The Greatest Cricketer Ever

[Sanz]

Haha, that average is only because of Ponting's record in India, as it distorts his away record against other countries. Here is an enlightening stat: there is only 1 country away that Lara averages above 50: SL (2 if you include 2 tests against Zimbabwe). Ponting averages above 50 everywhere bar India and England. That tells you how much better Ponting has been away from home. As I said earlier, Lara is statistically the worst of the lot.

Yes, let's ignore the 14 tests played in India and 18 tests in England, but count the 1 test in Pakistan to make your point about away average.

 

[abmk]

Haha, that average is only because of Ponting's record in India, as it distorts his away record against other countries. Here is an enlightening stat: there is only 1 country away that Lara averages above 50: SL (2 if you include 2 tests against Zimbabwe). Ponting averages above 50 everywhere bar India and England. That tells you how much better Ponting has been away from home. As I said earlier, Lara is statistically the worst of the lot.

he averages close to 50 in 2 of the countries ( Eng and Pak ) , 48 point something and 46 point something vs SA. Not like that's a major difference from say Ponting's average of 50 in SL , especially because the sample sizes are not that big in each country here .. elementary statistics !

and yes 1 test in Pak is supposed to be a great sample size :rolls eyes:

 

[Maximus0723]

As I said earlier, even in his prime Ponting was not getting the proper kudos IMO. It just wasn't going to be much of a selling point.

One other reason why that might have be the case was because Ponting had lot of greats around him. Each of whom played many great innings. Also he was "the" batsmen only after S Waugh left. Only when his wicket became the most important among his team mates.

Tendulkar/Lara didn't have the company of Ponting hence why their innings(good and the bad) were more apparent. For most of their careers, Lara/Tendulkar were "the" batsman in their respective teams and were the most priced wicket.

 

[abmk]

In the shoes of Bradman | Old Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Waugh says Ponting the best since Bradman | Australia Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting is 'the modern Bradman' | Cricket News | Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Howe_zat]

What does it achieve to dissect the figures like this? None of these cricketers had perfect records, form comes and goes and if one of them happens to have only toured Zimbabwe during a miserable period then he will have a "hole".

By all means compare them over the whole career and large samples but cutting off the various series that don't fit your argument seems kind of unnecessary, and not really coherent as an argument.

 

[Ikki]

Obviously, it has nothing to do with Steve Waugh's attitude ? Back then When Lara, SRT and Waugh were on top, it was an open debate to who was better. With Ponting, the longer he plays, the more obvious it is to fans (Not just Indian fans) all over about who is better.

Not to forget, apart from being a great player, Steve Waugh is a much more liked in India because of his charity work and his overall attitude and approach toward the game, fans and fellow cricketers and something that Ponting seriously lacks.

It is hard for me to gauge because I am someone who really places little value on the character of a player (with regards to being a likeable personality or not) when I rate them. It is irrelevant in any case.

So if that does not apply to CW, which is where ,I am assuming, most of your interaction with the Indian fans happens, what are you basing such an outlandish allegation against Indian fans ?

Maximus was referring to Cricinfo, and I agreed with him about the extra cover they give to Tendulkar's achievements. In general, I'd say the media are overly generous because they know that is what their audience wants.

Yes, let's ignore the 14 tests played in India and 18 tests in England, but count the 1 test in Pakistan to make your point about away average.

He averages 44 in England, that's not the reason his away average is so low. The only reason Ponting has an average that low is because of India. The guy is consistent across the board. It's not like Ponting was not going to score on the tracks in Pakistan either - in fact, he scored lots of runs in the difficult neutral tests. He averages 62 against Pakistan in 6 tests away from home.

Anyway, the point is: Lara's average reflects more or less how he did on a country to country basis. Ponting's doesn't. His record in India outweighs just how good he was elsewhere. It can definitely mislead.

he averages close to 50 in 2 of the countries ( Eng and Pak ) , 48 point something and 46 point something vs SA. Not like that's a major difference from say Ponting's average of 50 in SL , especially because the sample sizes are not that big in each country here .. elementary statistics !

and yes 1 test in Pak is supposed to be a great sample size :rolls eyes:

You're right; it would be disingenuous to pretend averaging 48 or 50 against a team is so different. Equally, it would be disingenuous to pretend that Lara was as good as Ponting away from home...he wasn't. Ponting's only poor record is in India. He is pretty much superb everywhere else. I'm not interested in you distorting the stats or arguing Ponting v Lara in this thread. If you look at the stats and are honest with yourself then it shouldn't need explaining.

