Jayasuriya v Ponting in odi as cricketers

[Ikki]

I can understand fielding being a remarkable enough factor to be considered when comparing someone like Munaf Patel to Ponting, considering the former is as **** on the field as the latter is brilliant. But fielding, that too the standard of individual fielding, is not that huge enough when comparing someone like Jayasurya with Ponting, to be any sort of clinching factor in a comparison as ODI cricketers. Jayasurya in his peak was safe and dropped few catches. He may not have scored as many run outs in spectacular fashion as Ponting, but unless we are talking about Ponting good enough to have effected 2-3 such brilliant dismissals in every match, the comparison holds no water imho to Jaya's superior skill with the ball.

Numbers sometimes do not say the entire story. Jaya's story is one of such. The raw impact he created with his willow was huge. Matches were almost singlehandedly won. Oppositions dismantled like anyone's business.

The problem is Jayasuriya didn't come close to 2-3 wickets a match. He doesn't even average 1 wicket a match. They don't keep run-outs affected in Statsguru from what I know, but I think Ponting would have an awesome figure - if not the best.

Jayasuriya's a pretty handy ODI bowler to have but it's often overstated how good he is with the ball. Unless you're regularly taking cheap/quick wickets then it's not a fantastic talking point IMO in ODIs. In 444 ODIs he has 8 4fers and 4 5fers. Sure, it is something that he has that Ponting doesn't, really, to any degree but Ponting is far ahead in terms of batting, captaincy and fielding.

Eknath Solkar
Yuvraj Singh (before he became a fat ****)
Mohammad Kaif (still continues to be agile, but is rubbish with the bat)
Dilshan (lightning quick, and pretty accurate as well)
Imran Nazir

maybe not "better" than Ponting, but can give any great fielder good competition.

Solkar is before my time but someone who has 7 ODIs shouldn't be in the discussion. Of those you name I'd consider Dilshan comparable and even he doesn't touch Ponting when he was at his peak. I think people underestimate just how hard it is to be that much better than even very good fielders. The amount of skill it takes is incredible, especially for it to be noticeable.

 

[Bun]

The problem is Jayasuriya didn't come close to 2-3 wickets a match. He doesn't even average 1 wicket a match. They don't keep run-outs affected in Statsguru from what I know, but I think Ponting would have an awesome figure - if not the best.

Jayasuriya's a pretty handy ODI bowler to have but it's often overstated how good he is with the ball. Unless you're regularly taking cheap/quick wickets then it's not a fantastic talking point IMO in ODIs. In 444 ODIs he has 8 4fers and 4 5fers. Sure, it is something that he has that Ponting doesn't, really, to any degree but Ponting is far ahead in terms of batting, captaincy and fielding.



Solkar is before my time but someone who has 7 ODIs shouldn't be in the discussion. Of those you name I'd consider Dilshan comparable and even he doesn't touch Ponting when he was at his peak. I think people underestimate just how hard it is to be that much better than even very good fielders. The amount of skill it takes is incredible, especially for it to be noticeable.

Ikki be my guest to prove Ponting has effected 250+ run outs in his career even after completely disregarding Jayasurya's fielding efforts.

 

[weldone]

It's quite surprising that this thread has run 6 pages and Ikki is yet to mention Ponting's performances in WC finals...or, am I missing something?

 

[Maximus0723]

It's quite surprising that this thread has run 6 pages and Ikki is yet to mention Ponting's performances in WC finals...or, am I missing something?

lol

 

[Ikki]

Ikki be my guest to prove Ponting has effected 250+ run outs in his career even after completely disregarding Jayasurya's fielding efforts.

He doesn't really have to TBH. Running someone out is like an extra - it doesn't come at the cost of runs/balls as bowling will do. Jayasuriya make take a wicket...but he'll - on average - concede 37 runs and take 7 overs to do it. Which is neither quick nor cheap. I am sure Sanath has affected matches much better than that with his bowling, and those innings are the talking points and not his aggregate total of wickets. That number is sure to be much less as well.

It's quite surprising that this thread has run 6 pages and Ikki is yet to mention Ponting's performances in WC finals...or, am I missing something?

It's well known by now already

Can't wait for the WC.

 

[weldone]

Can't wait for the WC.

Me too...

