Good/Great bowlers that owned good/great batsman...

[Cevno]

Shane Warne against Ashwell prince.
Chaminda Vaas against Michael Atherton.
Makhaya Ntini against Nathan astle.

 

[bagapath]

Shane Warne against Ashwell prince.
Chaminda Vaas against Michael Atherton.
Makhaya Ntini against Nathan astle.

of the six cricketers mentioned here only one (the great text messager) deserves to be part of this thread. the rest were just honest, working class cricketers who usually play and leave the game without making any sort of impact anywhere.

 

[Sir Alex]

of the six cricketers mentioned here only one (the great text messager) deserves to be part of this thread. the rest were just honest, working class cricketers who usually play and leave the game without making any sort of impact anywhere.

Makhaya and Chaminda would definitely make "good" of the Good/Great part.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Astle certainly made an impact.

Read the thread title a little closer.....

 

[Ikki]

Mcgrath got Tendulkar out only 6 times.

He only played McGrath some 9 times. McGrath clearly shut out Tendulkar. Even when Tendulkar made runs (i.e. 2 100s) McGrath went for F-all runs.

 

[Ikki]

Hard to remember anyone other than Harbhajan dominating Ponting like that.

Ishant did very well, but I think it's a bit over the top to call it dominating. Ponting averages 44 against Ishant and this in one of his worst troughs.

Also, Harbhajan's domination of Ponting is really only in India. In Australia Ponting scored 3 50s and a 100 in 7 innings averaging 44 in matches with Harbhajan.

 

[Sir Alex]

Ishant did very well, but I think it's a bit over the top to call it dominating. Ponting averages 44 against Ishant and this in one of his worst troughs.

Also, Harbhajan's domination of Ponting is really only in India. In Australia Ponting scored 3 50s and a 100 in 7 innings averaging 44 in matches with Harbhajan.

You forget, he started his trough with the Indian series... Kind of circular reasoning huh? Couldn't dominate Ishant in ONE test, couldn't HIT HIM OUT once, couldn't even PUT PRESSURE on the young kid.

The pressure WAS always on Ponting. That's what I'd like to call dominance.

 

[Ikki]

You forget, he started his trough with the Indian series... Kind of circular reasoning huh? Couldn't dominate Ishant in ONE test, couldn't HIT HIM OUT once, couldn't even PUT PRESSURE on the young kid.

The pressure WAS always on Ponting. That's what I'd like to call dominance.

Actually when he first faced Ishant in the series in Australia he averaged 53 in matches against him. He only played started poorly in the return series in India...a country he has never played well in. Surprise surprise. It may have started along that time, but in retrospect we can go back and look and see he hadn't been in touch for a good 2 years after it too. Or are you saying that's all because of Ishant? Heh.

I know what you'd like to call it; it just doesn't make it true...or near it. Ponting doesn't have to dominate or score at Sehwag levels to illustrate that Ishant didn't dominate him; he just has to stay in and score plenty of runs while Ishant is bowling...which he did.

I actually rated Ishant a lot back then. It's a shame he has dropped off so badly.

 

[Sir Alex]

Actually when he first faced Ishant in the series in Australia he averaged 53 in matches against him. He only played started poorly in the return series in India...a country he has never played well in. Surprise surprise. It may have started along that time, but in retrospect we can go back and look and see he hadn't been in touch for a good 2 years after it too. Or are you saying that's all because of Ishant? Heh.

I know what you'd like to call it; it just doesn't make it true...or near it. Ponting doesn't have to dominate or score at Sehwag levels to illustrate that Ishant didn't dominate him; he just has to stay in and score plenty of runs while Ishant is bowling...which he did.

I actually rated Ishant a lot back then. It's a shame he has dropped off so badly.

Scoring at less than 50 SR is domination huh?

How about averaging 23 per dismissal against him? Actually should be less than 20 considering Ishant got him caught behind clearly in the Sydney test but was not given.

Try shifting goalposts, keep running around, go on denying, but you just can't make the truth a lie. Ishant had Ponting's number.

