Ponting better than Sachin : Ian Chappell

[aussie]

Ponting was pushed up to three at the start of that series and has been the batsman he has come to be known as not since that point but since Ramprakash just failed to get his hands underneath that edge off Caddick at Headingley.

My mistake i meant to say when he scored that hundred when he moved back to batting @ 3 in that TB test after generally batting @ 6 in his younger days from SRI 95/96 to IND 01. At that point is when Ponting "the great batsman" was born.

I dont remember that Leeds incident, but i dont see what that has to do with anything.

Ponting being elevated to three and becoming the batsman he became did not coincide. In fact he had batted three before and had failed dismally, and had a much, much better record at five, six and seven.

It certainly did coincide after that TB hundred. Yes he batted @ 3 in the early 90s but he was young then, he clearly became the batsmen he was now after the 2001 Ashes (precisely beginning at that TB test hundred).

 

[Richard]

My mistake i meant to say when he scored that hundred when he moved back to batting @ 3 in that TB test after generally batting @ 6 in his younger days from SRI 95/96 to IND 01. At that point is when Ponting "the great batsman" was born.

I dont remember that Leeds incident, but i dont see what that has to do with anything.

It certainly did coincide after that TB hundred. Yes he batted @ 3 in the early 90s but he was young then, he clearly became the batsmen he was now after the 2001 Ashes (precisely beginning at that TB test hundred).

I believe tec once replied to one of your posts saying "could there be more incorrect information in here?" and this applies again now. Let's get a few things straight:
1, Ponting batted three on a few occasions against West Indies in 1996/97 (not the early 1990s), having been in the Test team briefly at six the previous season, and failed so badly he was dropped. He was then recalled, at six once again, in 1997.
2, Ponting did not make a century at Trent Bridge (the Third Test) in 2001, he made one at Headingley (the Fourth), which begun his spell of ferocious run-making which lasted until January 2004, then briefly abated after gaining the captaincy, the re-emerged when he had a spell of being exceedingly lucky with let-offs.
3, Ponting was re-elevated to three at Edgbaston (the First Test), not Trent Bridge, in 2001.
4, Ponting edged Caddick to third-slip, I think 1st ball (if not it was 2nd), of his 144 at Headingley. Ramprakash very nearly caught it, but in the end he was a fraction too deep and the ball brushed the grass and was given n\o on third-Umpire referral (even then there were those who thought it should've been given out). Had Ramprakash been standing a fraction closer Ponting would not have scored that century and his becoming what he became would have been delayed - possibly by an innings, possibly by a little longer, just outside-possibility by a lot longer. Also, one of the most memorable matches in my time would have taken a totally different course, so I can't help being kinda glad Ramprakash was standing a bit too deep.

 

[Burgey]

It was weird when they dropped Ponting vs the WI early on when he was tried at three.

IIRC he got 80 odd in Brisbane vs Ambrose, Bishop & Walsh, and was gone a few tests later. I think it was part of the era where we were looking for someone to step into Boon's shoes at three for several year's after the KOL's retirement.

We gave a few blokes a shot at it if memory serves, but it wasn't really until Ponting went there that the position was settled, though of course JL batted well there, despite seemingly always batting for his spot.

Edit: just looked up the series - he got 88 int he 1st innings, missed out in the second, got 9 & 4 in the second test then was dropped (or at least that's how it looks, not sure if he was injured, but I don't recall that being so). Oddly, the second test that series was in November and was played at the SCG.

 

[The Sean]

Edit: just looked up the series - he got 88 int he 1st innings, missed out in the second, got 9 & 4 in the second test then was dropped (or at least that's how it looks, not sure if he was injured, but I don't recall that being so). Oddly, the second test that series was in November and was played at the SCG.

Yeah mate he was dropped - he got 88 and then three single figure scores and was done. I remember distinctly after the 88 (and it was fine knock) that the general consensus was that he'd booked his place for the rest of the series, but it wasn't to be.

 

[aussie]

I believe tec once replied to one of your posts saying "could there be more incorrect information in here?" and this applies again now. Let's get a few things straight:.

Haa well i dont know about TEC telling me that for anything.

1, Ponting batted three on a few occasions against West Indies in 1996/97 (not the early 1990s), having been in the Test team briefly at six the previous season, and failed so badly he was dropped. He was then recalled, at six once again, in 1997.
2, Ponting did not make a century at Trent Bridge (the Third Test) in 2001, he made one at Headingley (the Fourth), which begun his spell of ferocious run-making which lasted until January 2004, then briefly abated after gaining the captaincy, the re-emerged when he had a spell of being exceedingly lucky with let-offs.
3, Ponting was re-elevated to three at Edgbaston (the First Test), not Trent Bridge, in 2001.
4, Ponting edged Caddick to third-slip, I think 1st ball (if not it was 2nd), of his 144 at Headingley. Ramprakash very nearly caught it, but in the end he was a fraction too deep and the ball brushed the grass and was given n\o on third-Umpire referral (even then there were those who thought it should've been given out). Had Ramprakash been standing a fraction closer Ponting would not have scored that century and his becoming what he became would have been delayed - possibly by an innings, possibly by a little longer, just outside-possibility by a lot longer. Also, one of the most memorable matches in my time would have taken a totally different course, so I can't help being kinda glad Ramprakash was standing a bit too deep.

