Choose three batsmen for the Post Packer XI middle order

[weldone]

My argument only had to do with the limitations of this particular polling system, due to its inherent nature, in drawing any sort of conclusions on the relative rating of the laggards based on non expression of the opinions of the overwhelming majority on said laggards. See, all I have to say is that it is not justified reaching a conclusion of a player being underrated on a first-past-the-post poll, just on the basis that the player X is sitting on 2 votes while another player Y is on 4 votes, considering we have no idea on what the other 50+ voters feel explicitly about those players X and Y because they have been busy voting for players A, B and C. You could of course say, as you have, that you're referring to just those 4 guys who voted for Y over X, in which case you're drawing a conclusion based on the voting patterns of just 4 out of the 50+ voters, which makes it a meaningless conclusion at worst, and useless at best. It is akin to entering into a discussion of Tendulkar vs Ponting and mentioning that Tendulkar got out for almost nothing in a World Cup Final while Ponting scored a century in the same game. Sure, you would technically be right, but do you think that point is really relevant? It is neither representative of a whole, nor can it allow meaningful conclusions about them when viewed in just isolation due to the extremely small sample size.

Good English, mate....Once again, let me clarify I wasn't drawing a conclusion based on the voting patterns of just 4 out of the 50+ voters...I just wanted to criticize those 4 voters, that's all...Probably I couldn't express that thought very clearly, but that may be because I didn't use as great English as you used in your last post...

Now, I think both of us know very well what I wanted to say...So no point in arguing further...

 

[shankar]

I'm sure fitness shouldn't be an argument, considering Warne was unfit to bowl for a good portion of those Tests. So arguing that one test changes it...well I can argue that one test where he belted Warne, if Warne were fit he would have held Tendulkar better.

It's not as if he was carrying a small niggle. It was a problem that constantly affected his batting until an operation a couple of years back. Another main issue was that he came in as a with no match practice. Anyway I have demonstrated that these 2 innings were played under obviously mitigating circumstances and are an anomaly in his performance against the two.

Furthermore, when you add these 7 tests to all the other tests he played against the other bowlers, then that 1 inning becomes irrelevant. And 44 is his average against those great attacks. Maybe not many did it better...but a few in this poll did.

Not many did better than 48.50 against Warne/McGrath. It makes little sense to combine it with other attacks as if all those attacks were of the same strength.

I wouldn't say so. Look at the rest of his career vs a gradually fading Pakistan. It doesn't get hugely better.

Not a surprise. His performance against all sides took a nosedive after his tennis elbow problems started.

 

[Evermind]

My point was (and that was clearly stated in that post itself) Border and Miandad should have gotten more votes than Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara and the others...

No forking way, man.

 

[Ikki]

It's not as if he was carrying a small niggle. It was a problem that constantly affected his batting until an operation a couple of years back. Another main issue was that he came in as a with no match practice. Anyway I have demonstrated that these 2 innings were played under obviously mitigating circumstances and are an anomaly in his performance against the two.

Likewise for Warne, he had to completely overhaul his method and learn to bowl again.

In comparison with the rest of his performances against the stipulated attacks, they're not an anomaly.

Not many did better than 48.50 against Warne/McGrath. It makes little sense to combine it with other attacks as if all those attacks were of the same strength.

But he didn't do 48.5, he got 42. Or should we only include matches where McGrath is stipulated?

Not a surprise. His performance against all sides took a nosedive after his tennis elbow problems started.

It's been some 7 years in continuance of that nose-dive, I think that reason is overused.

 

[Ikki]

That makes it sound as though the batsman who are getting the votes are ignoring him.

Yeah I just realised how poor I phrased that. I mean, the people who are not voting for him and are voting for others have no case...

 

[shankar]

But he didn't do 48.5, he got 42. Or should we only include matches where McGrath is stipulated?

Sure, Warne doesn't really doesn't matter for Sachin anyways. For Mcgrath again it's the same story Tendulkar before his slump had 2 full series with him in 99 Aus and 01 Ind over which he averages 48.5.

It's been some 7 years in continuance of that nose-dive, I think that reason is overused.

Given that he played a not insignificant 14 years before that slump, enough time to judge him on, I feel it's not.

 

[ret]

Lara, Tendulkar and Richards

 

[Ikki]

Sure, Warne doesn't really doesn't matter for Sachin anyways. For Mcgrath again it's the same story Tendulkar before his slump had 2 full series with him in 99 Aus and 01 Ind over which he averages 48.5.

Given that he played a not insignificant 14 years before that slump, enough time to judge him on, I feel it's not.

Well, even those 14 years prior don't match up to Ponting's 14 year record. So, what's the reason now?

 

[shankar]

Well, even those 14 years prior don't match up to Ponting's 14 year record. So, what's the reason now?

My reason for posting in this thread was to correct your apprisal of Sachin's record vs Mcgrath/Warne. I have no interest in getting into a long-winded comparison with Ponting or anyone else.

Oh and my picks are Sachin, Lara and Waugh.

 

[zaremba]

Richards
Ponting
Lara

No room for Tendulkar. No rioting, please.

 

[archie mac]

I suppose its genetic whether someone prefers Warne or Murali?

