Choose three batsmen for the Post Packer XI middle order

[stephen]

Criminal the lack of respect Ponting's record gets.

More runs at a higher average than nearly everyone else on the list.

Richards I feel is severely overrated. He was extremely good, but good in the same way that Gilchrist was - once his eye went his batting plummeted, which says to me that he was unwilling to adapt his game, which is not good in a batsman.

I really feel that Ponting, Tendulkar and Lara would be the best middle order, batting in that order.

 

[GilchristFtw]

IMO I would pick:
Ponting
Tendulkar
and Lara.
Waugh would be my next pick after these three.

 

[weldone]

This thread really shows that Border and Miandad are really underrated...I mean the two of them combinedly have got only 1 vote...They are far far better than that...If anyone should get votes except Tendulkar, Lara, Chappell, Ponting, Richards and Waugh they are Miandad and Border...Yes, definitely before Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara, Chanderpaul and the others...I mean playing against Hadlee, Marshall, Roberts, Garner, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Akram, Waqar, Kapil and the others and averaging over 50 is no mean feat...And doing that for decades after decades is just phenomenal...

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Criminal the lack of respect Ponting's record gets.

More runs at a higher average than nearly everyone else on the list.

Richards I feel is severely overrated. He was extremely good, but good in the same way that Gilchrist was - once his eye went his batting plummeted, which says to me that he was unwilling to adapt his game, which is not good in a batsman.

I really feel that Ponting, Tendulkar and Lara would be the best middle order, batting in that order.

This thread really shows that Border and Miandad are really underrated...I mean the two of them combinedly have got only 1 vote...They are far far better than that...If anyone should get votes except Tendulkar, Lara, Chappell, Ponting, Richards and Waugh they are Miandad and Border...Yes, definitely before Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara, Chanderpaul and the others...I mean playing against Hadlee, Marshall, Roberts, Garner, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Akram, Waqar, Kapil and the others and averaging over 50 is no mean feat...And doing that for decades after decades is just phenomenal...

Under-rated?
Lack of respect?

It's a ****en poll of peoples opinions of 'only 3' middle order batsman. There is nothing wrong with 'losing' a poll to Lara, Tendulkar, and Richards. ffs

 

[weldone]

There is nothing wrong with 'losing' a poll to Lara, Tendulkar, and Richards. ffs

Have you read any of the other words in my post except 'underrated' before posting a reply?

Yes, there definitely is nothing wrong losing a poll to Tendulkar, Lara and Richards, I agree.

But there certainly is something wrong in getting lesser number of votes than Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara, Chanderpaul, Flower and Co.

 

[kingkallis]

I've seen post 90 cricket the most so for me, Ponting - Kallis - SRT!

Lara was awesome but consistency was not there!

 

[bagapath]

i am not surprised by the choices made by CW members. now that the results look more or less set i am asking myself who i would vote for knowing my vote cant do much to change the results. who would i choose to be the middle order of my personal team?

the three most stylish batsmen in the lineup are:

Damien Martyn
Mohammad Azharuddin
VVS Laxman

i can watch these guys paint their masterpieces for days at a stretch. those balls from outside the off stump ending up behind the square leg or the inswinger cut behind point can thrill me till death. But their artistry alone cannot assure me success evertime they go out to bat. they can take your breath away you with an exhilarating 30 and spoon a catch to point off a long hop and walk away with a smile. you cant risk everything on beauty alone. also one of them could have taken money to throw away the match. you never know!!

then let me choose really tough guys who wont compromise their team for anything in the world. i want to go for three of the toughest nuts to crack.

let me first admit most, if not all, in contention are tough cricketers - including the stylists - to start with. otherwise they wouldnt have achived so much in their chosen profession. but even among the tough ones there must be really some guys who would rather die than lose a game. they are, IMO,...

Javed Miandad
Allan Border
Steve Waugh

I can choose these three guys and put my leg up knowing they would give their best irrespective of the match situation. Actually, they should be my choices. They have done well everywhere, against everyone and for many, many years.

But...

