***Official*** Tendulkar vs Ponting Thread

[DingDong]

what a rubbish thread. obviously
1. tendulakr/lara
2. ponting
3. dravid/kallis etc

 

[Ikki]

Tendulkar opening: 319 innings, 14,482 runs @ 48.92, SR 88.19
Ponting at 3: 312 innings, 12,166 runs @ 43.14, SR 81.04

I'd say statistically, using their best positions, the difference between them is pretty significant.

True but Tendulkar has played elsewhere were he wasn't good. How do you account for that?

Also, would that fly if I used the bees positions in Tests? IIRC Ponting averages 4 runs more in their best positions, without b/z. Also, does the above include every team?

What if the visitors are simply the better team? The difference is substantial when Tendulkar plays the likes of Mcgrath and Fleming in India while Ponting plays Agarkar and Irfan Pathan also in India. There are simply too many variables to just assume that the home team bowlers are better. The only quantifiable difference is that one is a home pitch and the other is an away-from-home pitch. Neutral and away venues should count the same.

That doesn't really make much sense. By that token; Aus were batting at home practically all the time since they had a better team than everyone.

The point of difference is that invariably home teams are suited to their conditions. Whether the visitors are better than them is irrelevant. On neutral grounds; that is more of a lottery.

By "destruction" I mean a Gilchrist/Jayasuriya type knock. Let's define it as a knock of SR > 100. Tendulkar is much more likely to dominate the bowlers and thus destroy them than Ponting

Athlai makes this point pretty well.

I'll give you this stat; when both players score 100 or more they both score at the same SR.

 

[Ikki]

dude.... the battle got over a few months back... ponting's place is confirmed for posteriety with all time greats like miandad, border, compton, weekes, g.chappell and gavaskar.

sachin is sitting in the next table with v.richards, lara, sobers, hutton, headley, hobbs and hammond.

With all due respect; that is the kind of rubbish that starts these threads.

there should not be any excuses. winning a WC is very important. but, since it is a team effort thing one cant judge how good a player is by simply counting WC wins. if that were the case moody > imran and kapil and akram.

You've missed the point. No one is comparing players with completely different records and rating one better than the other purely because of the WC. We're comparing players that are close for rational debate where one has a better WC record. As much as it's a team effort; it should be acknowledged that India have had a good enough team this decade to win it but the failure rests on the shoulders of her players.

giving excuses like "warne had to bowl with a cake of soap" in '96 final is silly. one has to perform well in all circumstances. if every element is perfect then i would be a great cricketer too. cant keep spinning excuses for failures. warne screwed up on that day. like sachin did in '03 final. end of story

Well it depends who you're comparing. There are circumstances one may have where the other won't. In 96 the difference between the conditions in the 1st and 2nd inning were marked enough. Someone brought the point that Sachin's failure in 03 equates with Warne's in 96. Again, the ball had deteriorated markedly for Warne in that final. What like condition did Tendulkar face?

Both failed but the assertion was their failures were the same. What more it is irrelevant as Warne carried Aus through to the final again 4 years later and dominated it.

just like the aussies dont care about winning in india. they used to have a leg spinner who could bowl out other teams but get slaughtered by india. and a no.3 batsman whose ****y swagger would be reduced to ****ty shivers in india. may be they would rather beat teams who cant play leg spin or who didnt have an turbaned right arm off spinner.

The Aussies did care about winning in India, but comparing it to winning a WC is laughable. One is the pinnacle of your discipline; the other is just another test country. At that time, it was more valuable to go to SA or WI and win away. There is nothing more valuable than winning the WC in ODIs.

 

[ankitj]

Re: Athlai's post

Tendulkar has scored 50+ at an SR of 100+, a total of 53 times in total of 431 innings.
Ponting has done that 23 times in 343 innings.

Of course, that stat is irrelevant.

 

[bagapath]

With all due respect; that is the kind of rubbish that starts these threads. .

