Kallis vs Ponting as test batsmen

[vcs]

Not in public taking away the attention from the winner, ala Fed

What absolute nonsense. So Murray was also taking away the attention from Federer in the Australian Open 2010? Give me a break. Shock horror, a human being getting overcome by emotion.

 

[NasserFan207]

Tbf Murray would have more reason to cry. Federer is basically the GOAT, he didn't really need the AO title. Kinda odd.

He is definitely self-obsessed etc, but thats required to be that successful. Nadal may seem humble but deep down you just know he's the same.

Either that or he's a machine.

 

[vcs]

The day Federer thinks he doesn't "really need a title", he might as well call it a day.

 

[The Sean]

How many are saying that?

Far too many people. Not many on this forum, thankfully, but I wasn't just referring to this forum with my statement.

 

[NasserFan207]

Well he doesn't. The only thing driving him is ego. Which I fully respect.

 

[Ruckus]

Actually a while ago I recall him saying he was aiming for 20 GS's before retirement. But I spose aiming for a record in tennis is as good as satisfying your 'ego'. Don't see a problem with that though because it's obviously not a team game - you are only playing for yourself.

 

[Prince EWS]

Stop talking about tennis in here FFS.

 

[Uppercut]

I think all of these batsmen; Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Waugh, Kallis, Dravid etc. etc. are in roughly the same league. Even though Tendulkar is the clear favourite amongst fans, I really don't think he is significantly better than any of the others. In modern cricket there is yet to be a batsmen who really stands out from the crowd imo - one everyone automatically says "yep, he is better than all of the rest". Do people see Tendulkar as a Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Roger Federer etc.?

Totally agree. If they score a similar amount of runs at a similar average over a long period of time, they're of similar quality.

It's the ODIs. Here we talk exclusively about tests and most agree they're all extremely close, but if you gave a decent weighting to ODIs Tendulkar would come out on top.

 

[Uppercut]

Fine (and I agree FWIW) but I don't know a single current international captain who would - and I was asked why S/R matters - this is why.


You have an outsized effect compared to your stats. Even though everyone logically knows it's unlikely, it looms in your head and makes you do things you wouldn't do if Dravid (an overall better player) was opening. You don't want to have to start to take off your fast bowler after three overs. You don't want to have to start taking slips out when the score is 50 off 5. Many times, even if he gets out, the damage is already done in terms of body language, and it lasts the whole innings.

I see times where Sehwag comes and scores at 6 runs an over and the fielders are pushed back and the bowlers are taken off. A new batsman comes in and is scoring at 2 rpo but the body language is still crap and the field is nowhere near as aggressive it would have been had it been the same score with a different batsman.

Don't really agree, or at least, I think the effect is seriously overstated.

Anyway, with regards to Kallis vs. Ponting, I'd say their respective strike rates are more reflections on where they've played their cricket than anything else. A theoretical batsman might be able to average 57 in South Africa while driving as freely outside off stump as Ponting does but it's far from the optimal strategy to deal with conditions there. Likewise, if Ponting played like Kallis does in Australia he'd have missed out on a lot of scoring opportunities and with the pace in the pitches, probably nicked out a fair bit playing a defensive stroke. And running out of time is a genuine concern. In South Africa it just isn't something you can afford to worry about.

Which brings me back to the point that averaging 57 in South Africa is a hell of a lot more difficult than doing so in Australia, surely by more than enough to make up for the strike rate discrepancy..

 

[centurymaker]

Totally agree. If they score a similar amount of runs at a similar average over a long period of time, they're of similar quality.

It's the ODIs. Here we talk exclusively about tests and most agree they're all extremely close, but if you gave a decent weighting to ODIs Tendulkar would come out on top.

I personally give a 25% weighting to ODIs and 75% to tests.

 

[Jono]

What absolute nonsense. So Murray was also taking away the attention from Federer in the Australian Open 2010? Give me a break. Shock horror, a human being getting overcome by emotion.

You mean the cool, calm and collected Federer that never lets his emotions get the better of him, which makes him better than everyone else (quoted from every tennis expert in the world)?

Nah.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'll be deleting tennis posts in here from now on; go use the tennis thread.

 

[Jono]

Ponting is a subject of this thread, so this post should be fine.

 

[Jono]

Look at Smith not declaring right now. Fear of a quickfire Sehwag innings.

It changes games, within ten overs, the field is pushed back, the bowlers start bowling tripe, fielders are defensive and every other batsman in the lineup benefits. You just have to watch Sehwag's effect on the rest of the lineup again, over the past few years.

A long innings will eventually demoralize bowlers, but it'll be a while and they can attack for a long time. What we see with really dominating innings is that even at the other end, bowlers start bowling tripe as they're off their rhythm, the fields all messed up, and the game seems to be taken away....

As I said, if I had two batsmen of similar averages I would pick the faster S/R 10/10 times. If the difference in S/R is 20+, let alone 30-40+, I'd probably pick the faster S/R even if the averages are 5-7 points lower.

Allan Donald saying exactly this right now.

Saying that an extra hour or so at India yesterday (when they were demoralised and tired from the heat) would have made a huge difference to this match, but Smith was scared of Sehwag.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Didn't have to be an hour, even five or so overs, take the initiative/front foot.

 

[Jono]

Most definitely.

But it wasn't just the timing of the declaration, but the fact Morkel was blocking balls with a 320 run lead which was perplexing.

 

[benchmark00]

Devo the l00ch was deleted.

 

[Ruckus]

I'll be deleting tennis posts in here from now on; go use the tennis thread.

Such a killjoy

 

[Jono]

Devo the l00ch was deleted.

Needed a photo with the Looch with a cricket bat

 

[honestbharani]

Yup. And that's why Gilly would open along with SRT in my all time XI.

Sehwah right now is having an effect purely on reputation - Imran Khan was talking about how Viv had the same effect on the fielding team...the fact that he could completely dominate you changed the gameplan for the opposition - even if he actually ended up having no effect. Chappelli was talking about it the other day about the importance of strike rates. Sometimes he makes me cringe, but on this he was spot on.

So while I respect Kallis and Dravids as greats who would make the all time sides of their countries, I would not have either in the absolute top echelon of batsmen (e.g top ten) which are candidates for an all time XI.

Dominance ends careers, it takes demoralizes bowlers, changes game plans, and completely puts the other team under pressure within five-ten overs. Ponting could and did do that. SRT and Lara did. Gilchrist and Sehwag certainly did. Kallis and Dravid - rarely so.

And I've changed my mind on this fairly recently - after seeing with my own eyes the effect that Sehwag has had on the other team. Even when out of form, even before the game, and certainly when he started to go off and opposition captain has a 'SOMEONE HELP ME' face about eight overs into a Test match in the first morning.

What the older guys have been saying about Viv has started making a lot more sense .

lol... And just the fact that to dominate the way these guys did at times requires much more skill than just hanging around. Put it this way, it is relatively easier to defend a good ball than to attack it.