Are they exciting to watch? Yes and no. Their grit, sweat and blood-spilling on the cricket pitch is high drama. it is almost gladiatorial. it is exciting in that macho sense. but there is something that makes them,sorry to say this, a little boring. their shot making is limited. their plans are noble and challenging but they are set and predictable. you can expect a steet fight from them and you will get it. but they will never surprise you with magic.

for that you should go to..

 

[bagapath]

Brian Lara
Greg Chappell
Kevin Pietersen

I know the third name is not yet on par with the first two. but eventually we will all acknowledge that they are kindred spirits. they are the right mix of the two groups already mentioned. they can perform like trapeze artists amidst the chaos the fighters usually thrive in. they can score back to the wall centuries but can make sure your heart jumps to your mouth every time a flick of the wrist bisects the narrowest gap between fielders or when a good length ball is cover driven in the last split second or when a switch hit sails over the rope.

being a slightly weak hearted person I would rather have more technically correct defense and power packed shot making and turn to..

Ricky Ponting
Sachin Tendulkar
Viv Richards

The boundaries reach the rope faster. The sixers fly longer. The blade alway looks broader. If the swagger of Viv personified arrogance, Punter and Sachin use their glare and coldness to project their self belief. These three just dont like any bowler who doesnt kneel down in front of them. It is personal pride on show here.

the other group i have as choice consists of three batsmen who derive some cruel sadistic pleasure in grinding the opposition to dust. or may be not. may be they are the most selfeless cricketers in the world that they dont mind being boring, slow and under-rated in comparison with their stroke making team mates.


Rahul Dravid
Jacques Kallis
Shiv Chanderpal

One of them has a home in miami and an ugly technique. another one is so methodical in everything he does that he could have been a nuclear scientist. other one has the ***iest girl friend of the lot but an unenviable scoring rate. he could probably come in contention again along with the all rounders.

we already have all-rounders in this line up. Since gilly is already in the team, he is not in contention. otherwise he could have been clubbed with the other two wicket keeping batsmen.

Sangakkara
Andy Flower

One attacker, one killer of spin, one classical grafter with "christian" strokes. all three are southpaws and good enough to play as batsman alone. the fact that they were quality glovemen made all three of them so vital to their teams.

I just cant make up my mind.

 

[G.I.Joe]

This thread really shows that Border and Miandad are really underrated...I mean the two of them combinedly have got only 1 vote...They are far far better than that...If anyone should get votes except Tendulkar, Lara, Chappell, Ponting, Richards and Waugh they are Miandad and Border...Yes, definitely before Kallis, Dravid, Sangakkara, Chanderpaul and the others...I mean playing against Hadlee, Marshall, Roberts, Garner, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Akram, Waqar, Kapil and the others and averaging over 50 is no mean feat...And doing that for decades after decades is just phenomenal...

What? Do you understand how these polls work? If a 'Best Batsman ever' poll consists of just Bradman and Tendulkar, and Bradman gets 100/100 votes, that doesn't imply that Tendulkar is under rated. It just means no one chose to cast a pity vote.

 

[thierry henry]

Crowe didn't score 3,000 at 45?

 

[Jamee999]

Ponting batting in Australia (half the time), never against two of the best bowlers of his time, and in one of the two best teams of all time counts against him, for mine.

He's top 5 of the era though.

 

[bagapath]

Crowe didn't score 3,000 at 45?

not without the 249 he scored against zimbabwe at 62+ avg.

 

[Ikki]

Ponting batting in Australia (half the time), never against two of the best bowlers of his time, and in one of the two best teams of all time counts against him, for mine.

He's top 5 of the era though.

Tendulkar batted in India (half the time), when he faced Australia with their best he wasn't successful, wasn't successful against Pakistan and neither S.Africa. 3 of the 4 best bowling teams of his time. And as soon as Ponting came to the scene has been in his shadow for the majority of it.

But he's top 5 of the era though.

---

Sorry, just thought it sounded silly and wanted to even the playing field. Looking at the Poll it's quite ridiculous in my eyes. Ponting with a 1/3 of the votes Tendulkar has?

 

[stephen]

Tendulkar batted in India (half the time), when he faced Australia with their best he wasn't successful, wasn't successful against Pakistan and neither S.Africa. 3 of the 4 best bowling teams of his time. And as soon as Ponting came to the scene has been in his shadow for the majority of it.