 

[abmk]

What does it achieve to dissect the figures like this? None of these cricketers had perfect records, form comes and goes and if one of them happens to have only toured Zimbabwe during a miserable period then he will have a "hole".

By all means compare them over the whole career and large samples but cutting off the various series that don't fit your argument seems kind of unnecessary, and not really coherent as an argument.

Well IMHO, ponting was only statistically better in 2006-07 over Sachin/Lara. All I was pointing out was through various statistical angles, as of now, you could argue Lara is better than Ponting.

I was taking more of the bulk stats - vs non-minnows, then away vs non-minnow (common teams ) - but if Ikki wants to argue on the basis of 1 test in Pak and all that, well then what can I say ?

 

[centurymaker]

In the shoes of Bradman | Old Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Waugh says Ponting the best since Bradman | Australia Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting is 'the modern Bradman' | Cricket News | Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

Peerless Ponting too good for Bangladesh | Cricket News | Australia in Bangladesh | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting approaches the pantheon | Cricket News | Australia in South Africa | ESPN Cricinfo

Smith proposes Ponting disposes | Cricket News | South Africa in Australia | ESPN Cricinfo

how biased is cricinfo

 

[Ikki]

In the shoes of Bradman | Old Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Waugh says Ponting the best since Bradman | Australia Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting is 'the modern Bradman' | Cricket News | Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

And yet even in those links you can see the difference:

The first piece talks about him almost getting a double century and becoming the best double-centurion after Bradman.

The second; Lawry is saying Ponting is something like the modern Bradman - not as good or better than Bradman, like Sachin. Later in that piece Holding says even when Ponting is averaging almost 60 that he'd still take Lara. Come on...

The third; Waugh is saying Ponting is going to be the best Australian batsman after Bradman.

It took until a couple years ago, when Ponting was already on the decline for someone to say "hey, this guy is even better than Tendulkar" - which was Chappell.

I just don't agree; he did not get anywhere near the attention he should have got in that period. He was unbelievable.

 

[vcs]

In the shoes of Bradman | Old Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Waugh says Ponting the best since Bradman | Australia Cricket News | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting is 'the modern Bradman' | Cricket News | Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

Peerless Ponting too good for Bangladesh | Cricket News | Australia in Bangladesh | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting approaches the pantheon | Cricket News | Australia in South Africa | ESPN Cricinfo

Smith proposes Ponting disposes | Cricket News | South Africa in Australia | ESPN Cricinfo

From the article "Peerless Ponting too good for Bangladesh" (written by Dileep Premachandran who is a massive Tendulkar fan-boy)

For much of the last decade, it was the cricket buff's favourite topic of discussion. Who was the world's best batsman, Sachin Tendulkar or Brian Lara? Now and then, other names would enter the picture, like Steve Waugh after the epic history-altering 200 at Sabina Park, or Matthew Hayden after his golden run in the new millennium, but opinion would always be split.

These days, the debate has become redundant. Ricky Ponting's splendid face-saving century at Fatullah was his ninth in 14 Tests, and while the numbers are sensational - an average of 76 over the past 10 Tests - it's been the nature of those innings that has elevated him to another plane. There have been batsmen aplenty with an appetite for centuries, big ones at that, but few that have the knack of playing defining innings with the mind-numbing consistency that Ponting has managed since the Ashes were surrendered.

Please don't make out as if there's some anti-Ponting conspiracy out there among Indian fans in general. Yes, some of them may resent him for his success and personality, but there are plenty out there who are broadminded enough to give him his due.

I'm done with this as there's no way to prove anything conclusively, but for me this is more than enough evidence that cricinfo was ready to hail him the best since Bradman. If you're going to go and look for articles from "The Times of India" and suchlike, you deserve what you get.

 

[abmk]

You're right; it would be disingenuous to pretend averaging 48 or 50 against a team is so different. Equally, it would be disingenuous to pretend that Lara was as good as Ponting away from home...he wasn't. Ponting's only poor record is in India. He is pretty much superb everywhere else. I'm not interested in you distorting the stats or arguing Ponting v Lara in this thread. If you look at the stats and are honest with yourself then it shouldn't need explaining.

don't see Ponting's record in England as "superb" by any means.