Are you suggesting tht this thread should not be there at all? If so, we certainly agree on that, Ikki. Ponting is a league below Sachin, so they shouldnt be compared.

Sachin did take India upto the final. So dont make it look like he was blinking like a rabbit in front of headlights, or like ponting in india, during WC. the final is just one game. it doesnt change careers. if so, collis king and srikkanth would be superstars.

The Aussies did care about winning in India, but comparing it to winning a WC is laughable. One is the pinnacle of your discipline; the other is just another test country. At that time, it was more valuable to go to SA or WI and win away. There is nothing more valuable than winning the WC in ODIs.

Was it not called the final frontier??? And didnt India stop Australia each time they had a 16 test unbeaten streak???? Is not India no.1 in the world now? Wouldn't Australia love to get that title back??? Doesnt it hurt an aussie fan to see that they have lost 0-2 twice to India in the last two outings??? Come on!

 

[honestbharani]

Are you suggesting tht this thread should not be there at all? If so, we certainly agree on that, Ikki. Ponting is a league below Sachin, so they shouldnt be compared.

Sachin did take India upto the final. So dont make it look like he was blinking like a rabbit in front of headlights, or like ponting in india, during WC. the final is just one game. it doesnt change careers. if so, collis king and srikkanth would be superstars.



Was it not called the final frontier??? And didnt India stop Australia each time they had a 16 test unbeaten streak???? Is not India no.1 in the world now? Wouldn't Australia love to get that title back??? Doesnt it hurt an aussie fan to see that they have lost 0-2 twice to India in the last two outings??? Come on!

There is a reason I don't speak much about rating Aussie ODI players of the recent years. It all boils down to one stupid point: "World Cup".. I seriously wonder if certain guys would react as if ODIs apart of WCs do not matter had it not been for the fact that Aussies have been doing so well in them.. Perhaps in that case the tri series down under would suddenly become the only meaningful ODIs?

 

[Ikki]

Are you suggesting tht this thread should not be there at all? If so, we certainly agree on that, Ikki. Ponting is a league below Sachin, so they shouldnt be compared

I love how you're so defensive about it; just shows how good Ponting is that you're worried about the comparison.

Sachin did take India upto the final. So dont make it look like he was blinking like a rabbit in front of headlights, or like ponting in india, during WC. the final is just one game. it doesnt change careers. if so, collis king and srikkanth would be superstars.

He took them past giants Kenya and was trapped early by McGrath in the final. Came back 4 years later and utterly failed. If he fails once again; is it still the team's fault?

When you're comparing players with close records; surely the fact that one has won WCs matters. It's no Mickey mouse prize; it is the highest achievement in ODIs.

Was it not called the final frontier??? And didnt India stop Australia each time they had a 16 test unbeaten streak???? Is not India no.1 in the world now? Wouldn't Australia love to get that title back??? Doesnt it hurt an aussie fan to see that they have lost 0-2 twice to India in the last two outings??? Come on!

It was dubbed the final frontier because we hadn't won there despite winning everywhere else. More to the point; it wouldn't matter if we hadn't; we were still #1. It doesn't even matter right now if we win there because the #1 test ranking doesn't hinge on beating the #1 team in their home. If it did, India wouldn't be #1 right now. It hurts more to lose to England than India; and they're not near #1.

The WC however can only be won by winning the tournament. Sachin hasn't won one; and that's certainly not because his team wasn't good enough. In the final he got to he was a non-factor and his team was walloped. People talk about the finals argument as if it's an argument about sample. You're unlikely to ever get much of a sample. Many players won't get to one final; let alone more. That's why the pressure is so high and the accolade so important when winning one.

That's not to say Ponting is a better ODI bat than Tendulkar; but they're much closer than this imaginary gulf people have created for Tendulkar where he is incomparable to all bar Richards - who is probably ahead of Sachin as much as Sachin is ahead of Ponting.