Some of my office colleagues were worrying today that India's prime obstacle in this WC will be Australia, especially after their recent performances against England...I assured them that Ponting didn't play in this series, and his presence will make a difference

 

[ankitj]

I can understand fielding being a remarkable enough factor to be considered when comparing someone like Munaf Patel to Ponting, considering the former is as **** on the field as the latter is brilliant. But fielding, that too the standard of individual fielding, is not that huge enough when comparing someone like Jayasurya with Ponting, to be any sort of clinching factor in a comparison as ODI cricketers.

+ 1

Neither does captainship in most cases. Only exceptions will be such great, great leaders as Imran Khan or Frank Worrell.

 

[vcs]

Hmm.. don't agree with that. A fifth-bowler taking a wicket can be considered as much a bonus as a fielder running out a batman who has an Inzamam-like judgement of a single.. obviously Ponting must have made more than his share of athletic, brilliant runouts but he would also taken advantage of many desperate situations when the batsmen were going for improbable singles.

EDIT : Was replying to Ikki's post there.

 

[Ikki]

Hmm.. don't agree with that. A fifth-bowler taking a wicket can be considered as much a bonus as a fielder running out a batman who has an Inzamam-like judgement of a single.. obviously Ponting must have made more than his share of athletic, brilliant runouts but he would also taken advantage of many desperate situations when the batsmen were going for improbable singles.

EDIT : Was replying to Ikki's post there.

I'll put it to you this way: would you rather a player who affects 2 run outs a match, or one that takes 2 expensive/slow wickets a match?

IMO it's a no-brainer that the former is more valuable. The fielder is not costing you runs or balls; he is almost invariably making a contribution that can't be replicated.

 

[Bun]

He doesn't really have to TBH. Running someone out is like an extra - it doesn't come at the cost of runs/balls as bowling will do. Jayasuriya make take a wicket...but he'll - on average - concede 37 runs and take 7 overs to do it. Which is neither quick nor cheap. I am sure Sanath has affected matches much better than that with his bowling, and those innings are the talking points and not his aggregate total of wickets. That number is sure to be much less as well.

Hahaha that's such a hilariously crude argument that I am wondering whether you really meant it seriously.

Unless it can be proven Ponting effected more dismissals than Jayasurya with the ball, either by bowling or by fielding, there isn't any strength in this argument. Also prove to me that how that stat of Jayasurya effecting a dismissal with the ball every 7 overs for 37 runs is inferior to what Ponting does.

 

[Ikki]

Hahaha that's such a hilariously crude argument that I am wondering whether you really meant it seriously.

Unless it can be proven Ponting effected more dismissals than Jayasurya with the ball, either by bowling or by fielding, there isn't any strength in this argument. Also prove to me that how that stat of Jayasurya effecting a dismissal with the ball every 7 overs for 37 runs is inferior to what Ponting does.

The proof is self-evident. For every wicket he concedes 37 runs and bowls 7 overs - his career ratios. Ponting doesn't cost anything to his side for his wickets-affected. Therefore expecting Ponting's run-outs to equal Jayasuriya's wickets is inane. The former is more valuable than the latter, and they are going to occur less naturally. In other words, even if Ponting had a lesser ratio, but still a high one, in affected wickets I'd consider that more valuable for his team.

And as I say that, I guess it depends which team you're talking about. If you're talking about a team that needs the overs bowled by someone like Sanath due to a lack of options then I guess that consideration differs.

 

[Bun]

The proof is self-evident. For every wicket he concedes 37 runs and bowls 7 overs - his career ratios. Ponting doesn't cost anything to his side for his wickets-affected. Therefore expecting Ponting's run-outs to equal Jayasuriya's wickets is inane. The former is more valuable than the latter, and they are going to occur less naturally. In other words, even if Ponting had a lesser ratio, but still a high one, in affected wickets I'd consider that more valuable for his team.

And as I say that, I guess it depends which team you're talking about. If you're talking about a team that needs the overs bowled by someone like Sanath due to a lack of options then I guess that consideration differs.

Haha you are still comparing apples to oranges. By your logic batsmen > bowlers because the former score runs and the latter only gives them away?

I'd rather now say Jonty Rhodes > McGrath

Also show me HOW Ponting effected more dismissals per match than Jayasurya. Or how Ponting effected more dismissals during the course of their career than Jayasurya.

