Ponting vs. Steve Waugh, Who Was the Better Batsman?

[Avada Kedavra]

As opposed to 55ish for nigh on 150?

You can't use two players up against the same bowlers as a defining characteristic when one of the two players is in his absolute pomp and the other is a whelp on his way up. That would be like me saying Steve Waugh can't be better than Border because when they each played against good bowlers together Waugh was crap (and he was much worse in his young days than Ponting was in his), and Border was at his best as a player.

As opposed to 55ish for nigh on 150?

You can't use two players up against the same bowlers as a defining characteristic when one of the two players is in his absolute pomp and the other is a whelp on his way up. That would be like me saying Steve Waugh can't be better than Border because when they each played against good bowlers together Waugh was crap (and he was much worse in his young days than Ponting was in his), and Border was at his best as a player.

Ok Waugh in his prime was a rock against bowlers like Ambrose,Walsh and Waqar.Does any innings of Ponting's come close to Waugh's 200 and 199.Maybe only that old trafford ton in Ashes 05 comes close.What I hold is against Ponting is that - and let me mention that he is an all time great - whenever the team really needed him he failed to step up - India 2001, Ashes 2005,SA 2008.His stats after Mc/W retirements are revealing : 2560 runs @ 44.13...not bad but not great either.

For that matter Border>Waugh

 

[Spark]

Ok Waugh in his prime was a rock against bowlers like Ambrose,Walsh and Waqar.Does any innings of Ponting's come close to Waugh's 200 and 199.Maybe only that old trafford ton in Ashes 05 comes close.What I hold is against Ponting is that - and let me mention that he is an all time great - whenever the team really needed him he failed to step up - India 2001, Ashes 2005,SA 2008.

I hate this line of argument because it almost without fail ignores all the other times when the team "really needed him" but because Ponting played so well it vanishes from people's memory.

His stats after Mc/W retirements are revealing : 2560 runs @ 44.13...not bad but not great either.

Correlation does not imply causation. My guess that that's just because he's getting older.

 

[Ikki]

Ok Waugh in his prime was a rock against bowlers like Ambrose,Walsh and Waqar.Does any innings of Ponting's come close to Waugh's 200 and 199.Maybe only that old trafford ton in Ashes 05 comes close.What I hold is against Ponting is that - and let me mention that he is an all time great - whenever the team really needed him he failed to step up - India 2001, Ashes 2005,SA 2008.His stats after Mc/W retirements are revealing : 2560 runs @ 44.13...not bad but not great either.

For that matter Border>Waugh

In the same match Waugh scored 199 against Walsh and Ambrose, Ponting scored 104. He also scored 88 in his first ever innings against them. He also scored 105 against a very strong S.African attack, which included Pollock and Donald. He scored 197 against an attack of Wasim Akram, Akhtar and Saqlain in 99. In the neutral tests away from home, he scored 141 against a similar attack, but this time Waqar instead of Wasim. He got the only century in a very low scoring match. We don't even need to touch on his triumph's against Murali.

Ponting against top quality bowlers is not a question. He's done it, and did it at a very young age - still on his way up. Did he face them as much as Waugh? No. Slippyslip makes a good point: you gotta stop pretending they played in completely different eras. They had different peaks, of course, but there is plenty to compare them with.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Ponting's ability is not in doubt.The 197 and century against SA were very good,his tons against a well past his peak Waqar were not that great though.I understand the point about Waugh being at his peak and Ponting only just starting-lets compare Ponting against the best bowlers when he was at his peak to Waugh's record against the best bowlers at his peak.Who were the good/great bowlers when Ponting was at his peak?He failed against both Harbhajan and Murali-he did well against Murali in the late 90s but only Ponting's peak is being considered here-he has not been too flash against Steyn either.Which other good/great non-Aussie bowler has Ponting faced at his peak?Waugh in many ways deserves more credit because the all conquering Australian side owes a lot to Waugh.He played in a comparatively weak side whereas Ponting enjoyed the benefits of a full strength team.His average has fallen away by 10 points since Mc/W retirements.....

 

[Ikki]

Ponting averages 50 against Murali. Harbhajan is hardly fit to be called one of the best bowlers. A good bowler, a very good spinner, and had the wood on Ponting in India...but certainly not one of the best bowlers. Ponting also averages 41.25 against Steyn - and that in the trough of his career. As for captaincy, I wouldn't credit Waugh all that much more than Ponting. Waugh also inherited a great side, one that was already #1. In fact, Ponting has captained Australia where Waugh hasn't; when our greats left and the team was no longer #1.

