• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Good/Great bowlers that owned good/great batsman...

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Wordisms again but no content, why am I not surprised!

Please show me ONE occassion where Ponting was able to get on top of Ishant.

Embark on your :laugh:athon mate. Figures don't lie. Ponting NEVER managed to see off Ishant, not even once so far. And probably never will. That is ownage.
What are you talking about? I just posted 4 of Ponting's highest scored in matches against Ishant where he was striking above 50 SR and Ishant could not take his wicket. See him off? :laugh:

As I said, you're full of it.
 
Last edited:

Sir Alex

Banned
I just posted 4 sizeable scores where Ponting scored at an above 50 SR where Ishant could do nothing to stop him. So how did Ishant dominate him if Ponting is capable of scoring so highly while he is bowling? As I said, you're full of it.
Haha on flattest decks of Bangalore, Adelaide and Delhi?? Fact is the maximum he EVER scored off Ishant in one innings was 33 runs!

On an average Ponting scores 11.8 runs per innings off Ishant. :laugh:
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Yet he scored at or below 50 SR vs Ishant. That is not exactly getting "on top" right? And also considering how flat the pitches were as well.
He actually scored them above 50 against Ishant. And no one is saying Ponting dominated Ishant. We're saying he scored enough runs against Ishant to say he wasn't dominated.

Haha on flattest decks of Bangalore, Adelaide and Delhi?? Fact is the maximum he EVER scored off Ishant in one innings was 33 runs!
That's because you don't face a bowler - especially a fast bowler - enough to take so many runs off of him in one single innings.

In the match against Ishan where Ponting made 140 runs, he scored 26 runs off 44 balls faced just off Ishant. That's an SR of almost 60. He can't help it if Ishant can't or isn't being bowled more often.

And since when did SR become the definition of domination? I take 200 runs scored @ 40 over 50 @ 70. You're creating your own goalposts so you can cling on to your argument.
 
Last edited:

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yet he scored at or below 50 SR vs Ishant. That is not exactly getting "on top" right? And also considering how flat the pitches were as well.
Again, you're just making my argument for me. Athers scored just about all of his big runs against the WI on roads too, why is he not 'owned' and Ponting is?

That's my point. I have my personal views on what owned is but you're applying yours inconsistently. Either that or you're giving Athers a pass because it's his birthday. It's infuriating.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
14.3 and thats an immaculate length from Sharma to hand Ponting another poor score! There was movement and bounce after the ball landed in a good channel, sucking Ponting forward then back as he hangs the bat out and a regulation outside-edge is snapped up by Dravid at third slip! Australia are in trouble! That was Dravid's 164th catch in Tests ... 43/4

33.1 and he gets his man! Edged and gone, as Sharma gets Ponting to push forward and edge a simple catch to into Dravid's lap at first slip and boy, is he excited! 117/3

22.2 got him! sharp catch at short midwicket. Ponting walks into the trap. Angled in to the pads, on a little fuller than good length, instinctive shot towards midwicket, but Laxman is sharp there, catches it low in front of him. he nods to Ponting, acknowledging it was a clean catch, and off he goes 49/2

7.5 this time it looked plumb! Ishant pitches it just a fraction short of a good length outside off and gets it to nip back in sharply, Ponting is caught at the crease and is beaten for pace, that was hitting the top of the stumps, Koertzen gives him the slow death 17/2

10.2 Ishant hits the timber, superb delivery, pitches around the off stump and comes back in off the pitch, Ponting commits early to the forward prod but somehow the ball sneaks through the daylight between bat and pad and knocks the off stump back, Ishant now gets Ponting for the fifth time in as many matches 52/4

Every single time it was the same type of delivery. Pitching on a good length outside off and darting in.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
Again, you're just making my argument for me. Athers scored just about all of his big runs against the WI on roads too, why is he not 'owned' and Ponting is?

