Ponting Vs Gavaskar

[ma1978]

When Ponting was in his prime he was rated above Sachin or Lara

 

[sayon basak]

When Ponting was in his prime he was rated above Sachin or Lara

Maybe because he averaged higher at that time.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Maybe because he averaged higher at that time.

Nah. I mean yeah, but it was people buying too much into hype over flat runs. It's really not Ponting exclusive, in his prime Compton and May were rated higher than Hutton for ex, or Kanhai than Sobers.

 

[sayon basak]

Nah. I mean yeah, but it was people buying too much into hype over flat runs. It's really not Ponting exclusive, in his prime Compton and May were rated higher than Hutton for ex, or Kanhai than Sobers.

I didn't know Kanhai was ever rated higher than Sobers.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I didn't know Kanhai was ever rated higher than Sobers.

Well upto 1965, for a quite big bulk of thier careers. It was quite a common sentiment and no way a hot take, shared by the likes of Benaud. Some players like Gavaskar might still rate Kanhai higher as a batsman (not totally sure he does, but he is a huge Kanhai fanboy and even named his son Rohan).

 

[kyear2]

When Ponting was in his prime he was rated above Sachin or Lara

There was legitimately a time when he was being discussed as the best after Bradman. He was on a serious trajectory

 

[capt_Luffy]

I swear everytime I hear "Ponting was rated higher than Sachin and Lara at a point" from Subs, Kyear and ma, I just loose more faith in peer ratings and Ponting drops a few points in my rankings.

 

[ma1978]

I swear everytime I hear "Ponting was rated higher than Sachin and Lara at a point" from Subs, Kyear and ma, I just loose more faith in peer ratings and Ponting drops a few points in my rankings.

Need alert

 

[capt_Luffy]

Need alert

Yep, you should issue an alert before posting such ****.

 

[kyear2]

I swear everytime I hear "Ponting was rated higher than Sachin and Lara at a point" from Subs, Kyear and ma, I just loose more faith in peer ratings and Ponting drops a few points in my rankings.

It wasn't just peer ratings, I thought / feared it as well. The man was on a tear and was just destructive.

 

[capt_Luffy]

It wasn't just peer ratings, I thought / feared it as well. The man was on a tear and was just destructive.

And the thought was wrong man..... We all have those from time to time. I thought Manoj Tiwari was a better batsman than Rohit in 2012/13, but now I know how stupidly I was wrong. There are much better points in favour of Ponting, his peak was really spectacular numerically, but him being rated wrongly in Sachin/Lara tier isn't the way to go imo.

 

[shortpitched713]

Nah. I mean yeah, but it was people buying too much into hype over flat runs. It's really not Ponting exclusive, in his prime Compton and May were rated higher than Hutton for ex, or Kanhai than Sobers.

Eh, the at the time ratings tend to be a bit biased, imo as people didn't want to ackknowledge Ponting when their favorites Lara and Sachin were still around.

Ponting was every bit as dominant of a batsman at his peak as they were, imo. Possibly the scariest batsman to face since Viv Richards.

He had a somewhat more exploitable weakness, and tailed hard at the end of his career, but to pretend his peak wasn't monstrous is historical revisionism.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Eh, the at the time ratings tend to be a bit biased, imo as people didn't want to ackknowledge Ponting when their favorites Lara and Sachin were still around.

Ponting was every bit as dominant of a batsman at his peak as they were, imo. Possibly the scariest batsman to face since Viv Richards.

He had a somewhat more exploitable weakness, and tailed hard at the end of his career, but to pretend his peak wasn't monstrous is historical revisionism.

His peak is great statistically. But:
1) The bowling lineups he faced and the playing conditions he played in, were for lack of a better word, extremely batting friendly. Over similar periods in the 2000s, all of Kallis, Dravid, Hayden and Lara had peaks statistically comparable. Yousuf had such a peak for a year.
2) India 2001 was at the middle of his peak and he averaged 3 there.
3) Yes, that's what I was saying, time ratings are biased. And Ponting's case they were premature, very premature. But instead on agreeing that perhaps they rated him wrong, some people here have doubled down on that rating being right and is somehow their main argument (kinda sad). As I said, Ponting's peak considering the SR was truly Great, it could had been used as the point in his favour in Kallis, Dravid and Sangakkara comparisons (though he also had such great peaks, a perk of the 2000s and early 10s), instead of him wrongly being assessed in the Sachin tier.

 

[kyear2]

His peak is great statistically. But:
1) The bowling lineups he faced and the playing conditions he played in, were for lack of a better word, extremely batting friendly. Over similar periods in the 2000s, all of Kallis, Dravid, Hayden and Lara had peaks statistically comparable. Yousuf had such a peak for a year.
2) India 2001 was at the middle of his peak and he averaged 3 there.
3) Yes, that's what I was saying, time ratings are biased. And Ponting's case they were premature, very premature. But instead on agreeing that perhaps they rated him wrong, some people here have doubled down on that rating being right and is somehow their main argument (kinda sad). As I said, Ponting's peak considering the SR was truly Great, it could had been used as the point in his favour in Kallis, Dravid and Sangakkara comparisons (though he also had such great peaks, a perk of the 2000s and early 10s), instead of him wrongly being assessed in the Sachin tier.