Your point regarding McWarne was already addressed. Ponting is in the trough of his career, not necessarily because those two retired. In the same time Martyn, Langer, Gilchrist and Hayden retired. I think they have much to do with it too, eh?

On the whole, you may give a generous evaluation to Waugh based on his exploits in periods where the bowlers were a bit better - it's well-deserved praise - but I don't think you can stretch it out to cover all the other bases where Ponting is probably superior.

 

[slippyslip]

You make it sound as if Waugh's success as a batsman had something to do with him Batting with Ponting. Just so you know, before Ponting made his debut Waugh, 3 year in a row ,averaged 60+ .

Well, you're reading something into my post that wasn't stated.

The point of my post was to counter the sheer idiocy of people talking as if Ponting and Waugh played in eras as seperate as Bradman and Tendulkar. They player during the same era.

 

[slippyslip]

Why would you remove SRW's performance against England though, what purpose does it serve ?

Between Ponting's Debut and Waugh's retirement both batsmen faced the same English attack and Waugh was miles better than Ponting.

Because people like you keep making the claim "Waugh faced better bowlers therefore he is better". But as I pointed out, yes Wuagh did face better bowlers pre Ponting's debut but he never had great success against them. Waugh never had great success against the great West Indian attacks of the 80's and early 90's and during the era when bowling, according to some "experts" here on CW, was 238674525865764286591659165916745165912356198 times better than what is it now, Waugh never had great success.

His first truly great series was the 1989 Ashes. Are you going to say that were great bowling by England during that series (Botham was a pale shadow of himself). Waugh did score some nice 90's during the 88/89 West Indian tour scoring 331 runs@41. He even took 5/92 in an innings during the series.

I remember Waugh made a lot of runs in the first part of 88/89 home season against Sri Lanka. Of course this is pre Murali and Vaas days when Sri Lankan bowling was weak. But in the 3 test series against Pakistan Waugh scored 44 runs in 4 innings for an average of 11 in a Pakistan attack that featured Wasim Akram at his best.

Lets not forget that Waugh was dropped during the 91/92 Ashes for his brother.

During the 92/93 Waugh did score a hard fought 100 against the West Indies at the SCG(I was at the ground and I remember it) but he did nothing else that series and averaged 25.

He did have a solid, but nothing spectacular away series against New Zealand in 1993.

Then he had another great series in England in 1993 and this was the birth of the new Steve Waugh and he never looked back. But this is just two and a half years before Ponting's debut.

Look, your argument that Waugh is better because he faced better bowlers pre-Ponting would hold some weight if he actually had any great success against them.. Most of Waugh great success against good bowlers did not occur until the mid 90's, which was the era Ponting started.

 

[Top_Cat]

The stuff averages don't tell you too is that, although Waugh did play very well, the WI attack in '95 really only had one bowler. Ambi only arced up on the one green deck in the series (greenest I've seen, I reckon) and the support staff, Winston/Kenny Benjamin and Carl Hooper, were pretty innocuous. Walsh was brilliant, though; worth almost two bowlers that series.

This is the problem with looking back at averages and making decisions about a player's performance, they don't take into account form. Steve Waugh, in a sense, was a bit fortunate to be hitting them fairly well right when the WI attack was pretty much threadbare. Ponting, before the 2001 Indian series, was hitting them relatively well. He just ran into Harbhajan in form he has never gotten within spitting distance of since. Few bowlers in Test history have had a series like that, really.

Not that I'm suggesting Waugh was prone to cashing in when the going was good, too many top performances in nasty situations so his rep is pretty conclusive there. But context is important.

 

[Teja.]

The stuff averages don't tell you too is that, although Waugh did play very well, the WI attack in '95 really only had one bowler. Ambi only arced up on the one green deck in the series (greenest I've seen, I reckon) and the support staff, Winston/Kenny Benjamin and Carl Hooper, were pretty innocuous. Walsh was brilliant, though; worth almost two bowlers that series.

This is the problem with looking back at averages and making decisions about a player's performance, they don't take into account form. Steve Waugh, in a sense, was a bit fortunate to be hitting them fairly well right when the WI attack was pretty much threadbare. Ponting, before the 2001 Indian series, was hitting them relatively well. He just ran into Harbhajan in form he has never gotten within spitting distance of since. Few bowlers in Test history have had a series like that, really.

