Lara Disappionted over pontings comment

[krkode]

>Let's see some real on-field, crunch situation leadership before potential is >transformed into conclusive proof.


This is what I was asked to prove Ponting was a good captain by N Pickup:

Can anybody provide examples of some real on-field, crunch situation leadership by the Kiwi captain or is it only the Australian captain that has to prove he a good leader.I think Ponting is the better captain but I am open to sound reasons why I might be wrong.

It's just that a lot of people feel that Ponting has done nothing but "inherit" a killer team from Steve Waugh. Hence his magnificent record. Although, it is a somewhat unfair (unfair to Ponting) way to look at it, I don't think there's much disputing it. What would Ponting's captaincy record be like if he played for New Zealand? Maybe not so good? Maybe better? There's no way anyone can prove either way, and that's why it's futile to compare.

People, on the other hand, feel that Fleming has himself, over the past several years, helped mould the team that New Zealand is. They were never that great, and they still aren't magnificent like Australia but there's no doubt in people's minds that Stephen Fleming has played an integral role in the "building" of the Kiwi team that we see today. How would Fleming do if he was the Aussie captain? Better? Worse? Would he even be in the team? Again, there's no way to prove.

It's just bloody speculation, and everyone is wasting their time by arguing it out.

There's no question that my 144-5 ODI record and 64-2-4 Test record beats any captain's record out there. I, ladies and gentlemen, am, undoubtedly, the best captain out there. My 23-0 ODI, and 11-0 test record against Australia shows it. No point arguing otherwise.

 

[THE G-TRAIN]

Totally agree with you kr. Especially with that captaincy record of yours. As for the issue of arrogance, i think its pretty unfair to generalise and say that ALL aussies are arrogant. Just because a few aussies in this forum are very happy about their teams success doesnt mean they are arrogant. Sure some people are, but they have a right to be considering the aussies domination of the game. A couple of people seem to be whinging about people being arrogant. So what?! Whinging about it to everyone isnt going to stop it. Who knows maybe its not arrogance. Maybe ur just upset because the Aussies are the best in the World and your jealous. I will repeat the term used earlier: "Sour grapes"

 

[krkode]

Yeah, please don't be sour about your team's defeat to the Aussies. It's clear that they're the best team in the world (after mine, of course) and it's also clear that *some* Aussies are a wee bit arrogant. Others are proud. Others are humble.

What each one feels should merely be manifested in your unspoken respect of them; no need to make it known. Nobody wants to listen to "whingers." Of course, nobody wants to listen to arrogant people as well, but if they're not going to shut up there's no point in whinging. Nobody wants to listen to boasters and whingers. That's overdose.

 

[Scallywag]

Dasa's only contribution was a derogatory comment dirtected at me.

I want to discuss cricket not be psycho anaylized by lurkers.

 

[Dasa]

It wasn't quite a derogatory comment, rather an observation, and it wasn't directed at you in particular. Not quite psychoanalysis.

... so, how about that Ponting, eh?

 

[Gaijin-san]

I'm enjoying this Fleming vs Ponting debate now.

Let's all cast our minds back to the world cup. It's Australia vs New Zealand in the Super Sixes, Shane Bond has just taken his 6th wicket to leave Australia adrift on 7/84 with around 24 overs left to play. Ricky Ponting, knowing there is so much time to play and so little left to play with, makes what seems an innocuous batting lineup change (too little too late?).

Andy Bichel is moved in front of Brett Lee for the first time in a while. Ponting figures that Bich can stay in and play out a lot of the time, and, if Australia is still there at the end, there is time for Brett Lee to unleash his longhandle. Bichel and Bevan feature in a stand with 97 runs for the 8th wicket.

Where was Shane Bond when this was happening? He was fielding. He'd bowled his 10 and that was it. Fleming bowled out Bond's precious last overs in order to kill off Australia, a crucial mistake because he couldn't do it. So Australia's lower order were content knowing they would not have to face Bond at all, only the mostly b-grade tripe that features in New Zealand's attack.

Anyway, Bevan gets out, leaving Bichel, Lee and 13 deliveries. Bichel gets out soon after, but not before having top scored with a crucial matchwinning 64. Lee thumps 2 sixes off the last two balls of the innings, and Australia get past 200; in their minds a massive psychological advantage. A little switch made all the difference, and New Zealand were comprehensibly smashed by Australia's bowlers, who were confident in the knowledge they had been given enough runs to play with.

