***Official*** Tendulkar vs Ponting Thread

[Ikki]

Lara was actually pretty disappointing. IIRC only really excelled against Australia. Waugh was probably the best against the better teams in the 90s.

 

[kingjulian]

I edited your selections taking out the likes of Doull et al and Ponting, with or without Bond, is comfortably ahead of Waugh.

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

Harbhajan was arguably (i would say definitely) the toughest spin bowling competitor against Australia next to Murali. They both had to play against him.

In the 90s playing in England's seaming wickets was a great challenge, and one in which Waugh really excelled. It separated out the men from the boys. Waugh was a gritty customer, and he played better as the conditions got tougher. Although i don't really remember who the top English bowlers were, Gough, Fraser and Caddick were very tough bowlers in English conditions. Waugh has actually played against a lot more tough bowlers in the late 80s too.

I think the changes are quite a bit unfair on Waugh.

record
Removed Bond and added Harbhajan. Ponting still not the best.

 

[kingjulian]

Runs and average against top 8 teams. Ponting and Sachin are neck to neck at the top.

top 6 teams

This is the story when you exclude NZ and WI as well. Two teams that have been rank bad during Ponting's time (and he helped himself to quite a lot of runs too). WI was pretty good from 1989 to 1998. But beyond that, they have played no better than Zimmers or Bangladesh really.

Lara and Tendulkar surge ahead.

 

[kingjulian]

I just had a look at Simon Doull's record. He has been bloody superb against subcontinent teams.

He averages less than 20 against Indian, Pak and SriLanka. That may have been the reason i added him.

But it seems he was dire against most other teams. There really has been no stand out NZ bowler other than Bond lately. Even he did not get to bowl at Australia in his peek. Any NZ lander around who can nominate a better bowler?

 

[Ikki]

The difference between Kumble and Harbhajan against Aus is less than a run, but everywhere else I'd take Kumble. In fact, if you look at Test matches where they played together Kumble is comfortably ahead of Harbhajan, especially in Australia. I mean, take away the 01 series and Harbhajan's record against Australia isn't really that good at all overall.

I can see why you'd want him in there - Ponting didn't do well against him in India - but he clearly isn't one of the best bowlers in the last 20 years. I'd put Saqlain before Harbhajan as well as Kumble and Murali.

record
Removed Bond and added Harbhajan. Ponting still not the best.

LOL so Martyn is? Despite playing less than half as many Tests? Come now.

 

[kingjulian]

The difference between Kumble and Harbhajan against Aus is less than a run, but everywhere else I'd take Kumble. In fact, if you look at Test matches where they played together Kumble is comfortably ahead of Harbhajan, especially in Australia. I mean, take away the 01 series and Harbhajan's record against Australia isn't really that good at all overall.

I can see why you'd want him in there - Ponting didn't do well against him in India - but he clearly isn't one of the best bowlers in the last 20 years. I'd put Saqlain before Harbhajan as well as Kumble and Murali.



LOL so Martyn is? Despite playing less than half as many Tests? Come now.

Against Australia, if i were Indian Captain, there was no way i would leave out either of them. If one is included, the other has to be. You can make a weak case for removing both.

Re Martyn. He has done it in half the number of runs. Probably cashed in one series or so with a big not out. But anyway i think Waugh has a very very strong case of being the more consistent batsman. Ponting may have been a better stroke maker.

If we are arguing Tendulkar and Lara vs Ponting.

Here is the record against the top 6 teams.

top 6

1. Ponting cashed in a lot on hapless WI and NZ attacks from 2000 onwards. So he goes down when you remove those two from the chart.
2. Tendulkar and Lara got their number playing for a lesser team. They were playing for a team ranked 4th or below for most of their career.

So i would choose those two over Ponting any day of the week. That is also the reason why those two are rated higher by about most experts.

 

[Ikki]

But if you were World captain and you had Saqlain, Murali, Kumble and Harbhajan to pick from...you know he is going to miss out. With that kind of thinking it is no wonder you put in Doul.

It's obvious you're in this to pick and choose, so I'll let you be.

 

[kingjulian]

Saqlain may have had a better peak. But once batsmen figured his doosra, he was quite hapless, and rightfully got dropped. Harbhajan Singh has sustained it. Only after 2005 his career average has tanked below that of Saqlain's.

There is no way i would say he was the better bowler than Harbhajan.

