Can Ponting overtake Tendulkar?

[Sir Alex]

Sure, but Ponting's is better IMO.

The stats Manan used are slightly misleading in that they include tonnes against minnows and exclude Ponting's innings on neutral soil.

Sachin is far from a home flat track bully but batting in India is generally better than in Australia. If you're looking to discuss why Ponting is behind, simply: he hasn't played minnows as much and as
much in general. This discussion will be more worthwhile when Sachin retires. It comes down to whether Ponting will have a second wind and play long enough. I reckon he will, and hope he does just to help his legacy that much more since he is underappreciated.

If batting is easier in India why Australians are averaging only 31 per wicket since 1996 (roughly when Ponting started his career)?

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

In contrast Australia averages 44 in Australia sine 1996

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[Ikki]

Because Australians have had trouble in India? Generally, it's easier to score runs there. Bore draws and flat tracks. The stats are fairly strong behind this one.

As for their records, IIRC Sachin had 2 more tonnes than Ricky, although having played more. They have a similar 100s per inning ratio so it's more a matter of less matches played.

As I say, it's more than achievable but Ponting might want to start playing Bangladesh more

 

[Sir Alex]

Because Australians have had trouble in India? Generally, it's easier to score runs there. Bore draws and flat tracks. The stats are fairly strong behind this one.

As for their records, IIRC Sachin had 2 more tonnes than Ricky, although having played more. They have a similar 100s per inning ratio so it's more a matter of less matches played.

As I say, it's more than achievable but Ponting might want to start playing Bangladesh more

What are their away figures (averages) excluding minnows?

 

[Sir Alex]

Because Australians have had trouble in India? Generally, it's easier to score runs there. Bore draws and flat tracks. The stats are fairly strong behind this one.

As for their records, IIRC Sachin had 2 more tonnes than Ricky, although having played more. They have a similar 100s per inning ratio so it's more a matter of less matches played.

As I say, it's more than achievable but Ponting might want to start playing Bangladesh more

Over 15 test matches Australians have struggled to score 2/3 of what they score in Australia. Shows how home bullies they are, which is not a terrible thing because they've played more than 50% of their cricket there.

 

[Furball]

Sure, but Ponting's is better IMO.

The stats Manan used are slightly misleading in that they include tonnes against minnows and exclude Ponting's innings on neutral soil.

Sachin is far from a home flat track bully but batting in India is generally better than in Australia. If you're looking to discuss why Ponting is behind, simply: he hasn't played minnows as much and as
much in general. This discussion will be more worthwhile when Sachin retires. It comes down to whether Ponting will have a second wind and play long enough. I reckon he will, and hope he does just to help his legacy that much more since he is underappreciated.

That's a lazy generalisation.

Between 2000 and 2009, Australian batsmen scored more runs at better averages in Australia than Indian batsmen scored in India. Every Australian batsman who's scored more than 1,000 Test runs in the last decade, with the exception of Gilchrist, averages more at home than they do outside of Australia. On the contrary, Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar averaged more outside the subcontinent that they did in India.

If batting in the subcontinent is easier, then why have so few non subcontinental batsmen over the last decade gone to the subcontinent and really dominated? The reason you get a lot of "bore draws" involving 2 subcontinental sides is because they're batting either in home conditions, or in conditions that are similar and that they're used to.

 

[asty80]

A tie would be awesome

 

[Ikki]

What are their away figures (averages) excluding minnows?

IIRC Ponting averages 50 to Tendulkar's 52. Yet that hides how good Ponting is since the only team that he has failed against away is India and that has brought his record down a lot. He averages 44 in England, his next lowest and above 50 everywhere else. His away average bar India is a freakish 58.

Anyway, this discussion doesn't explain why one has scored more 100s than the other.

Over 15 test matches Australians have struggled to score 2/3 of what they score in Australia. Shows how home bullies they are, which is not a terrible thing because they've played more than 50% of their cricket there.

Yeh, they were #1 Test team for more than a decade because they were home bullies.

 

[Ikki]

That's a lazy generalisation.

Between 2000 and 2009, Australian batsmen scored more runs at better averages in Australia than Indian batsmen scored in India. Every Australian batsman who's scored more than 1,000 Test runs in the last decade, with the exception of Gilchrist, averages more at home than they do outside of Australia. On the contrary, Dravid, Laxman and Tendulkar averaged more outside the subcontinent that they did in India.

If batting in the subcontinent is easier, then why have so few non subcontinental batsmen over the last decade gone to the subcontinent and really dominated? The reason you get a lot of "bore draws" involving 2 subcontinental sides is because they're batting either in home conditions, or in conditions that are similar and that they're used to.