Not that I'm suggesting Waugh was prone to cashing in when the going was good, too many top performances in nasty situations so his rep is pretty conclusive there. But context is important.

Indeed, he has four performances in the Widen 100 top test bowling performances from that series, which is more than any other bowler has throughout their career.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Ponting did not average 50 against Murali when Ponting was at his peak, his average of 41 against Steyn flatters him;inflated because of 101 ad 99 in 1 match-I wouldn't go on averages alone anyway,if that is how you look at it,then fine.Harbhajan is not a great bowler, but Harbhajan in India was one of the good attacks that Ponting had to battle against when he was at his peak.My point about Ponting's record is that as soon as he got a relatively weak team,there was a 10 point drop in averages.Ponting enjoyed the benefits of Australia being number 1 much more than Waugh did. Waugh only had about 4 years when the team was undisputably number 1 whereas for the majority of Ponting's career till late 2007,Australia were number 1.It is harder to play in a weak side and it shows.With the kind of form Ponting is in right now,his career average will drop further and maybe end up around 52ish.He has been in mediocre form for quite a while now with only 1 good series against the 7th ranked team..that too because of 1 dropped catch on 0.

 

[Athlai]

Don't think it has anything to do with the team being weaker, just think Ponting is a bit older and not as good as he once was.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Waugh, because he played in the 90s more.

Duh.

 

[Ikki]

Ponting did not average 50 against Murali when Ponting was at his peak, his average of 41 against Steyn flatters him;inflated because of 101 ad 99 in 1 match-I wouldn't go on averages alone anyway,if that is how you look at it,then fine.Harbhajan is not a great bowler, but Harbhajan in India was one of the good attacks that Ponting had to battle against when he was at his peak.My point about Ponting's record is that as soon as he got a relatively weak team,there was a 10 point drop in averages.Ponting enjoyed the benefits of Australia being number 1 much more than Waugh did. Waugh only had about 4 years when the team was undisputably number 1 whereas for the majority of Ponting's career till late 2007,Australia were number 1.It is harder to play in a weak side and it shows.With the kind of form Ponting is in right now,his career average will drop further and maybe end up around 52ish.He has been in mediocre form for quite a while now with only 1 good series against the 7th ranked team..that too because of 1 dropped catch on 0.

So unless you're at your peak your performances against great bowlers don't count? It seems you're doing whatever you can to denigrate Ponting.

And how can two innings of 101 and 99 be misleading when he's only played 2 3-test series against Steyn? He's scored 1 100, and 4 50s against him in 12 innings. He also had 3 0s, why aren't those the misleading figures? Calm down with the generalisations.

Anyway, Ponting has had less time with his team at #1 than Waugh. When Waugh took over from Taylor they were #1 and stayed that way for his entire tenure. While it may be only 5 years...guess what, that was his whole tenure as captain. Ponting has been captain longer than Waugh has. I'd say until around 2008/09 he had the #1 ranked team as well which means he had similar time on top as Waugh. Although, having said that we were #1 in name only, once all the greats retired we were a shadow of our former selves. Now Ponting is going through a time Waugh never had to as captain.

Anyway, the inference you draw simply due to the correlation of the careers of certain players is unreliable. You can also say that for Waugh. Until Australia's attack got stronger (Warne et al arrived) Waugh was very average. IMO, the reality is, Ponting had been going so strong for so long he was bound to hit a trough. He was at one point averaging 59.99 (overall career). The fact that there was a big loss in players will surely put more pressure on him in terms of captaining the side and concentrating on rebuilding a new team. Add to that, he's hardly a spring chicken.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Ponting's runs against Murali when he was not at his peak is not taken into account because I was told that it would be unfair to compare Waugh's record against great bowlers in his pomp to Ponting's because Ponting was only starting out.Ponting's numbers after the retirements of his illustrious mates can be interpreted in many different ways.My view is that it is much harder to play in a not so strong side than it is to play for a champion side.He no longer has the cushion of Hayden and Langer's great starts nor does he have to deal with low scores from the opposition as a result of M/W not playing, and it clearly affects his numbers.

 

[Ikki]

Ponting's runs against Murali when he was not at his peak is not taken into account because I was told that it would be unfair to compare Waugh's record against great bowlers in his pomp to Ponting's because Ponting was only starting out.Ponting's numbers after the retirements of his illustrious mates can be interpreted in many different ways.My view is that it is much harder to play in a not so strong side than it is to play for a champion side.He no longer has the cushion of Hayden and Langer's great starts nor does he have to deal with low scores from the opposition as a result of M/W not playing, and it clearly affects his numbers.

