Ricky Ponting vs. Kumar Sangakkara (ODIs)

[Burgey]

I'd put Roger Harper and Chris Harris ahead of Ponting and Jonty.

Harper was brilliant anywhere when he was younger. On his last tour here though, he had slipped remarkably.

 

[Burgey]

we could have semantic debates about what exactly 'it's that simple' means or we could watch some videos

edit: that video doesn't come remotely close to doing justice to that innings btw

IMO that was his best knock. He played on a different pitch to everyone else. It was an insane hundred on a last day deck against an excellent, mint-fuelled attack.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I know that the Ashes is prestigious, but as a challenge for Australian batsmen is it really up there? When Ponting faced England he never had to bat against any ATG bowlers (I know the 2005 'attack' was excellent), but who was England's last great bowler? Botham? Willis? Underwood? Snow? Trueman?????

Surely scoring runs against Pakistan or 287 against Steyn should rate higher than Ashes runs for Australia (obv Ashes runs would rate for Englishmen - Michael Vaughan in that series in Oz many moons ago was stunningly good?

Mate, that 2005 England bowling attack was freakish. Individually when you look at them and their careers you wouldn't think so, but I watched that whole series and the way they bowled, the reverse swing especially was crazy. I dunno if it was the batch of balls or if the poms had some sneaky reverse swing tactics but it was awesome. The only other times I'd seen bowling that good would be when McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne were at their best in the early 2000s.

 

[Contra]

287 against Steyn? lol Steyn was hardly the bowler we know today at the time, lets be real please. Also isn't this Ponting v Sanga ODI's?

 

[Burgey]

Why don't people factor in the age old question of whether subcontinental cricket records should even count? I recall this debate being opened up in the 1980s by Roy & HG on JJJ and it's one which has fallen a bit by the wayside as teams like India, Pakistan and SL actually won a test away from home; but I think it's time to revisit the question. You don't know who's on the take, who's having a go, which bloke is picked because he's the selector's son-in-law or whether someone has peeled away half the ball with a bottle top.

It's a conundrum.

 

[BigBrother]

287 against Steyn? lol Steyn was hardly the bowler we know today at the time, lets be real please. Also isn't this Ponting v Sanga ODI's?

Except when he wasn't facing Steyn he would have been facing Pollock and Donald, two other ATG bowlers...

Steyn has been a gun bowler ever since 2007 btw, he never played Australia before 2008.

 

[BigBrother]

I'd rank Kallis fairly decisively below the others ftr.

Well that's just silly. But then again you seem to rank batsmen based on "memorable" knocks against England so maybe not...

 

[BigBrother]

Slats celebrating more than a decade of ruining great moments

I used to argue with nothing but statsguru when I was younger in terms of player ratings. Then when you grow up and actually gain some perspective, you realize how stupid the whole thing is considering not every batsmen/bowler faces the same quality of opposition, conditions, and in LO cricket, rules.

What I try to do is look at standardized averages (quality of bowlers faced, quality of batsmen dismissed) which there are plenty of, especially in this forum. Unfortunately, no such thing can be done for the assessment of conditions so you kind of have to go back to statsguru for that.

Rules, well that's where you have to use your eyes and common sense, a google search of what the rules actually were at the time helps too.

So when I see people argue with nothing but statsguru, it's kind of annoying and amusing at the same time these days.

 

[Burgey]

Wooooooooosssssssshhhhhhhh

 

[TheJediBrah]

Except when he wasn't facing Steyn he would have been facing Pollock and Donald, two other ATG bowlers...

Yeah, no. neither Pollock nor Donald were playing. In fact Donald had been retired for like 5 years . . .

 

[Maximas]

Waugh, Sangakarra, Kallis, Dravid are all greats too but you can't quite put them on the same level. If Ponting and Lara had played a dozen tests each against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe or half their games on roads like Sanga they could be averaging 70+.

Most Australian venues are easier to bat on than most SL venues, and I won't repeat the statistics that show Sanga still heads the pack in terms of averages when you discount the minnows.

 

[Maximas]

Except when he wasn't facing Steyn he would have been facing Pollock and Donald, two other ATG bowlers...

Lol, try Nicky Boje, Ntini and Andre Nel

 

[OverratedSanity]

SA have had pretty weak attacks several times. Hayward, young Ntini, a Pollock on the decline and Kallis isn't exactly world class.