But he's top 5 of the era though.

---

Sorry, just thought it sounded silly and wanted to even the playing field. Looking at the Poll it's quite ridiculous in my eyes. Ponting with a 1/3 of the votes Tendulkar has?

TBH I think that a lot of votes that otherwise would have gone to Ponting have gone to Greg Chappell and Viv Richards. It seems that a vast majority of posters rate Tendulkar/Lara/xxxx as their best bats of the era, with xxxx being one of Ponting, Chappell or Richards.

EDIT: Would be very nice to implement a preferential voting system on a forum like this, it would certainly be interesting. This system is essentially a presidential style first past the post election, with any vote not going to the "major" players being a wasted vote.

 

[bagapath]

Tendulkar batted in India (half the time), when he faced Australia with their best he wasn't successful, wasn't successful against Pakistan and neither S.Africa. 3 of the 4 best bowling teams of his time. And as soon as Ponting came to the scene has been in his shadow for the majority of it.

But he's top 5 of the era though.

---

Sorry, just thought it sounded silly and wanted to even the playing field. Looking at the Poll it's quite ridiculous in my eyes. Ponting with a 1/3 of the votes Tendulkar has?

This argument is based on assumptions or cherry picked statistical analysis.

Here are the cold facts.

Lara in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Harbhajan, Kumble, Mcgrath, Warne, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

BC Lara 1990-2005 37 70 0 3293 277 47.04 5799 56.78 9 11 4 421 19

Tendulkar in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Warne, McGrath, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

SR Tendulkar 1989-2008 33 53 3 2244 169 44.88 4436 50.58 7 11 3 292 4

Ponting in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Harbhajan, Kumble, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

RT Ponting 1996-2008 23 40 2 1369 123 36.02 2755 49.69 5 5 3 147 10


There is a very good case for Ponting being called a great batsman. But Lara and Tendulkar are a cut above him when it comes to facing high quality attacks in overseas conditions.

I know it is possible to add a series here and remove a series there to make their records match better. But simply put when it comes to playing against the 9 best bowlers of the last two decades in conditions favoring the bowlers, Lara and Tendulkar are ahead of Ponting. Ricky fans can take heart from the fact that neutral fans all over the world have acknowledged him as an all-time great. But please dont expect him to be ranked on par with Lara and Sachin; not yet.

 

[Ikki]

This argument is based on assumptions or cherry picked statistical analysis.

Here are the cold facts.

Lara in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Harbhajan, Kumble, Mcgrath, Warne, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

BC Lara 1990-2005 37 70 0 3293 277 47.04 5799 56.78 9 11 4 421 19

Tendulkar in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Warne, McGrath, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

SR Tendulkar 1989-2008 33 53 3 2244 169 44.88 4436 50.58 7 11 3 292 4

Ponting in overseas tests against Wasim, Waqar, Harbhajan, Kumble, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Pollock and Muralitharan

RT Ponting 1996-2008 23 40 2 1369 123 36.02 2755 49.69 5 5 3 147 10


There is a very good case for Ponting being called a great batsman. But Lara and Tendulkar are a cut above him when it comes to facing high quality attacks in overseas conditions.

I know it is possible to add a series here and remove a series there to make their records match better. But simply put when it comes to playing against the 9 best bowlers of the last two decades in conditions favoring the bowlers, Lara and Tendulkar are ahead of Ponting. Ricky fans can take heart from the fact that neutral fans all over the world have acknowledged him as an all-time great. But please dont expect him to be ranked on par with Lara and Sachin; not yet.

You just cherry picked stats. You lumped bowlers together that give Tendulkar a rise in his otherwise poor record vs the best bowling sides of the world. For example Tendulkar has a ordinary if not poor record against most of those bowlers, but by including someone like Murali who bowls by himself and has rarely had a great team to bowl with him you inflate Tendulkar's stats with his hammering of one of the weaker teams in the world.

Likewise, Ponting has an excellent record against all those bowlers bar Harbhajan/India. One addition or subtraction of such a player turns the whole analysis on it's head. There have only been 4 great bowling sides during their concurrent era: West Indies, Pakistan, Australia and South Africa. Let's look at the facts:

Tendulkar:
S.Africa: 35
Pakistan: 42 - and was in the 30s in the 90s.
West Indies: 57
Australia (with Warne and McGrath): 42. For about 20 of his 29 test vs Australia either Warne, McGrath or both did not play.

