Slifer
International Captain
But he didn't succeed vs Donald either. So again they both failed....
-
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.
McGrath vs Hadlee
- Thread starter DrWolverine
- Start date
Slifer
International Captain
And no one made Akram play as long as he did....What
No one stopped Marshall from playing another 5 years. Its not Akram's fault, he was capable of playing international cricket 18 years.
What if Bradman played another 20 years and retired with 40 avg, would you still rate him GOAT batsman?
kyear2
International Coach
The longevity argument is a tricky one.
It's used to show value, but simultaneously and inevitably parts are taken out to focus on the same peak.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Honestly, that's a bad faith argument. Not saying Akram was better than Marshall, he wasn't. The comment isn't on that comparison. But longevity is definitely a big plus for any player. No one made Akram play that long, but he still did. And at the end of the day, it was definitely very beneficial for his team as he offered significantly more than any replacement could had.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
That's not the same thing.
If you said Tendulkar wasn't particularly successful against Donald at the beginning, I wouldn't have issues.
But he never failed against Donald per se. Lara did in 98.
Slifer
International Captain
I know, I'm just messing with PFK...
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
How dare that Wasim.
Slifer
International Captain
Ok so then Lara succeeded vs Donald then, since Donald only dismissed once outside of those 5 tests in 1998. And it's not just the beginning, Sachin averaged 27, 36 and 40 in tests vs Donald in the years you highlighted.
Slifer
International Captain
See above sir. I was messing with PFK...
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Sure if you consider that 2001 series particularly relevant against an aging Donald. I don't as much.
What we can agree that against quality pacers away from home, Lara generally sucked.
kyear2
International Coach
Why is this argument then not afforded to Ponting?
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Who doesn't? I rate Ponting quite highly much for his longevity, but this argument hardly holds any merit when compared with Kallis, Waugh (works against actually), Border and Dravid.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Longevity is only an advantage if you maintain those worldclass or close standard.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
Longevity can also be used to explain certain lean patches. But re Ponting, it is certainly a boost for him. The problem is just that all the players I rank ahead of him which you and Kyear doesn't, have similar longevity.
PlayerComparisons
International Vice-Captain
Ponting doesn’t really have greater longevity than other ATGs. Kallis, Dravid, Waugh played a similar amount of tests. Sangakkara would have played that many if SL played as many tests as Aus.
Slifer
International Captain
Won't argue with that.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I definitely argue that for ponting (for example in comparison to Greg Chappell who only played 12 odd years), however his case is trickier because of how concentrated his peak was into a 4-5 year stretch. He had less sustained excellence than most atg batsmen.
smash84
The Tiger King
You mean like Marshall?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I don't penalise either Chappell or Marshall.