That only works one way, not both. If Ponting is debuting/not at his peak and scoring 100s, that's to his credit. It's not something you expect. Whereas you do expect players to start off a level below or to do better when they're at their peak. And even at a level below he was pretty awesome. Murali himself thinks Ponting is one of the best players of spin in the world.

Again, if we take your argument seriously, until Waugh had a good bowling attack he himself was also an average batsman. No doubt good teammates can help you perform better; but your black and white look at when they were and when they weren't there, and Ponting's average in these periods, is a stretch to say the least. Ponting scored runs even when Hayden and Langer didn't give him cushy starts, stop with the generalisations.

I hate to go this way, but you and a number of new members simply take the discussion into incredible diversions. It was not too long ago that in a Lara/Tendulkar/Ponting thread that you were saying that Ponting was equal or the best among them, now he is inferior to Waugh? It's hard to take you seriously.

Anyway overall the best batsmen I have seen would be

1. Ponting / Tendulkar (can't split them)
3. Lara
4. Steven Waugh
5. Kallis

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Ponting did not average 50 against Murali when Ponting was at his peak, his average of 41 against Steyn flatters him;inflated because of 101 ad 99 in 1 match-I wouldn't go on averages alone anyway,if that is how you look at it,then fine.Harbhajan is not a great bowler, but Harbhajan in India was one of the good attacks that Ponting had to battle against when he was at his peak.My point about Ponting's record is that as soon as he got a relatively weak team,there was a 10 point drop in averages.Ponting enjoyed the benefits of Australia being number 1 much more than Waugh did. Waugh only had about 4 years when the team was undisputably number 1 whereas for the majority of Ponting's career till late 2007,Australia were number 1.It is harder to play in a weak side and it shows.With the kind of form Ponting is in right now,his career average will drop further and maybe end up around 52ish.He has been in mediocre form for quite a while now with only 1 good series against the 7th ranked team..that too because of 1 dropped catch on 0.

Inflated? His 101 and 99 were great innings under pressure, esp the 99 where he completely dominated when everyone around him was falling.

Just out of curiousity, did Steyn even get Ponting out during the Tests? I can only recall him getting Ponting out in one of the last ODI's. I think it goes against Steyn for the lack of times he was able to get Punter out. Ponting looked at ease and Steyn didn't look like getting him out.

Waugh may of faced better bowlers, but he was batting lower-middle order which meant that he wasn't facing the new ball or when the bowlers were fresh.

 

[Uppercut]

I think it goes against Steyn for the lack of times he was able to get Punter out. Ponting looked at ease and Steyn didn't look like getting him out.

IMO he looked like getting him out when he hit the ball straight into Neil McKenzie's hands at the MCG and straight into Graeme Smith's hands at the Wanderers. That would make three dismissals in six tests, puts a completely different spin on Ponting's "dominance" of Steyn. Particularly considering that in three of his nine other innings he didn't even face Steyn because he'd already gone for 0 to someone else.

 

[Spark]

Inflated? His 101 and 99 were great innings under pressure, esp the 99 where he completely dominated when everyone around him was falling.

Batting was never our problem that series, despite the walking-wicket status of Hussey and to a lesser extent Hayden (who actually was exceptionally unlucky that series). I only remember one real collapse (where Ponting got the 99) - our problem was bowlers who only showed up for part of one innings per match. Ponting being good - not outstanding, but good - has a lot to do with that.

Just out of curiousity, did Steyn even get Ponting out during the Tests? I can only recall him getting Ponting out in one of the last ODI's. I think it goes against Steyn for the lack of times he was able to get Punter out. Ponting looked at ease and Steyn didn't look like getting him out.

Not in tests in Aus. Ponting did like to drive Steyn, he doesn't get the vicious bounce of Morkel who he did have some issues with.

Waugh may of faced better bowlers, but he was batting lower-middle order which meant that he wasn't facing the new ball or when the bowlers were fresh.

Not sure this makes much difference tbh.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

My opinion on Waugh vs Ponting has indeed changed.There are arguments for both but the pro Waugh arguments hold more water IMO.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Waugh may of faced better bowlers, but he was batting lower-middle order which meant that he wasn't facing the new ball or when the bowlers were fresh.

Ponting's 197 against Pak,100 against Donald and Pollock in Melbourne, century against Ambrose and Walsh were all scored when he batted in the lower-middle order.