 

[Ikki]

There is a reason I don't speak much about rating Aussie ODI players of the recent years. It all boils down to one stupid point: "World Cup".. I seriously wonder if certain guys would react as if ODIs apart of WCs do not matter had it not been for the fact that Aussies have been doing so well in them.. Perhaps in that case the tri series down under would suddenly become the only meaningful ODIs?

As far as I'm aware; in any sport which has a Global format; that tourney is the pinnacle of that sport - particularly if is held every 4 years. Yet holding that standard is an injustice in cricket. Cry me a river.

 

[honestbharani]

As far as I'm aware; in any sport which has a Global format; that tourney is the pinnacle of that sport - particularly if is held every 4 years. Yet holding that standard is an injustice in cricket. Cry me a river.

So ODI cricket should only be played once in 4 years???????

 

[Ikki]

So ODI cricket should only be played once in 4 years???????

Ideally yes - more Tests the better

Come on; you know full well what I am saying. The WCs are the most important events by far in ODIs. Come 2011 Tendulkar will have played in 6 of them. Are you telling me when his career ends; comparing him with Richards for example you are going to hold that the only reason he didn't win one was because his team wasn't good enough? If he fails in 2011; you're going to argue Sachin is the best ODI bat of all time despite 6 tries to win the WC?

 

[ankitj]

Come on; you know full well what I am saying. The WCs are the most important events by far in ODIs. Come 2011 Tendulkar will have played in 6 of them. Are you telling me when his career ends; comparing him with Richards for example you are going to hold that the only reason he didn't win one was because his team wasn't good enough?

Yes. Just as the only reason Ponting won 3 is that his team was ridiculously good. Ditto for Bevan, McGrath, Warne, Waugh, Hayden etc. They collectively deserve the credit but none of them individually.

Or otherwise, blame Ponting for never winning a test in India as captain, if you have any consistency.

EDIT: And also blame Ponting for losing two ashes in England as captain.

 

[Ikki]

But they weren't that good. We didnt just breeze through. In 96, 99 and 2003 we got through by the skin of our teeth. Mainly due to amazing performances by the aforementioned players.

And Ponting has had a poor record in India; who claimed otherwise? He'll never be the greatest captain of all time for many other things also.

 

[Shri]

But they weren't that good. We didnt just breeze through. In 96, 99 and 2003 we got through by the skin of our teeth. Mainly due to amazing performances by the aforementioned players.

And Ponting has had a poor record in India; who claimed otherwise? He'll never be the greatest captain of all time for many other things also.

You actually did not get through in '96.

 

[Ikki]

You actually did not get through in '96.

LOL I wasn't talking about the finals obviously as we romped all 3 that we won. I was referring to the build-up. In 96 we got through in a thrilling match where Warne saved our ass taking 4/36.

 

[ankitj]

But they weren't that good. We didnt just breeze through. In 96, 99 and 2003 we got through by the skin of our teeth. Mainly due to amazing performances by the aforementioned players.

And Ponting has had a poor record in India; who claimed otherwise? He'll never be the greatest captain of all time for many other things also.

Don't see how you can give credit to some 6-7 of them individually for the world cup (by saying something like Bevan has two world cups), when you say they all of contributed?

 

[Shri]

LOL I wasn't talking about the finals obviously as we romped all 3 that we won. I was referring to the build-up. In 96 we got through in a thrilling match where Warne saved our ass taking 4/36.

I knew.

 

[bagapath]

I love how you're so defensive about it; just shows how good Ponting is that you're worried about the comparison.

bad argument. i would be equally worried if you compared sachin with marcus north.

 

[weldone]

This thread has run its course. Let's open a Dravid versus Ponting thread now.

 

[bagapath]

This thread has run its course. Let's open a Dravid versus Ponting thread now.

been saying that for weeks dude. tendulkar vs ponting sounds as dated as tendulkar vs inzamam. come on, people! ponting vs dravid sounds okay to me. ponting slightly, marginally better than dravid.... probably.

 

[Ikki]

bad argument. i would be equally worried if you compared sachin with marcus north.

Not yet; Tendulkar's not good enough for that "league". Tendulkar vs Atherton?