 

[weldone]

Such a lame argument Ikki. Jayasuriya played such a crucial role as a fifth-bowler, that it's a given that SL would have needed to play an extra bowler (dropping a batsman and thereby reducing their batting prowess by quite a bit) if Jayasuriya couldn't bowl. Punter was a brilliant fielder, but what he did by effecting an odd runout here and there (and don't fool yourself and other CW members by pretending like Ponting ran batsmen out twice per match or so...no, he did once per three-four matches at best - the best fielders have that ratio) doesn't come even close to what Jayasuriya offered to his team as a potent bowling option...

However, I personally rate Ponting a slightly better ODI batsman than Jayasuriya (and not because he's awesome in WC finals, tbh), but that's a different story.

 

[Ikki]

I'm talking about oranges and oranges - wickets and wickets. If Sanath was cheaper and faster, I could get your point. But he's not...so pretending as if every one of his wickets will equate a run-out is disingenuous. As I mentioned, there'll only be a fraction of his total wickets going towards an effort that is truly a match-winning contribution. I could understand if you said Ponting had to match those efforts and have a similar ratio, that would be closer to making sense.

 

[Ikki]

Such a lame argument Ikki. Jayasuriya played such a crucial role as a fifth-bowler, that it's a given that SL would have needed to play an extra bowler (dropping a batsman and thereby reducing their batting prowess by quite a bit) if Jayasuriya couldn't bowl. Punter was a brilliant fielder, but what he did by effecting an odd runout here and there (and don't fool yourself and other CW members by pretending like Ponting ran batsmen out twice per match or so...no, he did once per three-four matches at best - the best fielders have that ratio) doesn't come even close to what Jayasuriya offered to his team as a potent bowling option...

However, I personally rate Ponting a slightly better ODI batsman than Jayasuriya (and not because he's awesome in WC finals, tbh), but that's a different story.

You're missing the point: obviously Ponting is going to affect less run-outs per match than Jayasuriya will take wickets per match. My point is that the large majority of Sanath's bowling is nothing more than being economical for, usually, even when he takes wickets, on average, he is expensive and slow. Therefore, someone saying "Ponting must have the same ratio of affecting wickets as Sanath has taking/bowling them for it to equate" is wrong - or rather is using false standards. If Ponting had the same ratio as Sanath's bowling he'd be far more valuable than Sanath; therefore that is not the ratio we should expect but something lesser.

 

[weldone]

As I mentioned, there'll only be a fraction of his total wickets going towards an effort that is truly a match-winning contribution.

Ah, so the summary of what you are trying to say is that the matchwinning contributions are the only things that count when we are assessing the value added by a player in a team? By that logic, Tendulkar has only scored 1000 test runs or so...

 

[Bun]

I'm talking about oranges and oranges - wickets and wickets. If Sanath was cheaper and faster, I could get your point. But he's not...so pretending as if every one of his wickets will equate a run-out is disingenuous. As I mentioned, there'll only be a fraction of his total wickets going towards an effort that is truly a match-winning contribution. I could understand if you said Ponting had to match those efforts and have a similar ratio, that would be closer to making sense.

His economy rate was 4.7, which meant if he gave away 37 runs to take a wicket, he'd also ensure that if he bowled 10 overs, he'd given away only 47 runs on an average, which translates into about 230 per 50 overs, which in the modern age is a sub par total on almost all surfaces. This means he makes the job of his batsmen easier, not to mention his own destructiveness with the bat. And this completely discounting his utility as a reliable deep fielder and the fact that he has effected some great run outs on his own.

Equating his dismissals to Ponting's run outs was overtly charitable to Ponting. Jayasurya's wicket taking and economy rate just about trumps by miles Ponting's strike rate of what, a dismissal every 2-3 matches???

 

[vcs]

Ikki.. you've missed weldone's point that Jayasuriya added so much balance to his team by being a reliable fifth bowling option. If your fifth bowler takes 1-45 in 10, most people would take that. Especially considering Jayasuriya bowled at the death, where you'd gladly concede a run a ball.

 

[weldone]

someone saying "Ponting must have the same ratio of affecting wickets as Sanath has taking them for it to equate" is wrong - or rather is using false standards.

Agreed...

But saying that Ponting's fielding added more value to the Aussie team than the value added by Sanath's bowling to the SL team is much more pathetic really. Simple as that...

 

[honestbharani]

Ikki and Migara are quite the pair, aren't they?