Which cricketer has the most complete record?

[Ikki]

not as daft as calling someone complete when he averages 20 in a country. look elsewhere dude. you cant sell ponting in this thread.

Sure, someone averaging 38 overall against a team is much more complete. [/sarcasm]

well.. there is someone who averages above 35 even if you include minnows.. guess who?

Who?

Probably bound to find some middling batsman who averages nowhere near the elite but enough over 35 to qualify

 

[bagapath]

Probably bound to find some middling batsman who averages nowhere near the elite but enough over 35 to qualify

wrong answer. this guy averages among the elite. and also doesnt average below 40 anywhere against anyone except one nation. 36 at home against a nation is his worst. yes ikki. when you look for the complete batsman, you cant look beyond the sachin tendulkar. his name will come up every time ponting is mentioned the same way warne's name will come up every time mcgill's name is brought up. stuart and ricky will always be compared with shane and sachin and will live under their shadows forever. that is their curse.

 

[Ikki]

wrong answer. this guy averages among the elite. and also doesnt average below 40 anywhere against anyone except one nation. 36 at home agaist a nation is his worst. yes ikki. when you look for the complete batsman, you cant look beyond the sachin tendulkar. his name will come up every time ponting is mentioned the same way warne's name will come up every time mcgill's name is brought up. stuart and ricky will always be compared with shane and sachin and will live under their shadows forever. that is their curse.

He's good, but no Ponting. Or Greg Chappell either for that matter.

Chappell not only averages 46 and above overall against everyone, his lowest average (36.25) against NZ also makes bagapath's cut-off. All hail Chappell?

 

[bagapath]

how about adam gilchrist? he failed against india at home but performed superbly with the gloves to make his presence felt. has he been a success all around the globe? i remember him scoring hundreds against every test playing nation. combined with his keeping he should be among the most complete cricketers of all time.

 

[Ikki]

how about adam gilchrist? he failed against india at home but performed superbly with the gloves to make his presence felt. has he been a success all around the globe? i remember him scoring hundreds against every test playing nation. combined with his keeping he should be among the most complete cricketers of all time.

He averages 28 against India overall. Best batsmen I've looked at until now is probably Greg Chappell.

 

[bagapath]

He's good, but no Ponting. Or Greg Chappell either for that matter.

Chappell not only averages 46 and above overall against everyone, his lowest average (36.25) against NZ also makes bagapath's cut-off. All hail Chappell?

he comes very close. but unfortunately he didnt score any hundred against nz at home. sachin has scored 2 against SA at home. since everything else is similar between greg and sachin this factor would pull chappell one step below, i am afraid.

 

[Ikki]

he comes very close. but unfortunately he didnt score any hundred against nz at home. sachin has scored 2 against SA at home. since everything else is similar between greg and sachin this factor would pull chappell one step below, i am afraid.

You're shifting the goal posts now? Greg's lowest average against a team overall is 46 everything is not equal (Sachin's is 38). Every other team he averages 56+ (Sachin still has Pakistan at 42). Funny enough, his lowest figure 36.25 is exactly the same average as Sachin's. Best of both our arguments.

He is more complete than both Sachin and Ponting.

 

[bagapath]

You're shifting the goal posts now? Greg's lowest average against a team overall is 46 everything is not equal. Every other team he averages 56+. Funny enough, his lowest figure 36.25 is exactly the same average as Sachin's. Best of both our arguments.

He is more complete than both Sachin and Ponting.

you know very well I am not shifting goalposts. it remains the same. and two have made past it. now how do you split them when both average the same at home against their nemesis? one has managed to score two centuries. the other one didnt score any. if i were to judge chappell at home against NZ and sachin at home against SA, I am more likely to give it to sachin because he at least has these two centuries to show. if you can split this home stat with any other criteria, go ahead.

sachin has scored centuries at home and away against every big nation. greg's resume has a gap to fill. that makes tendulkar more "complete" (also, greg never played in india but cant hold it against him because i dont think he backed out of any tour during his time)

 

[Ikki]

Ok, enough. One played 10 tests, the other played 6. One failed home and away against SA, the other only at home to NZ, smashed them away. One has more low records, the other has none. Yet it comes down to whether one guy's 36.25 has centuries whereas the other guy's 36.25 doesn't?

You stick to Sachin, it's gotten beyond silly now.

 

[bagapath]

Ok, enough. One played 10 tests, the other played 6. One failed home and away against SA, the other only at home to NZ, smashed them away. One has more low records, the other has none. Yet it comes down to whether one guy's 36.25 has centuries whereas the other guy's 36.25 doesn't?