You are ignoring that Lara's average in Aus lowers his away average ( especially when you consider how much Ponting has plundered the weak WI attacks after 2000s for comparision ) .

Lara's record in NZ is average, but certainly better than ponting's in India. He played one series in Ind, averaging ~33, not good, but not that poor either. Otherwise he averages 45+ in SA,Pak,SL,Eng ( and Zim )

This is their record when Aus is removed from Lara's record and WI from Ponting's - away stats

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

ponting average ~45.4

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

lara average ~50.2

Among major countries, lara was better away vs Eng, SL,Ind

Ponting was better away vs SA,NZ and Pak

How can you say that ponting is definitely better abroad ?

 

[Ikki]

Peerless Ponting too good for Bangladesh | Cricket News | Australia in Bangladesh | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting approaches the pantheon | Cricket News | Australia in South Africa | ESPN Cricinfo

Smith proposes Ponting disposes | Cricket News | South Africa in Australia | ESPN Cricinfo

I see you added others.

The first: A pretty meh article considering what he was achieving at the time. Christ, I've lost count how many articles have been written about Tendulkar in the last year alone.

The second; read this:

Before this year is out, Ricky Ponting will have confirmed his place as one of the greatest Test cricketers that has ever lived. Perhaps that's something that we've known all along, but such has been the embarrassment of riches in Australia's middle-order, his brilliance has been just another shining star in a glittering firmament. Until now that is.

Which says it all. Over 100+ tests and now people are only starting to realise that he is one of the best ever?

At the age of 31, and with 8431 runs to his name already, every batting record in the book suddenly seems to be at his mercy. Of the players still in operation, only Lara and Tendulkar have more hundreds, while he is virtually neck-and-neck with Rahul Dravid in the run-scoring charts. None, however, has quite such an incentive for self-improvement, which is why in 18 months' time he could well be standing supreme at the pinnacle of the game.

So having a career average of pretty much 60 after 100 tests isn't enough. He needed another 18 months at that level to be the "supreme pinnacle of the game". What would he be averaging then? 65? To me it's just insulting. Why wasn't he better then? At that moment? As I say, no one had the balls at that time to call Ponting the best...despite the fact that there was a canyon between him, Lara and Sachin at the time.

In the third:

In Ponting's last 52 Tests, the same number as Bradman played in his career, he has scored 5386 runs at 70.86 with 20 hundreds. He still can't reach Bradman's shadow, but it is an incredible record for the 21st century.

If they had written that on a piece about Tendulkar Cricinfo would be cursed in the comments section for a year.

 

[Ikki]

don't see Ponting's record in England as "superb" by any means.

You are ignoring that Lara's average in Aus lowers his away average ( especially when you consider how much Ponting has plundered the weak WI attacks after 2000s for comparision ) .

Lara's record in NZ is average, but certainly better than ponting's in India. He played one series in Ind, averaging ~33, not good, but not that poor either. Otherwise he averages 45+ in SA,Pak,SL,Eng ( and Zim )

Read again, I said "pretty much superb everywhere else". He averages 44 in Eng and 50+ everywhere else. I think that justifies my initial statement.

As for their records against each other's teams; Ponting suffers more removing WI as he averages 78 there. Lara's average actually goes up. We've already discussed their records against the best attacks in the 90s. Ponting averaged 50 against Pak, WI and SA (lowest being 40) whereas Lara only did well against Australia and was poor against the others (20s and 30s).

Again, I shouldn't have to be telling you this. If you are honest with yourself the numbers are clear enough.

 

[vcs]

Go and argue with the journalist. FFS. I just spent half a ****ing hour pulling all that up.

 

[Ikki]

Go and argue with the journalist. FFS. I just spent half a ****ing hour pulling all that up.

LOL, thanks for the trouble anyway.

 

[abmk]

Read again, I said "pretty much superb everywhere else". He averages 44 in Eng and 50+ everywhere else. I think that justifies my initial statement.

Your statement was this :

Ponting's only poor record is in India. He is pretty much superb everywhere else.

to which I replied his record is not "superb" in England

As for their records against each other's teams; Ponting suffers more removing WI as he averages 78 there.