Lara:
S.Africa: 49
Pakistan: 53
Australia: 51
West Indies: N/A

Ponting:
S.Africa: 60
Pakistan: 81
West Indies: 62 - although in the 90s it was 40
Australia: N/A

Analyse again, thanks. Cold-hard-facts.

 

[bagapath]

You just cherry picked stats. You lumped bowlers together that give Tendulkar a rise in his otherwise poor record vs the best bowling sides of the world. Murali bowls by himself and has rarely had a great team to bowl with him. So when you lump him in with the rest, you inflate Tendulkar's record.

Likewise, Ponting has an excellent record against all those bowlers bar Harbhajan. One addition or subtraction of such a player turns the whole analysis on it's head. There have only been 4 great bowling sides during their concurrent era: West Indies, Pakistan, Australia and South Africa. Let's look at the facts:

Tendulkar:
S.Africa: 35
Pakistan: 42 - and was in the 30s in the 90s.
West Indies: 57
Australia (with Warne and McGrath): 42.

Lara:
S.Africa: 49
Pakistan: 53
Australia: 51
West Indies: N/A

Ponting:
S.Africa: 60
Pakistan: 81
West Indies: 62 - although in the 90s it was 40
Australia: N/A

Analyse again, thanks. Cold-hard-facts.

hey, you mentioned tendulkar scoring mostly in india and against weak australian attacks! when i disproved it by showing his record is better than pontings in such circumstances, you want to change it to overall figures. you are welcome to do so. but dont use this to argue that ponting has a better record against better bowlers. he does not. lara and sachin have a better record against great bowlers in overseas tests. you accept it and change your earlier argument.

i am cherry picking???? tell me which great bowler have i missed out or which mediocre bowler have i added to make sachin's record better than ponting's? actually, if you want to believe in something irrespective what the actual facts are it is your problem. just dont be surprised the rest of the world is functioning normally. cheers.

 

[Ikki]

For example, including all those bowlers above, without the Indians, Ponting averages 56 - his career average pretty much. He actually has little problem with Kumble and only Harbhajan. But when you include Kumble Harbhajan is there mostly. Anyway, the Indians aren't one of the great attacks and only bother him in India.

And as I showed you for Tendulkar, using all those bowlers, bar Murali, his average against the top bowlers is 44. That one player being included rises his average against the top bowlers by 6 points. Which just shows he was average against the best attacks of his time.

Cold-hard-facts.

 

[Uppercut]

Toughy for me. On one hand there's Lara, my personal favourite to watch and someone who could really dominate an attack, but who's been criticised in the West Indies for his unprofessional approach and for seeming to score so many of his runs when it didn't matter. Then there's Tendulkar, who rules the world in terms of style, class and longevity after carrying the hopes of his country on his shoulders for so long. But in terms of sheer run-scoring ability, his record isn't quite at the level of the others when his record against minnows isn't considered. There's Ponting, a batsman with some clear technical weaknesses yet also one who scores more runs more quickly than the others. Richards, a legend in every sense of the word who averaged over 50 without the benefit of 2000s pitches and poor opposition.

Most people will go for Richards, Lara, Tendulkar evidently, but I'm going to go for Kallis, Richards, Lara. Kallis has to be in the team for me, being one of the most incredible all-rounders of all time, and the other two from four are so close IMO that it's largely down to personal preference.

 

[bagapath]

btw, neither sachin nor lara have such ****ty records as ponting's in india. even in SA - his nemesis, sachin averages 40. ponting has a sub 30 avg (it used to be 12) in india that has repeatedly punctured his ego. he cannot expect to be called a great player with such a pathetic record in a major cricketing nation. actually it is a pity he is getting more votes than border and waugh. just goes to show people have short memories.

you want me to remove murali from the list of great bowlers so that lara and sachin's records take a beating and remove bhajj's name too so that ricky looks better. i am sorry you are so desperate to prove a point. let me tell you this as my final argument. ricky is an awesome player. but he is no lara or sachin.