• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Steve Waugh vs Ricky Ponting in Tests?

Steve Waugh vs Ricky Ponting


  • Total voters
    43

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I've had the good fortune to rarely interact with you on here, as is shown by the fact you're somehow telling me of all people that Allan Border is under rated.

Ponting was the best batsman of the 2000s and batted in the most important spot in the order. Honestly I'm a massive Waugh fan and rate him very highly, but he had one pretty average series at three vs the Windies in 92/93 and other than that didn't bat above five to the best of my knowledge. Terrific player. Tough and uncompromising. But Ponting was better. Waugh was Aldi Border but Ponting was Aldi Bradman.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ponting did play in a really easy era but I think he’d still average 50 in the 80s and 90s if he batted down at 5/6 like Waugh/Border/Chanders etc tbh.
He'd average 50 if he batted three in those eras because he'd adapt, like all great players do. They're products of their environment and the conditions they grow up and play in. The only thing which is likely to suffer if he played in those eras would possibly be his strike rate, but the bloke also walked out against Ambrose and Walsh at Brisbane as a 20 year old wearing a cap and made 90, so maybe not.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
Honestly, by the very basic logic every single Ponting wanker is using in this thread, surely Pujara>Laxman; right?? For once, Pujara even played in the tougher era unlike Ponting....
 

PlayerComparisons

International Vice-Captain
He'd average 50 if he batted three in those eras because he'd adapt, like all great players do. They're products of their environment and the conditions they grow up and play in. The only thing which is likely to suffer if he played in those eras would possibly be his strike rate, but the bloke also walked out against Ambrose and Walsh at Brisbane as a 20 year old wearing a cap and made 90, so maybe not.
Yeah I think his strike rate would probably drop to around 55 in a harder era like Kohlis but would still average around 50
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
I'm going to hate myself for asking this because I'd rather masturbate with a cheese grater than have a lengthy discussion with you, but enlighten us as to what you think is the "very basic logic" by which every person who rates Ponting ahead of Waugh came to that conclusion.
Nah, feel free to masterbate with your cheese grater.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Ponting. Impressive that he managed to successfully overcome the serious impediments of having a silly little David Brent beard in the mid 90s and looking like a schoolboy any time he actually wore the baggy green.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
How can I know that cheese is grated or not.... I am an Indian; we don't really cook with cheese at home.
 

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Honestly, by the very basic logic every single Ponting wanker is using in this thread, surely Pujara>Laxman; right?? For once, Pujara even played in the tougher era unlike Ponting....
You are the naive one here as you were in your diapers when Ponting was dominating the world. So you are basing your judgement off raw stats because thats all you have on him, having not really seen him play.

We have seen players before and after. We have lived through his career so obviously we would know better.
 

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
You are the naive one here as you were in your diapers when Ponting was dominating the world. So you are basing your judgement off raw stats because thats all you have on him, having not really seen him play.

We have seen players before and after. We have lived through his career so obviously we would know better.
Ok boomer.
 

Top