This part greatly annoys me for some reason. Because it's not where you personally rate him, it's "sad" that people don't reconsider their rating of him?
What the actual ****.

You think Sunny is better than Viv, not sure based on what exactly, could I also say that it's kinda "sad" that you prefer to cling to your reasonings as well?

No one thinks he ended his career in Sachin's tier, end of career slump and all
But for a period, as was Smith, he was in that conversation along with Lara.

Don't know why that's hard to accept.

 

[capt_Luffy]

This part greatly annoys me for some reason. Because it's not where you personally rate him, it's "sad" that people don't reconsider their rating of him?
What the actual ****.

You think Sunny is better than Viv, not sure based on what exactly, could I also say that it's kinda "sad" that you prefer to cling to your reasonings as well?

No one thinks he ended his career in Sachin's tier, end of career slump and all
But for a period, as was Smith, he was in that conversation along with Lara.

Don't know why that's hard to accept.

The part hard to accept is you people doubling down on rating Ponting so highly for a mid career peak, when you thought he was approaching Sachin territory...... I have previously stated that Ponting have his arguments and his peak was extremely productive, but the annoying part is the repeated emphasis on him reaching those tiers. Let me rephrase it, the Ponting being Top 10 (or whatever) itself isn't really unreasonable, the things some use to rate him this high I just happen to highly disagree with. The annoying part is your over emphasis on a silly point, repeatedly.
You bring me rating Gavaskar into everything for some reason every chance you got..... I have provided you with ample enough reasons and neither am the only one to rate him this highly (nor in this forum neither among pundits and ex-cricketers). Still can't see the reason, very well then.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Gavaskar is closer to Viv than he is to Ponting, for me(although I have always rated Viv>Gavaskar). Gavaskar is 8/9 in my rankings and Viv 4/5, and Ponting around 16ish

 

[kyear2]

The part hard to accept is you people doubling down on rating Ponting so highly for a mid career peak, when you thought he was approaching Sachin territory...... I have previously stated that Ponting have his arguments and his peak was extremely productive, but the annoying part is the repeated emphasis on him reaching those tiers. Let me rephrase it, the Ponting being Top 10 (or whatever) itself isn't really unreasonable, the things some use to rate him this high I just happen to highly disagree with. The annoying part is your over emphasis on a silly point, repeatedly.
You bring me rating Gavaskar into everything for some reason every chance you got..... I have provided you with ample enough reasons and neither am the only one to rate him this highly (nor in this forum neither among pundits and ex-cricketers). Still can't see the reason, very well then.

My point wasn't about Gavaskar, nor Ponting.

The part that bothered me was the "sad" comment.

Everyone has their own views and perspective, so to say a perfectly valid perspective is sad, just because you think so is a bit much.

I disagree and have argued with your Miller takes than anything else, never came close to calling it sad.

That's my only point.

 

[kyear2]

Gavaskar is closer to Viv than he is to Ponting, for me(although I have always rated Viv>Gavaskar). Gavaskar is 8/9 in my rankings and Viv 4/5, and Ponting around 16ish

It wasn't about the ratings, it was about the language.

That being said, I have Viv 5th, Sunny around 9 and Punter 10. So no, I have Punter closer to Sunny than Viv.

 

[capt_Luffy]

My point wasn't about Gavaskar, nor Ponting.

The part that bothered me was the "sad" comment.

Everyone has their own views and perspective, so to say a perfectly valid perspective is sad, just because you think so is a bit much.

I disagree and have argued with your Miller takes than anything else, never came close to calling it sad.

That's my only point.

You guys honestly have called my takes things much worse than "sad" really; not to mention my point was totally on you people criticising old writers for evaluating players like Compton in this way, and then doing the same. Again, it wasn't a personal attack on you solely and was just a passing comment on how your argument was very repetitive and and unironically double standard. Still, if you thought of it to be insulting, then I apologize.

 

[kyear2]

You guys honestly have called my takes things much worse than "sad" really; not to mention my point was totally on you people criticising old writers for evaluating players like Compton in this way, and then doing the same. Again, it wasn't a personal attack on you solely and was just a passing comment on how your argument was very repetitive and and unironically double standard. Still, if you thought of it to be insulting, then I apologize.

Didn't take it personally, just through it was condescending.

Valuating players is multifaceted and isn't adjudicated purely based on stats. Ponting at his destructive best had me fearing that he would be seen as the best of the era, and he just kept going, kept scoring... Of course that came crashing down, but he was there for a point and was a beast.

But again, that wasn't my primary point.