That's because they were better. There is a reason I mentioned results because it shows such pitches - those in Ausralia that is - were good enough to consistently take 20 wickets off of. Whether Dravid or whoever averages more outside India than in it...it's fairly irrelevant because of the pitches that have generally been prepared there. Already looked at this in several ways, and there are a few things you can't escape...more runs are scored in India and there are a lot of non-results. Ironically, the generalisation you've made about sub-continental teams cancelling out doesn't really hold. In the 00s for instance, there are as many non-sub teams getting draws, even moreso actually. As a proportion or aggregate. Credit to Indians for still being one of the hardest teams to beat at home, but it doesn't mean that runs aren't scored there slightly more than elsewhere.

 

[Sanz]

The stats Manan used are slightly misleading in that they include tonnes against minnows and exclude Ponting's innings on neutral soil.

Otherwise Ponting is better, isn't it ? Oh wait a minute, we need to exclude India from the away records too. India is like Ricky's second home.

 

[Cruxdude]

Sure, but Ponting's is better IMO.

The stats Manan used are slightly misleading in that they include tonnes against minnows and exclude Ponting's innings on neutral soil.

Sachin is far from a home flat track bully but batting in India is generally better than in Australia. If you're looking to discuss why Ponting is behind, simply: he hasn't played minnows as much and as
much in general. This discussion will be more worthwhile when Sachin retires. It comes down to whether Ponting will have a second wind and play long enough. I reckon he will, and hope he does just to help his legacy that much more since he is underappreciated.

Ponting has score 6 centuries against the WI after Walsh and Ambrose retired. Tendulkar last played them in 2002 and scored 2. Ponting's record against them is pretty skewed because of these series. Surely WI are minnows and they shouldn't be taken into account.

 

[Furball]

That's because they were better. There is a reason I mentioned results because it shows such pitches - those in Ausralia that is - were good enough to consistently take 20 wickets off of. Whether Dravid or whoever averages more outside India than in it...it's fairly irrelevant because of the pitches that have generally been prepared there. Already looked at this in several ways, and there are a few things you can't escape...more runs are scored in India and there are a lot of non-results. Ironically, the generalisation you've made about sub-continental teams cancelling out doesn't really hold. In the 00s for instance, there are as many non-sub teams getting draws, even moreso actually. As a proportion or aggregate.

No, Australia's attack during the decade has been good enough to take 20 wickets.

 

[Cruxdude]

Till 2002 Ponting averages 40 against WI and after that he averages 72.

 

[Sanz]

Sachin is far from a home flat track bully but batting in India is generally better than in Australia. If you're looking to discuss why Ponting is behind, simply: he hasn't played minnows as much and as
much in general.

Yes That's why Tendulkar's Average in Australia is( 58.53) > Tendulkar's Average in India (55.72)

And Ponting's Average in Australia (60+) >>>>>>>>>>> Ponting's Average in India

 

[Sanz]

IIRC Ponting averages 50 to Tendulkar's 52. Yet that hides how good Ponting is since the only team that he has failed against away is India and that has brought his record down a lot. He averages 44 in England, his next lowest and above 50 everywhere else. His away average bar India is a freakish 58.

Anyway, this discussion doesn't explain why one has scored more 100s than the other.

No but it clearly doesn't statistically explains why Ponting is better away from home.

Time to bring out the spreadsheets of excuses and bull****s.

 

[Pothas]

Dear God this is tedious

 

[Sir Alex]

IIRC Ponting averages 50 to Tendulkar's 52. Yet that hides how good Ponting is since the only team that he has failed against away is India and that has brought his record down a lot. He averages 44 in England, his next lowest and above 50 everywhere else. His away average bar India is a freakish 58.

Anyway, this discussion doesn't explain why one has scored more 100s than the other.



Yeh, they were #1 Test team for more than a decade because they were home bullies.

You forget that Tendulkar played so many away series in the early 90s as well when the pitches were much difficult and bowlers too. Also he has not played West Indies away after they became really ****. So all this holds against him too. Yet he averages a full 2 points more than Ponting with more than a tonload of difference in sheer weight of runs as well.

 

[Ikki]

Till 2002 Ponting averages 40 against WI and after that he averages 72.

True, but you cannot divorce the home attack from pitches. Is it the home attack that is too good or are the pitches more helpful? India prepares flat pitches that are more suited to spin, Australia produces less flat pitches that are more suited to pace. Since most bowlers, and the better ones too, are fast bowlers, that means bowling in India is nothing short of a nightmare. It's not because the Indians are great players of pace. It's the pitch. Australians also average better away from home than Indian batsmen IIRC. If you were better away, I could at least get that.