Ponting vs Fleming? No contest.

 

[DJ]

Also as this thread is showing, some people can't seem to be able to take criticism or anything but outright praise for their compatriots.

I read an article a while back about an experiment that was done at an Australian university. Groups of respondents were read criticisms of Australia, Autralians and Australian society, but one half were told that the comments were made by an Australian while the other half had the comments attributed to a non-Australian. The group who thought they were listening to an Australian were generally in agreement with what was said, whereas those who thought they were listening to a non-Australian generally disagreed with the criticisms. Interesting, don't you think? Although I don't think that sort of reaction is necessarily limited to Australians, it is certainly food for thought.

As far as the captaincy issue goes, I'd like to hear more examples of what people consider to be good captaincy. One of the best that I have witnessed was during the opening game of the 2003 WC, SA vs. WI. Before the game started, the teams were taking throw-downs on the field. Carl Hooper was taking particular interest in the SA throws and must've noticed that Shaun Pollock was having trouble keeping his front-foot shots down. Later in the game, as soon as Pollock came in to bat, Hooper put himself in at a short cover position and had Chris Gayle bowl a selection of nicely pitched up deliveries. One of them went for four, but a few balls later Pollock drove again only to thump the ball ,slightly airborne, straight at Hooper.

I wish I had some examples of Pollock being a clever captain, but I don't. He was rubbish.

 

[luckyeddie]

I'm enjoying this Fleming vs Ponting debate now.

Let's all cast our minds back to the world cup. It's Australia vs New Zealand in the Super Sixes, Shane Bond has just taken his 6th wicket to leave Australia adrift on 7/84 with around 24 overs left to play. Ricky Ponting, knowing there is so much time to play and so little left to play with, makes what seems an innocuous batting lineup change (too little too late?).

Andy Bichel is moved in front of Brett Lee for the first time in a while. Ponting figures that Bich can stay in and play out a lot of the time, and, if Australia is still there at the end, there is time for Brett Lee to unleash his longhandle. Bichel and Bevan feature in a stand with 97 runs for the 8th wicket.

Where was Shane Bond when this was happening? He was fielding. He'd bowled his 10 and that was it. Fleming bowled out Bond's precious last overs in order to kill off Australia, a crucial mistake because he couldn't do it. So Australia's lower order were content knowing they would not have to face Bond at all, only the mostly b-grade tripe that features in New Zealand's attack.

Anyway, Bevan gets out, leaving Bichel, Lee and 13 deliveries. Bichel gets out soon after, but not before having top scored with a crucial matchwinning 64. Lee thumps 2 sixes off the last two balls of the innings, and Australia get past 200; in their minds a massive psychological advantage. A little switch made all the difference, and New Zealand were comprehensibly smashed by Australia's bowlers, who were confident in the knowledge they had been given enough runs to play with.

Ponting vs Fleming? No contest.

A fair point, but what would have been your thoughts on Fleming if, say, he had had Australia in exactly the same dire straits and had then decided to keep a couple of Shane Bond overs back for the 'slog' and Australia with Bevan and Bichel had still got there?

Because those very same circumstances occurred in the Australia v England game, and Hussain held Caddick back, this despite the fact that jug-ears was on fire.

Two matches, two captains, two identical situations, the same two batsmen, two wins for Ponting's Australia. Now tell me again why Fleming's attempt to break the last vital partnership before it had a chance to get going was bad captaincy when he had seen the opposite tactic fail just nine days earlier.

I maintain the two Australian victories (against England and New Zealand) were down to team spirit and never-say-die attitude. If that is to Ponting's credit then so be it - you could say the same about any victory grasped from the jaws of defeat.

If it is conclusive proof that Ponting is a better captain than Fleming, please tell me how.

 

[marc71178]

Can anybody provide examples of some real on-field, crunch situation leadership by the Kiwi captain or is it only the Australian captain that has to prove he a good leader.

The mere fact you are questioning the ability of Fleming as a captain shows how much credence we should pay to your knowledge of and arguments about captaincy.

 

[marc71178]

Where was Shane Bond when this was happening? He was fielding. He'd bowled his 10 and that was it. Fleming bowled out Bond's precious last overs in order to kill off Australia, a crucial mistake because he couldn't do it.

Yet if he'd taken him off earlier, he'd have been crucified for not trying to kill the game off (!)

 

[bennyr]

There's absolutely no evidence to say he is.

I would imagine the Kiwi's for one would disagree strongly, seeing as they actually possess an awesome captain.

