that have slowed Tendulkar down so much.. don't think he's been able to stay fit for more than just couple of months in last 3 or 4 years. These little niggles he keeps on getting have slowed down his reaction heaps hence doesn't seem to pick the ball so early like he used to.

Indeed - tennis-elbow which plagued him for a good 18 months or so IIRR is hardly helpful.

 

[Johnners]

Not neccessarily. Tendulkar has declined to such a level that he couldn't even be relied upon to score too heavily against popgun attacks on flat subcontinent wickets in 2004\05 and 2005\06. That tells me that, since 2003, he's not been a particularly notable batsman. Hence, I'm not inclined to read a great deal into his performances of the time.

Why he should have declined so much, so quickly, is not something that I can explain, but nothing will ever convince me that the 1990-2002 Tendulkar is not >>> the 2001-current-day Ponting.

As i said, at this stage the peak of Sachins career is more notable, but if Ponting continues on his merry way for another 3/4 years, it would be ignorant to not even consider the fact that Ponting = Sachin, especially if he continues at a rate that is vastly superior to his batting peers.

 

[cover drive man]

Methinks Ponting because he is a lot more consitent than Tendulkar (Who should have retired years ago)

 

[Johnners]

Methinks Ponting because he is a lot more consitent than Tendulkar (Who should have retired years ago)

Dire...

 

[Richard]

As i said, at this stage the peak of Sachins career is more notable, but if Ponting continues on his merry way for another 3/4 years, it would be ignorant to not even consider the fact that Ponting = Sachin, especially if he continues at a rate that is vastly superior to his batting peers.

It's not just length of peak, though. It's quality of the bowling the runs are scored against. Not many people would deny, I presume, that the quality of the bowling between 1990 and 2002 (or 2001, to be exact, but it's hard to know for certain which point to choose - the end of Tendulkar's good period or the point the bowling declined) was better than that between 2001 and the current time.

In any case - Ponting will be 36 in 4 years' time. It'll be a hell of a player to be still doing the sort of thing he has most of the time since 2001 at that age.

 

[cover drive man]

Dire...

Why I just think Tendulkar should have retired a while ago.