 

[Ikki]

Scoring at less than 50 SR is domination huh?

How about averaging 23 per dismissal against him? Actually should be less than 20 considering Ishant got him caught behind clearly in the Sydney test but was not given.

Try shifting goalposts, keep running around, go on denying, but you just can't make the truth a lie. Ishant had Ponting's number.

Ponting strikes at 54.44 in matches against Ishant. Try harder.

The per dismissal stat as T-C has already stated is one of the most useless stats you can bring. It only takes into account the scores Ponting was on when Ishant got him out. Whereas it does not take into account the scores Ponting made against Ishant when he couldn't get him out.

It's like batsman A averaging 100 against bowler B in 10 matches they've played together. But in one inning bowler B took batsman A's wicket for when he was on 15 runs. That means the per dismissal average is 15 for that bowler against that batsman. When in reality the bowler was shellacked.

Unfortunately, you have this complex where you have to justify every bit of non sense to the point that it's ridiculous and tiresome. Keep clutching those straws mate.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Scoring at less than 50 SR is domination huh?

How about averaging 23 per dismissal against him? Actually should be less than 20 considering Ishant got him caught behind clearly in the Sydney test but was not given.

Try shifting goalposts, keep running around, go on denying, but you just can't make the truth a lie. Ishant had Ponting's number.

Stop playing an argument that isn't there. Where in that post did Ikki say that Ponting dominated Ishant?

Harbhajan to Ponting is a domination. McGrath to Atherton is a domination. Alderman to Gooch is a domination. Ishant to Ponting is nowhere near those levels; fair to say that Ishant has the upper hand, but calling it a domination seems a bit ridiculous.

 

[Sir Alex]

Ponting strikes at 54.44 in matches against Ishant. Try harder.

The per dismissal stat as T-C has already stated is one of the most useless stats you can bring. It only takes into account the scores Ponting was on when Ishant got him out. Whereas it does not take into account the scores Ponting made against Ishant when he couldn't get him out.

It's like batsman A averaging 100 against bowler B in 10 matches they've played together. But in one inning bowler B took batsman A's wicket for when he was on 15 runs. That means the per dismissal average is 15 for that bowler against that batsman. When in reality the bowler was shellacked.

Unfortunately, you have this complex where you have to justify every bit of non sense to the point that it's ridiculous and tiresome. Keep clutching those straws mate.

Requoting my post again. No idea why you were blasting the windmills!

It was not a Harbjanesque kind of domination. But given the conditions, the vast gulf in their experience etc, Ishant did dominate Ponting.

Their player vs player record is as follows:

Test	Innings	 	Runs 	 Balls 	 Wicket 
Sydney	1st Innings	 14 	 15 	
Perth	1st Innings	 0   	 3 	 1 
	2nd innings	 15 	 38 	 1 
Adelaid	1st innings	 26 	 44 	
Bnglore	1st innings	 33 	 62 	
	2nd innings	 6 	 16 	 1 
Mohali	1st innings	 0   	 8 	 1 
	2nd innings	 0   	 8 	 1 
Delhi	1st innings	 9 	 26 	
Nagpur	1st innings	 15 	 23 	
	2nd innings	 -   	 -   	
Total		 	118 	 243 	 5 
Avg/wicket			 23.60 	
SR			 	 48.56

Hard to remember anyone other than Harbhajan dominating Ponting like that.

 

[Sir Alex]

Stop playing an argument that isn't there. Where in that post did Ikki say that Ponting dominated Ishant?

Harbhajan to Ponting is a domination. McGrath to Atherton is a domination. Alderman to Gooch is a domination. Ishant to Ponting is nowhere near those levels; fair to say that Ishant has the upper hand, but calling it a domination seems a bit ridiculous.

