I am a huge Ponting fan & Lara is one of my favourite batsmen ever. So there is no biasness towards anyone as i state my opinion towards the view of the thread staters here..
There, I said it.
A major point is that many people claim Lara scored his runs against better bowling than Ponting. They say that he dominated in an era where Waqar, Wasim, Donald, McGrath, Ambrose and Walsh were bowling. Fair enough. He did indeed dominate in such an era. I've always felt that was an incredibly general statement though, and thought I'd investigate it further.
Yes he has scored runs againts better bowling attacks than Ponting thats a plain fact. I'm not sure though if the idea that he dominated the likes of Waqar, Wasim, Donald, Mcgrath was ever said though given that he was so inconsistent. I know for a fact he never scored big runs againts Pakistan or South (home or away) in the 90's when Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Pollock where at their
peaks.
Ponting has scored centuries against attacks containing Wasim Akram:.
Saw this series & i can tell you even though he was unlucky with decisions & bad fielding he was in decline as a test bowler & wasn't the great Akram anymore. Off my head i don't think Akram took alot of wickets at all during that series.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63856.html
By 2002 Waqar was definately gone, added to the fact the conditions where neutral the other bowlers where very either sub-standard (razzaq, sami) or also in decline (Saqlain) the only serious bowling Ponting & the other Australian batsmen had in that series was from Akhtar. Plus the last link was a Akram game from the 99 series.
So overall bringing up these examples won't help Punter too much since facing Wasim & Waqar below there peaks doesn't compare to the challenge Lara had while facing them.
Centuries by Lara against attacks containing both, or either of these bowlers? 0. His average comes to 30 in 7 Tests. Not terrible, but by absolutely on means 'dominant'. If we apply the same criteria to Ponting, we are left with an average of 73.11 from the same number of Tests as Lara.
No doubt Lara didn't do much againts PAK & SA when they had there stalwart bowlers. But as i just Ponting managed to score runs againts them when they where way past their best.
Let's move on to Donald. Once again, Lara failed to ever score a Test century against an attack containing Donald. Ponting, however, did achieve such a feat (in his first Test against Donald mind you), and was the only Australian century maker in the relatively low scoring Test:
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63778.html
Ponting played 4 Tests against attacks containing Donald for an average of 50.40. He was not once dismissed by Donald. Lara on the other hand, played 11 Tests against attacks containing Donald and failed to score a single century. He was dismissed 6 times by Donald and averaged 35 against said attacks. Once again, not terribly poor by any means, however not as dominant as some make out. Thus far, you'd have to say Ponting has the wood over Lara when it comes to scoring against 'quality' opposition.
Stats don't prove everything hear in Lara's career record vs South African opponent when Donald/Pollock where bowling at their peaks as i found out when i did a research in the past when comparing Lara's record vs Tendulkar's.
In those 11 test vs Donald never was it a case where Lara was at his best as i will describe to you now. In 92 it was just a one of test where neither had established themselves as world-beaters so i'll start for the 98/99 series. In that 98/99 series in SA Lara was clearly going throught a lean patch during the late 90's where other than 2 big series vs England (who had poor bowling attacks) & big scores here or there it wasn't Lara at his best he was very inconsistent compared to Tendulkar up until that fabolous series vs Australia in 99. Then in 2001 when SA went to the caribbean his problem was that he was gradually coming back from a break from the International game & wasn't back to his fluent best, while Donald was clearly past his best.
Yea you may be tempeted to say one has to make the most of his oppurtunities has Ponting did by averaging well in his 4 test vs SA but the fact that Lara wasn't at his best to tackle SA while Donald/Pollock partnership was at there best is an important point, also i'm sure if one was to make a resarch into how many times Lara averaged high (40 plus my criteria) vs top-class bowling attacks in their respective careers in fairly sure Lara would be ahead.