 

[Furball]

True, but you cannot divorce the home attack from pitches. Is it the home attack that is too good or are the pitches more helpful? India prepares flat pitches that are more suited to spin, Australia produces less flat pitches that are more suited to pace. Since most bowlers, and the better ones too, are fast bowlers, that means bowling in India is nothing short of a nightmare. It's not because the Indians are great players of pace. It's the pitch. Australians also average better away from home than Indian batsmen IIRC. If you were better away, I could at least get that.

Yet you've ignored the fact that India's 3 best batsmen of the last decade all averaged more outside the subcontinent than they do in India.

 

[Ikki]

Yet you've ignored the fact that India's 3 best batsmen of the last decade all averaged more outside the subcontinent than they do in India.

Whether 3 batsmen out of some 100 batsmen score more outside the subcontinent - which is another false generalisation in itself, because Sri Lanka and India contrast quite a bit - is irrelevant. Think bigger picture.

Yes That's why Tendulkar's Average in Australia is( 58.53) > Tendulkar's Average in India (55.72)

And Ponting's Average in Australia (60+) >>>>>>>>>>> Ponting's Average in India

No but it clearly doesn't statistically explains why Ponting is better away from home.

Time to bring out the spreadsheets of excuses and bull****s.

Sure it doesn't.

Let me break it down for you, bar Ponting's one poor record, his away record smokes Tendulkar's. It's just that the single country is so poor it weighs down his awesomeness as an "overall away average".

I'll show it clearer, without spreadsheets :

Batsman A: 52

Country A: 41
Country B: 43
Country C: 60
Country D: 50
Country E: 50
Country F: 50
Country G: 52
Country H: 38
Country I: 46

Batsman B: 50

Country A: 60
Country B: 60
Country C: 65
Country D: 60
Country E: 29
Country F: 70
Country G: 52
Country H: 44
Country I: 50

Or how about the players themselves?

Tendulkar: 52.20

Australia: 58.53
England: 62
New Zealand: 49.52
Pakistan: 40.25
S.Africa: 39.76
Sri Lanka: 63.75
West Indies: 47.69

Ponting: 49.96

England: 44.10
India: 20.85
New Zealand: 97.66
Pakistan: 119
S.Africa: 54.18
Sri Lanka: 50.11
U.A.E.: 97
West Indies: 78

Till 2002 Ponting averages 40 against WI and after that he averages 72.

Sure, and what does he average against S.Africa and Pakistan?

You forget that Tendulkar played so many away series in the early 90s as well when the pitches were much difficult and bowlers too. Also he has not played West Indies away after they became really ****. So all this holds against him too. Yet he averages a full 2 points more than Ponting with more than a tonload of difference in sheer weight of runs as well.

The irony is that Tendulkar's better averages came against the weaker teams and results varied with the best ones; whereas Ponting was better against the best and not good against the worst. You can also argue Ponting missed out playing those weaker sides when he was actually a great batsman. Also, the fact that Tendulkar's record in the 00s is pretty average in general makes such assumptions hard to believe as a rule.

The only concrete differences between them are:

A) Tendulkar has played more minnows and stocked up 100s where Ponting hasn't; and
B) Ponting has not played as much Test cricket as Tendulkar yet.

The rest of this is just a Versus-debate we've done time and time before; and nobody is converting anybody. Which brings me to my next point; you've already said Ponting is better in many threads, why are you arguing this?

 

[jeevan]

Sure, but Ponting's is better IMO.


Sachin is far from a home flat track bully but batting in India is generally better than in Australia. If you're looking to discuss why Ponting is behind, simply: he hasn't played minnows as much and as

Because Australians have had trouble in India? Generally, it's easier to score runs there. Bore draws and flat tracks. The stats are fairly strong behind this one.

Which explains Ponting's astonishingly high average of 21 in India.

Seriously dude:
Tendulkar's average away is about the same as at home.
Dravid's is actually higher (50 at home vs 54 overall)
Ganguly's is also about the same (42 & change) home & away
Laxman averages 48 at home vs 46.5 overall
Gambhir (short record, fwiw) 46 at home 55 overall wouldn't want to play at home either.

Among major Indian batsmen, only Sehwag (58 at home vs 52.5 overall) enjoys the same kind home field advantage as Ponting does (60 at home vs 55 overall).

India plays 2 tests in BD like every 4 years. So all of these folks have about 5 or 6 tests in BD and much much less in Zimbabwe. Far far less than what they've played in SA,NZ,Eng,Aus which should be testing tours for Indian batsmen.


If you want to embellish Ponting's record - last thing you'd want to say is that batting in India is much easier. Not for him and not for the stalwarts of the Indian lineup.