 

[kingjulian]

But if you were World captain and you had Saqlain, Murali, Kumble and Harbhajan to pick from...you know he is going to miss out. With that kind of thinking it is no wonder you put in Doul.

It's obvious you're in this to pick and choose, so I'll let you be.

Ha ha...Classic case of pot calling kettle black.

Through out this thread, you have been the one trying to pick things to make Tendulkar look an average player.

There is nothing to say that all four of them can't be in this exercise. If I include Saqlain too, things don't change much. There is nothing to say that only two spinners have to be included. After all there are more than 2 or 3 pace bowlers.

This is not against a world X1. This is how they fared against the top bowlers of the time. I have added Saqlain removed Doull as per your wish. Doull averages 16 against India, so i thought he should be added, because he obviously tested Indian bats and Tendulkar.

Proof that Ponting clearly does not stand out from the crowd.

Waugh had to play Donald, Akram, Ambrose, Waqar at their peak and for a far longer period. These are all bowlers that were in contention for the recent world X1 exercise. Considering that, a slight difference is explainable and it could even be argued Waugh was the more consistent bat.

Next...

 

[Ikki]

You'd pick all 4, is what you're saying? TBF, Harbhajan is OK as a spinner, but as spinners go there are usually not many great ones. But there were in his era; and that's not even including Macgill and Warne. Your argument's just picking to make Tendulkar look better. If playing good against Aus was the criteria, then why would I include Warne against Tendulkar for example? It'd be silly not to have him.

Ponting scoring @ 52 with Harbhajan included (having played more than twice as many Tests as Martyn) clearly does make him stand out. Without Bhajji, he averages 55, with still twice as many tests played as Martyn - showing how he really did against the best - incredible feat.

 

[ankitj]

Against Australia, if i were Indian Captain, there was no way i would leave out either of them. If one is included, the other has to be. You can make a weak case for removing both.

Re Martyn. He has done it in half the number of runs. Probably cashed in one series or so with a big not out. But anyway i think Waugh has a very very strong case of being the more consistent batsman. Ponting may have been a better stroke maker.

If we are arguing Tendulkar and Lara vs Ponting.

Here is the record against the top 6 teams.

top 6

1. Ponting cashed in a lot on hapless WI and NZ attacks from 2000 onwards. So he goes down when you remove those two from the chart.
2. Tendulkar and Lara got their number playing for a lesser team. They were playing for a team ranked 4th or below for most of their career.

So i would choose those two over Ponting any day of the week. That is also the reason why those two are rated higher by about most experts.

Let's hear a response to this, shall we?

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Let's hear a response to this, shall we?

No need for a response.Tendulkar made the World eleven,Ponting couldn't get into the Aus eleven.End of thread

 

[Ikki]

Here is the record against the top 6 teams.

top 6

1. Ponting cashed in a lot on hapless WI and NZ attacks from 2000 onwards. So he goes down when you remove those two from the chart.
2. Tendulkar and Lara got their number playing for a lesser team. They were playing for a team ranked 4th or below for most of their career.

So i would choose those two over Ponting any day of the week. That is also the reason why those two are rated higher by about most experts.

So the team that Ponting cashed in on, for example, averaging 71.72 against NZ, you exclude...when in the same period Tendulkar averages 39.61 against them. Lara averaged 29.87 against NZ in the 00s. Ponting also averaged higher against WIndies too in the 00s.

But you're not stat-picking...

 

[kingjulian]

You'd pick all 4, is what you're saying? TBF, Harbhajan is OK as a spinner, but as spinners go there are usually not many great ones. But there were in his era; and that's not even including Macgill and Warne. Your argument's just picking to make Tendulkar look better. If playing good against Aus was the criteria, then why would I include Warne against Tendulkar for example? It'd be silly not to have him.

Ponting scoring @ 52 with Harbhajan included (having played more than twice as many Tests as Martyn) clearly does make him stand out. Without Bhajji, he averages 55, with still twice as many tests played as Martyn - showing how he really did against the best - incredible feat.

So you desperately want to exclude a player, who was one if the toughest spin bowlers Aussies had to face. Lets exclude him aye...he was unfairly good against my player, even though Waugh et all managed to play him just fine. It is not a one off. Over a very long period Harbhajan averages better than even Murali against Australia. Against Australia he really has been the best spinner in the last 20 years.