Well I think my opinion is based on something other then on their birth place in that debate

I think people vote more for their own country because they watch more of those players, which is understandable. VVS Laxman has a great average against Aust so I would imagine that I would rate him higher then someone from say England. Simply because I have watched more of him at his best

This poll has a lot of votes for Lara but we have hardly any WI supporters on this forum (which is a shame), why is that? Because of his batting ability not his country of birth

 

[Anil]

Richards
Ponting
Lara

No room for Tendulkar. No rioting, please.

 

[silentstriker]

Well I think my opinion is based on something other then on their birth place in that debate:x

And that's great. I never said that you were biased, or implied it.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Haha, these arguments involving the presentation of 'cold-hard facts' are hilarious. Why do you feel the need to defend a 'your player', its not like the end results means anything, does it? It's just a representation of who a selection of CWers "think" would be in a Post Packer XI.

From the OP.

Please select three of them to bat at nos 3,4 and 5 behind gavaskar and hayden. You can choose them based on their specific positions or jut according to your whim.

I thought it was relatively simple.

 

[bagapath]

yes it was. i got into a long winded argument because ikki was questioning why the whole world was failing to rank ponting on par with or above sachin. i think i should've stayed quiet. but it was good fun anyway.

since ikki chooses to use the stats of bowlers before 2002 i am using the same parameters and giving stats of sachin and ponting against Eng, SA, WI, Pak, Aus/ Ind.

SR Tendulkar 56 96 6 4722 179 52.46 16 21 5

RT Ponting 39 65 7 2335 197 40.25 7 10 6


sachin's record is great. ricky's is merely above average. i am going to see how else ikki can twist this further to arrive at the pre-designed answer he has. may be he will choose to compare sachin and ricky post 2002 now. remember i didnt do this on my own. he suggested we should consider the bowling attacks of major teams only upto 2002 because the greats retired after that.

btw, if he wants to remove india from ricky's opponents his record looks marginally better but nowhere near anything great.

RT Ponting 29 48 5 1811 197 42.11 5 8 3

Ikki has a tendency to create smoke screens suggesting some arbitrary years, setting complicated conditions (ignore india against ponting/ ignore sachin's record against murali etc.)

what i've done is simple and straight forward. i've taken the major cricketing nations and compared the batting averages of sachin and ricky's against them.

if he still doesnt agree sachin deserves to be considered better than ricky overall, at least let him stop saying ricky's record is better than sachin's either pre 2002 or post 2002. it is not if you look at pre 2002 records. when the great bowlers were fully in action ricky was just another batsman on planet. sachin was already seated with the legends.

 

[JBH001]

Bagapath... >_<

The reason I think it's not giving him his dues is because the people who are being given vastly more votes really have no case (and I know people won't like me saying this) to be ignoring him in such a way. Thanks anyway.

To be honest, Ikki, I think you are creating a bit of a strawman and then pummeling it to death. I dont think any CW poster, or at least the good majority of them, really considers Tendulkar a "God" or "Godlike" or any such thing. Neither I think do they mythologise Tendulkar, althouth that may happen in the future as time goes on. Tendulkar had gotten plenty of heat on these forums over the years, you only have to look at some of the India vs X threads or other threads going back a year or two to when Tendulkar was suffering from poor form and injury.

It is, I think, more than a little patronising and condescending to think that a good many of the CW members who picked Tendulkar were or are sucked in by a 'myth'. A good many of these individuals have watched Tendulkar for years, watched him fail and succeed and in my view would have good grounds for choosing Tendulkar as one of the three premier batsman of the post packer years. I have already explained some of my reasoning, here and in greater depth elsewhere. Simply it comes down to the fact that I have never seen anyone embody the craft of batting better than Tendulkar. To watch him score a good hundred is to see intelligence, method, and organisation at the crease married to a great technique, and a touch of flair. It is to see a master craftsman at work. And in my experience, I dont think I have ever seen a more intelligent batsman at the crease. In that sense, he is the batting version of Shane Warne. This is not to say anything negative about Ponting or to believe that people are ignoring him by 'choosing' Tendulkar. Ponting is, as I said, arguably the second finest Australian bat of all time. IMO only G Chappell is his competition. Only that, to re-iterate my original point, with five stellar batsmen up for three slots, two of these batsmen missing out is, in my view, indicative of little.

Busting the so-called myth certainly does have validity in the case of Sobers. Most of us, after all, did not watch the man. Certainly, as I said in the other thread, Kallis vs Sobers is a good debate, and you raise some excellent points about Sobers' bowling. But I doubt you can claim the same with regard to Tendulkar.

Anyway, good luck with the argument. Its usually enjoyable reading.

 

[bagapath]

Bagapath... >_<

okay.

 

[adharcric]

Didn't notice Viv Richards further down the list - if it comes down to it, please change my vote from Ponting to Richards.

 

[Sanz]

Didn't notice Viv Richards further down the list - if it comes down to it, please change my vote from Ponting to Richards.

Haha, so true. I almost missed but then before clicking..just looked down and found him and then unchecked everyone else, Checked Viv, then checked other 2.

 

[0RI0N]

Richards
Ponting
Lara

No room for Tendulkar. No rioting, please.

was gona be my votes.wanna swap tend for richards.i want ricky at 3 viv at 4 and lara at 5.
Pont ,lara and king viv > tendulkar