You stick to Sachin, it's gotten beyond silly now.

as long as you dont stick to ponting i am happy to give up

the fact is players like richards, miandad, greg chappell, gavaskar, sachin, lara, ponting and dravid have all had comparable records and they all are complete batsmen. picking ricky out of this list first up and proposing his name without doubt as the most complete batsman is ridiculous. and on top of it questioning mcgrath's superior overall record to paint ponting as his equal is completely unacceptable. it is not going to be easy for you or anyone to place ricky as the leader of this pack. there are more deserving players in there. that is all.

 

[Ikki]

as long as you dont stick to ponting i am happy to give up

No, I've always gone for Chappell, even over Ponting.

Chappell > Ponting > Tendulkar

 

[Streetwise]

Its only my opinion but I think that because Australia have had so much success over the last 15 years and so many good players that it is not that important to Australians where Ponting is ranked but as India have not had as much success it is more important for Indian supporters to insist that Tendulkar is better than everyone else. Afterall cricket is a team game and the only thing that matters is who is the best team and now that India are the number one team maybe the desire to promote Tendulkar above every batsmen will subside a small amount.

 

[Burgey]

It's not really fair to post that though, when the thread is about who the most complete cricketer is, as opposed to which has been the better team for 15 years, is it?

 

[Neil Pickup]

This thread really has nothing to do with Ponting and Tendulkar.

There is legitimate question of what the OP defines as a "complete" record, and that is one that is consistent, home and away, against allcomers. Ponting's record in India excludes him from this, and we don't now need another 30 posts debating this.

We have already handed out bans recently for posters who can't avoid having the last word after they've been asked to stop arguing about something. So I would like this to be a line under it, and a return to the actual topic at hand.

I'd like to hear a bit more about Alan Davidson - I've never seen the guy bowl, but the record is outstanding. What was it that made him so effective? Swing, seam position, control? How quick did he bowl, and how did he take his wickets? Are there any left handers bowling today that could compare to him, style wise?

 

[bagapath]

Its only my opinion but I think that because Australia have had so much success over the last 15 years and so many good players that it is not that important to Australians where Ponting is ranked but as India have not had as much success it is more important for Indian supporters to insist that Tendulkar is better than everyone else. Afterall cricket is a team game and the only thing that matters is who is the best team and now that India are the number one team maybe the desire to promote Tendulkar above every batsmen will subside a small amount.

not right dude. there is as much ponting promotion going on as sachin tom-toming. so your veiled gloating doesnt hold true.

 

[gwo]

McGrath's 31 (Striking @ 63.4) in Pakistan is not as **** as Ponting's 20odd against India.

McGrath toured Pakistan... twice?

First time was when he was just a young upstart... took 7 wickets in 2 matches @ 35 (SR 68.7)

By the time he was recognised as a excellent fast bowler... 12 wickets in 3 matches @ 28.66 (SR 60.4).

That is all. It's "intellectual dishonesty" if you try and try and tell me that McGrath failed in Pakistan.

 

[Neil Pickup]

not right dude. there is as much ponting promotion going on as sachin tom-toming. so your veiled gloating doesnt hold true.

I'm going to assume you started typing this before my last post appeared.

 

[Streetwise]

not right dude. there is as much ponting promotion going on as sachin tom-toming. so your veiled gloating doesnt hold true.

Its my opinion and you are entitled to disagree or disregard it as you please.

 

[bagapath]

I'd like to hear a bit more about Alan Davidson - I've never seen the guy bowl, but the record is outstanding. What was it that made him so effective? Swing, seam position, control? How quick did he bowl, and how did he take his wickets? Are there any left handers bowling today that could compare to him, style wise?

well... from what I have read he was only as fast as bedser/barnes/ or mcgrath in his last legs. but bobby simpson, when he selected the best postwar aussie xi (lawary/simpson/bradman/chappell/harvey/border/gilchrist/ davidson/ warne/ lillee/ thompson) had davo in the team for his accurate swing bowling and ability to bowl on and on until the skipper told him to stop. guess he was right because davidson's low average and low ER combined with a high SR show that he was a very disciplined work horse. from what i remember he had a very good record in the subcontinent as well. but for the large number of amazing cricketers australia has produced over the years, he would make it to every dream aussi xi.

 

[bagapath]

I'm going to assume you started typing this before my last post appeared.

yup. i hear you. loud and clear.