Mac Who? Don't make me laugh now.

I would take a bet that if Ponting had to face Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Akram and Waqar at their peak for as long as Waugh did, his average will dip much lower than the gap that is there right now. Most expert would agree with that, that was also the reason he didn't make it into Australia XI selected by an expert panel.

 

[Ikki]

You don't seem to understand; he was only really that good against Australia (and really, 1 or 2 series at most). He has been pecularly good against us - especially Ponting. How does that make him one of the best bowlers in the world? If you had said "lets look at bowlers who did well against Australia", I'd have no problem. You said lets look at the best bowlers; and the you throw in Harbhajan to pull Ponting's record down a few points. If that was the case, you'd have to remove bowlers like Waqar, Donald, Murali and those who didn't do fantastically against us.

It's like a batsman averaging 50 against Australia and diddly squat against the rest and saying he is one of the best batsmen in the world.

Ponting would have been fine; as his record even now suggests. He's the best player of pace of the last 2 decades.

 

[kingjulian]

So the team that Ponting cashed in on, for example, averaging 71.72 against NZ, you exclude...when in the same period Tendulkar averages 39.61 against them. He also averaged higher against WIndies too in the 00s.

But you're not stat-picking...

It is top 6 only rating. If there is an argument to have top 8 only, then there is an argument to have for top 6 only.

Tendulkar played against a strong Windies team from 89 to 2000. Ponting tried to play against an aging but strong windies bowling line-up. Failed. Got dropped. Then later when all the great bowlers retired, and when Windies had forgotten what it was to be competitive, Ponting cashed in big time.

You said Doul is not a great bowler in your own words, and insinuated there has been not many great NZ bowlers who bowl with PACE. So there should be no problem excluding him and his team yeah.

 

[kingjulian]

You don't seem to understand; he was only really that good against Australia (and really, 1 or 2 series at most). He has been pecularly good against us - especially Ponting. How does that make him one of the best bowlers in the world?

That's like a batsman averaging 50 against Australia and diddly squat against the rest and saying he is one of the best batsmen in the world.

Ponting would have been fine; as his record even now suggests. He's the best player of pace of the last 2 decades.

Except thats not the case.

1. He has played in more than 1 or 2 series. He has played a whole lot of series, in Australia and India and has had very reasonable success. More so than every spinner out there. It is a lot different to say a NZ cricket team preparing an extremely green track to neuter India's batting for one series where teams struggled to make triple digit scores.
2. He does not average diddly squat against the rest.

 

[Ikki]

It is top 6 only rating. If there is an argument to have top 8 only, then there is an argument to have for top 6 only.

Really? Because you said you're removing them because Ponting pummelled them...and the other 2 didn't. Peculiar that.

Tendulkar played against a strong Windies team from 89 to 2000. Ponting tried to play against an aging but strong windies bowling line-up. Failed. Got dropped. Then later when all the great bowlers retired, and when Windies had forgotten what it was to be competitive, Ponting cashed in big time.

Ponting averaged 40 against them; hardly failing. And he did better against Pakistan and S.Africa than Tendulkar did...so what now?

You said Doul is not a great bowler in your own words, and insinuated there has been not many great NZ bowlers who bowl with PACE. So there should be no problem excluding him and his team yeah.

So we should exclude his whole team when both Lara and Tendulkar did pitifully against them. It's like removing minnows, knowing the batsmen failed, having played enough, for the sake of removing minnows.

Except thats not the case.

1. He has played in more than 1 or 2 series. He has played a whole lot of series, in Australia and India and has had very reasonable success. More so than most series. It is a lot different to say a NZ cricket team preparing an extremely green track to neuter India's batting for one series where teams struggled to make triple digit scores.
2. He does not average diddly squat against the rest.

Harbhajan averages diddly squat just removing his 01 series against Aus. Let alone the rest of his stats against everybody else which puts him as an average spinner and nothing more. Away from home he is plain crap.

 

[kingjulian]

. It's like removing minnows, knowing the batsmen failed, having played enough, for the sake of removing minnows.
.

Lol!!!!

Like removing Harbhajan?

 

[Ikki]

Lol!!!!

Like removing Harbhajan?

No, because you specifically said to include the best bowlers. It's why you don't have Hansie Cronje, who has better stats against India than Murali and Warne, for Tendulkar.