Couldn't agree more.

Brett Lee could get appointed one day captain and have a similar win-loss record if he was capable of taking the advice of John Buchanan. Would this make him a great captain?

Stephen Fleming is able to extract more out of his side than he should logically be able to. It would be near impossible for Ricky Ponting to do this with his current side considering the talent it contains. If Ponting is a great captain, he will need to prove it by maintaining domination of world crcket as Australia loses the players that have established that dominance.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Because those very same circumstances occurred in the Australia v England game, and Hussain held Caddick back, this despite the fact that jug-ears was on fire.

I can argue that Ponting did what he did correctly on both occasions then.

Either way, the 'Bond bowling out' was not as major a point as the switching of Lee/Bichel. You can't argue that was a masterstroke and that did NZ in.

 

[Deja moo]

I can argue that Ponting did what he did correctly on both occasions then.

Either way, the 'Bond bowling out' was not as major a point as the switching of Lee/Bichel. You can't argue that was a masterstroke and that did NZ in.

How was thata masterstroke ?

Ponting had noticed Bichel making 64 in the earlier game Vs england.

Hence ,being the in form batsman , Bichel was sent in before Lee . Hardly a masterstroke that.

 

[Gaijin-san]

How was thata masterstroke ?

Ponting had noticed Bichel making 64 in the earlier game Vs england.

Hence ,being the in form batsman , Bichel was sent in before Lee . Hardly a masterstroke that.

Don't you hate it when you don't check out facts before you get all high and mighty? Bad luck if you do. Bichel actually made 30-odd.

Ponting made it fairly clear in his book that the reason Bichel was sent in was because he can actually play a long innings. Lee can't.

 

[Deja moo]

Don't you hate it when you don't check out facts before you get all high and mighty? Bad luck if you do. Bichel actually made 30-odd.

Ponting made it fairly clear in his book that the reason Bichel was sent in was because he can actually play a long innings. Lee can't.

Ok, my bad if it was 30 and not 64.

Still, if the reason why ponting sent in bichel ahead of lee was that bichel could actually play a long innings, how was that a masterstroke as opposed to plain commonsense ?
I suppose you want to imply that any other captain would have sent in a guy who couldnt bat ?

 

[luckyeddie]

I can argue that Ponting did what he did correctly on both occasions then.

Either way, the 'Bond bowling out' was not as major a point as the switching of Lee/Bichel. You can't argue that was a masterstroke and that did NZ in.

I never disputed the batting order - and that is definitely an area where the captain's influence is paramount.

As for you being able to make a case for Ponting being right on both occasions (Fleming's and Hussain's differing decisions regarding the use of their strike bowlers, both unsuccessful), I guess you can, but we will all laugh at you and point.

 

[Gaijin-san]

As for you being able to make a case for Ponting being right on both occasions (Fleming's and Hussain's differing decisions regarding the use of their strike bowlers, both unsuccessful), I guess you can, but we will all laugh at you and point.

On the contrary, LE. I will be laughing. After all, Australia won both games.

Suck on them apples, losers.

 

[DJ]

I suppose you want to imply that any other captain would have sent in a guy who couldnt bat ?

Shaun Pollock probably would've. He was as rubbish as I am fluffy.

 

[Gaijin-san]

Ok, my bad if it was 30 and not 64.

Still, if the reason why ponting sent in bichel ahead of lee was that bichel could actually play a long innings, how was that a masterstroke as opposed to plain commonsense ?
I suppose you want to imply that any other captain would have sent in a guy who couldnt bat ?

It was a masterstroke because of the effect it had on the match, all things considered at the time the decision was made.

 

[Scallywag]

Ponting shows he's got captaincy clues
Michael Crutcher - 25 March 2002

Ponting's confidence reflected his approach to the leadership in the first matches since Waugh's axing, bringing together a team minus injured players Shane Warne (hamstring), Michael Bevan (hamstring) and Ian Harvey (shoulder).

Replacements Jimmy Maher, Shane Watson and Nathan Hauritz were key figures in the second match and Ponting defused another late blast from Lance Klusener (59 in 59 balls) as South Africa was dismissed for 181 in reply to 8-226.

Ponting used Darren Lehmann's part-time spin to outwit Klusener, who holed out to deep mid-wicket, and also claimed the key wicket of Jacques Kallis to a catch at a specially-placed short cover-point.

They were clever moves and showed Ponting had learned well under Waugh's relentless captaincy.