Now for obvious reasons, Ponting never faced McGrath in Test cricket. Which is a shame because Ponting without a doubt had the wood over McGrath in State cricket. In this match, very early on in Ponting's career, Ponting scored 125 & 69 against the attack featuring McGrath.
http://www.pcboard.com.pk/Archive/Scorecards/56/56891.html
In this match he scored 58 & 134 against an attack featuring McGrath:
http://www.pcboard.com.pk/Archive/Scorecards/60/60034.html
In being fair, Ponting didn't have such a magnificent outing on this occasion and scored 20 and 43, being dismissed by McGrath in the second innings.
http://www.pcboard.com.pk/Archive/Scorecards/61/61214.html
And in the final match in which Ponting faced McGrath, the honours go to Ponting once again. Ponting scored 126 and 154 in this match.
http://www.pcboard.com.pk/Archive/Scorecards/73/73209.html
That's an average of 91.13 against attacks containing McGrath for Ponting...and it's not like these attacks are terrible either...Look at some of the names who were with McGrath...Lee, MacGill, Clark, Matthews...Not cannon fodder, and I think it's fair to say that Ponting had the wood over McGrath (when you consider all those runs at that average for a mere 1 dismissal)...whereas Lara didn't. I'm aware that comparing State cricket to the Australian attack is kinda silly...but as I said...these weren't exactly No-Frills attacks surrounding McGrath. And I think it's a fair indicator of how Ponting plays McGrath.
Let's do the same for Lara when it comes to Walsh and Ambrose. Ponting played 9 Tests against attacks containing either/or for an average of 40. Not magnificent, but respectable, and there is indeed a century amongst it, so there is further evidence of performing against quality opposition. Walsh dismissed him 4 times in these 9 Tests, so it's probably fair to say he troubled Ponting. However, Lara seemed to struggle against attacks containing Ambrose as evidenced by him failing to reach triple figures once against Leeward Islands in 5 matches with Ambrose in them only averaging 26.3. Lara however did very well against attacks containing Walsh with Jamaica scoring runs at an average of 54 in 7 matches. I'd call this one even.
I understand what you are trying to prove i don't think its needed since. I personally never had agreed with the argument that just because Australian batsmen have not faced their own bowlers in this era are not better than batsmen from around the world because they have (a strong point made by some when comparing Ponting & Dravid), especially when those opposition batsmen have failed againts Australia.
People won't dare to use that argument for former legends and say Greg Chappell was better than Viv Richards because he faced the fearsome quartet while Viv didn't. Its an extremely flawed argument that doesn't make sense at all.
When it comes to Murali, Lara without a doubt handles him incredibly well and averages 75 against Sri Lanka containing Murali. He is a wonderful player of spin and has Ponting covered against this bowler. That said, Ponting's average against attacks containing Murali is 58, which certainly doesn't put him to shame. Interesting thing is though, that Lara has been dismissed by Murali 4 times in the 6 Tests they've played against each other, while Ponting has only been dismissed by the great spinner 3 times in 10 Tests...So something to ponder there.
Not for me, its fairly obvious for from what i've seen that the way Lara has played Murali is miles above anyone has in the modern game. I'm fairly sure even though Murali has dismissed Lara 4 times in 6 test Lara still has some massive scores behind that. Ponting along with most Australian batsmen since 99 (the series where Ponting was the only batsmen to play Murali well) have played Murali very well but none have dominated him.
So all in all, I think this certainly proves that the idea that Ponting hasn't done well against quality bowlers (in comparison to other 'modern greats') is entirely a myth.
Hmm, well lets just stay in comparison with Lara don't worry about the other top-batsmen just yet.
Note: Doing well againts top-quality attacks will be averaging 40+ againts them.
Ponting vs top-quality attacks:
Looking at his series by series breakdown i would only consider his performance in the 97/98 home series vs SA, Ashes series (even though it slightly goes againts the criteria), vs SRI in 99 & vs SA home & away in the 2005/06 season.
Lara vs top-quality attacks:
Looking at Lara's series by series breakdown i'll say AUS 92/93, 95, 99, 2003, 2005, PAK 93, SA 2001, 2003/04, SRI 2001, ENG 2000 where attacks of
quality.
Did not include the 2004 home series vs ENG where he averaged 40+ but he did not dominate the English attack really in that series that 400 really covers up the struggles he had alot.
So overall Lara beats Ponting againts quality attacks by a fair away so its not a myth.
Let's not forget that many of these innings were when Ponting wasn't even half the player he is today...Imagine what he would be capable of if his current skills were on show back then.
Players go through transitions Ponting was on a certain level back then he has evolved since then. So its useless to say now what he could have done if he was then if he was batting like he is now. Its just how it is..
These statistics also indicate that Ponting has performed against the 'greats' to a higher level than Lara has (on the whole)....yet many state the opposite...It doesn't appear to be true here.
Well as i showed you thats not really the case..
If you are going to explain that then please make it short 