Sanga's century on his last tour of SA is one which I think is criminally overlooked. He came in on the back of scores of 0,1,2 and was dropped in this innings on 3 Made a brilliant hundred against a top attack on form and SL won the game with fatty Herath bowling beautifully. Defnitely an overlooked gem. **** the 287.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Most Australian venues are easier to bat on than most SL venues, and I won't repeat the statistics that show Sanga still heads the pack in terms of averages when you discount the minnows.

Yeah Australia has had some of the flattest pitches in it's history in the last decade or so.

Regarding Sanga and minnows, the fact that he averages higher even without minnows is definitely awesome, and shows he's deservedly at their level as a batsman. However, it should be kept in mind that his non minnow average is 54 over something like 105 tests I think. While Ponting and Lara's non minnow (pretty much career) average is around 52 it's over a lot more tests, too. 30-40 tests more, which is pretty sizeable. So ,really 54 over 100 tests and 52 over 140 tests are pretty similar.

The only reason I keep pointing this out is not to bring Sanga down, but just that Sanga isn't "statistically better" like some people insist. His statistics seen in context are just as impressive as Lara, Ponting, Sachin. Only subjective preferences of style of play can truly decisively separate them imo.

 

[weldone]

Oh! This thread is getting worse and worse.

Just when you thought Furball's Ashes > All else nonsense was hilarious, Burgey comes in with a garbage bag.

Viriya's posts don't seem so bad now, in comparison.

 

[weldone]

Yeah Australia has had some of the flattest pitches in it's history in the last decade or so.

Regarding Sanga and minnows, the fact that he averages higher even without minnows is definitely awesome, and shows he's deservedly at their level as a batsman. However, it should be kept in mind that his non minnow average is 54 over something like 105 tests I think. While Ponting and Lara's non minnow (pretty much career) average is around 52 it's over a lot more tests, too. 30-40 tests more, which is pretty sizeable. So ,really 54 over 100 tests and 52 over 140 tests are pretty similar.

The only reason I keep pointing this out is not to bring Sanga down, but just that Sanga isn't "statistically better" like some people insist. His statistics seen in context are just as impressive as Lara, Ponting, Sachin. Only subjective preferences of style of play can truly decisively separate them imo.

Tendulkar has played 200 tests, hasn't he? (or are you conveniently forgetting his longevity and only comparing Lara's/Ponting's longevity with Sanga because it suits your argument?)

Edit: As an aside - Had Tendulkar been an English cricketer, he could've played 300+ test matches in 24 years.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Tendulkar has played 200 tests, hasn't he? (or are you conveniently forgetting his longevity and only comparing Lara's/Ponting's longevity with Sanga because it suits your argument?)

Edit: As an aside - Had Tendulkar been an English cricketer, he could've played 300+ test matches in 24 years.

Wtf are you talking about. I didn't even mention Sachin in my post because I was comparing Sanga with the two batsmen who didn't face minnows much.

And if it un-knots your panties, i think Tendulkar's the best of the bunch. Doesn't mean he didn't bash minnows. Got to feast on them a ton more than Lara and Ponting.

Seriously if viriya and weldone are going to repeatedly feign deafness and be stupid, I'm done.

 

[weldone]

Wtf are you talking about. I didn't even mention Sachin in my post because I was comparing Sanga with the two batsmen who didn't face minnows much.

And if it un-knots your panties, i think Tendulkar's the best of the bunch. Doesn't mean he didn't bash minnows. Got to feast on them a ton more than Lara and Ponting.

Seriously if viriya and weldone are going to repeatedly feign deafness and be stupid, I'm done.

There's no need to get hyper. You are talking nonsense. You are claiming that your post had nothing to do with Sachin. Well then, read your own post again. If you still don't get the point then at least I know who the blind and deaf person is.

Your post was specifically comparing longevity, and claiming that Sanga's better average against non-minnows is offset by the fact that Lara and Ponting played 30 more tests. Fair enough - but after that you conclude by saying therefore they can't be separated by statistics, including Tendulkar. I called out the sheer hypocricy in that post, because Tendulkar played 90 more tests.

Get the point now or should I elaborate more, eh?

 

[OverratedSanity]

This is pretty frustrating. Didn't know you were that kind of Sachin fanboy who gets sensitive when I wasn't even criticizing him. Good to know. Won't bother next time.

 

[GotSpin]

Yeah this is sad.