To be called any sort of an equal contest, there should be minicontests where Ponting managed to get on top of Ishant. And where Ishant got on top of Ponting as well. Here the former seldom happened, while the latter almost always. Except for two flatbeds (Bangalore and Adelaide), Ishant almost always troubled Ponting. In slightly helpful conditions (Mohali, & Perht) he practically owned him. Ponting had no answer for the lengths or line Ishant bowled.

The figures should have been 6 out of 7, but for a clear caught behind not given in the fractitious Sydney test match. Ponting afterwards admitted it even. But a few fanboys find it somehow unable to digest their favorite player just can't get owned by a teenager. Had anyone caught both series on TV, it would be very obvious.

 

[Ikki]

Requoting my post again. No idea why you were blasting the windmills!

You said that Sharma dominated Ponting. He clearly didn't. Pretty even battle, really. Nowhere near domination.

The per innings stat is useless.

 

[Sir Alex]

At Perth

YouTube - Ishant Sharma and Ricky Ponting, 3rd test

After 6 months at Mohali

YouTube - Ishant's Deadly Inswinger to Ponting


The lengths and line were exactly similar...

 

[Sir Alex]

You said that Sharma dominated Ponting. He clearly didn't. Pretty even battle, really. Nowhere near domination.

The per innings stat is useless.

Hahaha even battle??? Lol! 5 times he "owned" Ponting.. that's not even 1% fightback from Ponting was involved in those. Actually include Sydney and that makes it 6. He never even played an innings, or a cameo even which put Ishant in the least amount of pressure as a bowler.

 

[honestbharani]

Larwood - Bradman (for one series anyway).
McGrath - Lara is one worth discussing. He got him oout plenty of times, but the little bugger scored plenty of runs against Australia too. Probably wouldn't say he "owned" him, but that each had their time against the other.

yep... remember McGrath himself taking exception to that PoV.. He said something like, I got him a few times and he got me a few times...

 

[nightprowler10]

Venkatesh Prasad - Amir Sohail(one ODI/one moment but it did feel ****ing good )

****

Harmison always had a good time against Inzamam.

 

[Ikki]

Hahaha even battle??? Lol! 5 times he "owned" Ponting.. that's not even 1% fightback from Ponting was involved in those. Actually include Sydney and that makes it 6. He never even played an innings, or a cameo even which put Ishant in the least amount of pressure as a bowler.

It doesn't matter. He could have bowled Ponting out for 0 5 times and in 5 other innings Ponting could score 5 100s with Ishant not getting his wicket. That would be an average of 50 in matches against Ishant, yet the per innings stat would have him down for 0. Flipping your logic on it's head, when Ponting made 140, 123, 87 and 55 in matches against Ishant, since Ishant didn't take his wicket he offered 0% fightback. You really are full of it.

He took his wicket many times and conceded many runs. McGrath took Lara's wicket some 15 times IIRC; yet Lara averages 47 in matches with McGrath.

The per innings stat just shows that when Sharma got Ponting it was usually early. That's very good. But when he didn't, he went for plenty of runs and Ponting made sizeable scores. Enough so that overall he averages 44 in matches vs Ishant and that's not domination one way or the other.

 

[Sir Alex]

It doesn't matter. He could have bowled Ponting out for 0 5 times and in 5 other innings Ponting could score 5 100s with Ishant not getting his wicket. That would be an average of 50 in matches against Ishant, yet the per innings stat would have him down for 0. Flipping your logic on it's head, when Ponting made 140, 123, 87 and 55 in matches against Ishant, since Ishant didn't take his wicket he offered 0% fightback. You really are full of it.

He took his wicket many times and conceded many runs. McGrath took Lara's wicket some 15 times IIRC; yet Lara averages 47 in matches with McGrath.

The per innings stat just shows that when Sharma got Ponting it was usually early. That's very good. But when he didn't, he went for plenty of runs and Ponting made sizeable scores.

Wordisms again but no content, why am I not surprised!

Please show me ONE occassion where Ponting was able to get on top of Ishant.

Embark on your athon mate. Figures don't lie. Ponting NEVER managed to see off Ishant, not even once so far. And probably never will. That is ownage.