That's my point. I have my personal views on what owned is but you're applying yours inconsistently. Either that or you're giving Athers a pass because it's his birthday. It's infuriating.
I didn't say Atherton was never owned. Don't put words into my mouth. He indeed was owned in 1991 and 1997 series. I just said it is cruel to call him "was always owned" when he did have a good series in 1993-94 season.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
I couldn't get videos of all Ishant-Ponting dismissals and hence had to resort to cricinfo commentary extracts. Please fetch me videos/commentary where some bowler got Tendulkar 5 times in 8 months with almost exactly the same delivery.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
He actually scored them above 50 against Ishant. And no one is saying Ponting dominated Ishant. We're saying he scored enough runs against Ishant to say he wasn't dominated.



That's because you don't face a bowler - especially a fast bowler - enough to take so many runs off of him in one single innings.

In the match against Ishan where Ponting made 140 runs, he scored 26 runs off 44 balls faced just off Ishant. That's an SR of almost 60. He can't help it if Ishant can't or isn't being bowled more often.

And since when did SR become the definition of domination? I take 200 runs scored @ 40 over 50 @ 70. You're creating your own goalposts so you can cling on to your argument.
Yeah if you think getting Ponting with scoring (against you) twice in a single match is not dominating, then I'd like to what is dominating in your dictionary.

It is not as if Ponting was making big matchwinning double hundreds ala Lara vs McGrath. His failures were huge, and his small amounts of success were sparse and not really enough.
 

Migara

International Coach
You said that Sharma dominated Ponting. He clearly didn't. Pretty even battle, really. Nowhere near domination.

The per innings stat is useless.
Bollocks. Ishant always had the upper hand over Ponting. You may not like to call it owning or pwnage, and lets keep that judgement open. But how you define owning when it comes to other bowlers will show whether you are speaking crap.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah if you think getting Ponting with scoring (against you) twice in a single match is not dominating, then I'd like to what is dominating in your dictionary.

It is not as if Ponting was making big matchwinning double hundreds ala Lara vs McGrath. His failures were huge, and his small amounts of success were sparse and not really enough.
So if you get Ponting out twice in a match for **** all you dominate him? Fine.

But don't propogate the myth that Lara blasted match winning doubles against McGrath for toffee. McGrath got Lara out cheaply a **** load more times than Sharma did Ponting. But apparently Sharma "owns" Ponting but good ol' Brian, well he was all over McGrath. **** me dead.

Lara was a great player - had highs higher than anyone I reckon, but he also had periods of utter ****e, and still others of utter ****e where he frankly seemed not to give a ****.
 

Cevno

Hall of Fame Member
He only played McGrath some 9 times. McGrath clearly shut out Tendulkar. Even when Tendulkar made runs (i.e. 2 100s) McGrath went for F-all runs.
So out of 18 innings ,he got him 6 times.(33.33%)

That is hardly owning him.
And this coming from the same guy who says Ishant getting ponting out 5 out of 13 times(40 % nearly) is not owning him.8-)
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
So if you get Ponting out twice in a match for **** all you dominate him? Fine.

But don't propogate the myth that Lara blasted match winning doubles against McGrath for toffee. McGrath got Lara out cheaply a **** load more times than Sharma did Ponting. But apparently Sharma "owns" Ponting but good ol' Brian, well he was all over McGrath. **** me dead.

Lara was a great player - had highs higher than anyone I reckon, but he also had periods of utter ****e, and still others of utter ****e where he frankly seemed not to give a ****.
Well, tbf, from whatever I have seen of him (almost his whole career), he looks ****e when he didn't give a ****e (or when carrying injuries), but Godly otherwise...



And honestly, that would probably apply to almost all greats of the game.
 

Shri

Mr. Glass
So if you get Ponting out twice in a match for **** all you dominate him? Fine.

But don't propogate the myth that Lara blasted match winning doubles against McGrath for toffee. McGrath got Lara out cheaply a **** load more times than Sharma did Ponting. But apparently Sharma "owns" Ponting but good ol' Brian, well he was all over McGrath. **** me dead.

Lara was a great player - had highs higher than anyone I reckon, but he also had periods of utter ****e, and still others of utter ****e where he frankly seemed not to give a ****.
Quality rant. 7.5/10
 

Top