Again, I shouldn't have to be telling you this. If you are honest with yourself the numbers are clear enough.

yes, but how do we compare in this case ? There is a huge difference in the quality of bowling attacks .

Anyways , that is not really the most important point . The most important point is : is consistency across the years, not a parameter ? What about ponting's average outside of 2002-2006 ? ~40 in 90+ tests . Neither Lara nor sachin were that average outside of their best 5 or 6 years ( again, we're talking of chinks here, not peaks remember )

 

[abmk]

As for their records against each other's teams; Ponting suffers more removing WI as he averages 78 there. Lara's average actually goes up. We've already discussed their records against the best attacks in the 90s. Ponting averaged 50 against Pak, WI and SA (lowest being 40) whereas Lara only did well against Australia and was poor against the others (20s and 30s).

Again, I shouldn't have to be telling you this. If you are honest with yourself the numbers are clear enough.

LOL, way to manipulate ... India IN india was a pretty strong attack. Ponting failed miserably in his first 6 tests in India ( till 2001 ). You forgot SL where Lara was absolutely mindblowing ( though Ponting did well there , still doesn't compare to Lara )

Ponting only played a "strong" Pak attack in 3 tests in 99 ( before 2003 ), scores were 0,0,0,197. I wouldn't call that very good by any means ...

read again, neither wasim/waqar/saqlain played in the 98 test in Peshawar in which Ponting got 119 runs and was dismissed only once

In fact, on thinking about it again , he fell to Aamir and Asif twice each in England recently , that was the 2nd toughest Pak attack he faced. ( some might even argue that was the toughest Pak attack he faced !! )... Scores were 26,0,6,66 ....

 

[Ikki]

The words "pretty much" were used to insinuate that he isn't superb bar no other instance, but that he is almost there.

I am not sure how we compare them when they didn't face each other's teams or many of the other problems. There are plenty ways to look at their records, but I think if you're being honest with yourself you'll see Ponting's is superior. The guy only has 1 bad record home or away. In terms of averages or statistics, I think Ponting is ahead to Lara a similar amount to what Sachin is. But that is not everything and I don't pretend that these kinds of stats tell the whole story. I don't really mind anyone saying Lara was the best of the lot - I think proving that through stats is very tough though. Probably best done when you consider runs per innings rather than plain averages.

Both Lara and Sachin had bad periods. In the 00s, Sachin averaged 47 IIRC when you remove minnows. Lara towards the end of the 90s had a big falling off. All 3 players had their peaks and their troughs. They've all played for a long time and their success hasn't been a flash in the pan either. Their records are what they are. If Ponting is having a bit more trouble in his trough, then he did better in his peak.

 

[abmk]

The words "pretty much" were used to insinuate that he isn't superb bar no other instance, but that he is almost there.

I am not sure how we compare them when they didn't face each other's teams or many of the other problems. There are plenty ways to look at their records, but I think if you're being honest with yourself you'll see Ponting's is superior. The guy only has 1 bad record home or away. In terms of averages or statistics, I think Ponting is ahead to Lara a similar amount to what Sachin is. But that is not everything and I don't pretend that these kinds of stats tell the whole story. I don't really mind anyone saying Lara was the best of the lot - I think proving that through stats is very tough though. Probably best done when you consider runs per innings rather than plain averages.

Again, no , at this stage, you CAN argue even through stats that Lara is better ( Even I think stats don't tell the full story ) ... Ponting's stats are not "clearly" better than lara's .....

I am only showing where you are wrong regarding stats - like you forgetting SL or regarding Ponting vs Pak or about Indian attack in India

 

[abmk]

Both Lara and Sachin had bad periods. In the 00s, Sachin averaged 47 IIRC when you remove minnows. Lara towards the end of the 90s had a big falling off. All 3 players had their peaks and their troughs. They've all played for a long time and their success hasn't been a flash in the pan either. Their records are what they are. If Ponting is having a bit more trouble in his trough, then he did better in his peak.

the thing is its not a bit more, the difference is quite significant. He averages ~40 for nearly 90 tests out of 150 ( outside of 2002-2006 ) , a pretty big sample, don't you think ? Is that not a 'significant' chink or a chink worth mentioning ?

This is just in response to you saying Ponting's only chink in record in his record in India, which is so NOT true .....