Yoyoyoyoyo flag up - offside - travelling - blow the whistle its halftime hold up man. All i did was get the ground wrong my bad it was long time ago. Plus by saying "early ninties" i was refering to 95/96 when he debuted @ 3, i should have said mid-90s. So dont overexaggerate i dont make up facts when i debate cricket.

As i said i dont remember that Ramprakash incident in Punters Leeds hundred, but no need to bring it up. Since even if it was taken, Ponting would have still been the batsman he is today, by bringing it up your trending on your usual FCA theory which is crap.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah mate he was dropped - he got 88 and then three single figure scores and was done. I remember distinctly after the 88 (and it was fine knock) that the general consensus was that he'd booked his place for the rest of the series, but it wasn't to be.

Yeah, I remember the knock, it was a good one. That WI attack wasn't bad at all - probably the last time they brought a really decent attack here, although Bishop wasn't the force he once was by then.

I think the Perth test that series was the one where it was about 44 degrees and Walsh and Ambrose were bowling one over spells from one end. Cleaned us up too, which they used to do in Perth even when they'd get skittled everywhere else.

 

[The Sean]

Yeah, I remember the knock, it was a good one. That WI attack wasn't bad at all - probably the last time they brought a really decent attack here, although Bishop wasn't the force he once was by then.

I think the Perth test that series was the one where it was about 44 degrees and Walsh and Ambrose were bowling one over spells from one end. Cleaned us up too, which they used to do in Perth even when they'd get skittled everywhere else.

Ha ha yep, as I remember that was the only Test of that summer where the Ambrose/Walsh/Lara triumvirate all hit form together - and considering it happened with the series already lost I'd argue their collective timing could have been better.

Ambrose though as I recall had been his typically awesome self in the Melbourne Test as well. There was a lot of criticism of Australia at the time for getting beaten in three days, but my memories of that match are that both teams collapsed in both innings and it would have been over in three days regardless of who won it.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah, I remember the knock, it was a good one. That WI attack wasn't bad at all - probably the last time they brought a really decent attack here, although Bishop wasn't the force he once was by then.

I think the Perth test that series was the one where it was about 44 degrees and Walsh and Ambrose were bowling one over spells from one end. Cleaned us up too, which they used to do in Perth even when they'd get skittled everywhere else.

Ponting's knock wasn't just good, it was awesome. A brilliant counter-attacking knock in conditions where the ball was moving around a fair bit.

Haha, Perth hammerings all used to be the same! I distinctly remember Richie Richardson bowling Ambi/Bish in 1 over spells in the preceeding series in 1993 when Ambi took 7/1. Didn't see the entire Perth Test of 1996, switched off when Blewwy got bowled by a ball which could charitably be said to have gotten at least an inch of the turf but yeah, you could pretty much show someone footage of any Perth match against the WI in the 80's/90's and no-one would know which year they were being shown. Same players, same results, same ****ing heat.

 

[The Sean]

you could pretty much show someone footage of any Perth match against the WI in the 80's/90's and no-one would know which year they were being shown. Same players, same results, same ****ing heat.

Some were slightly better than others - getting rolled for 76 in '84 (and going on to lose the Test by an innings and 100-odd) was surely the lowpoint.

 

[Burgey]

Some were slightly better than others - getting rolled for 76 in '84 (and going on to lose the Test by an innings and 100-odd) was surely the lowpoint.

By a short half head from the "effort" in 92-93.

 

[thierry henry]

That's interesting. Throughout the time I watched Fleming (which was basically from the England tour of 1999 onwards, though not incessantly) he was someone I always considered a very strong on-side player, off front-foot and back-, in fact up with the best through the leg-side (without it being a strength-that-can-also-be-weakness as in Ponting's case). But he never struck me as anything especially strong on the off. I'd always presumed this was a lifelong thing, a la Graeme Smith. Never knew it was something that came into his game.

The cover drive was Fleming's signature shot. I'm talking right from the very first international he played, people were in raptures about his driving through the off-side. It's the sort of thing where, even though he might have hardly played a cover drive apart from the first 2 or 3 years of his career, people still saw it as "his shot".

Later on I think his shot was the tuck off the hip, where he looked like he was almost playing a defensive shot yet the ball would absolutely rocket to the boundary, often straight of mid-wicket. He played that particularly shot with uncanny power.

 

[Ikki]

I think that would be a stats argument even if you could prove it TBH. Since Ponting in the 90s under no circumstances was better than Tendy or Lara - he was a totally different bat to what he was after he transformed to the batsmen he has been currently, when he began to bat @ 3 in the Trent Bridge test of 2001.

I didn't say he was better, just had more success against the best.

Unfortunately i cant agree my friend. I trust what i've seen on Tendy/Lara/Punter that would always put them ahead of Punter - even if they are some stats where Punter could be better.

I'd say in full flow Tendy & Punter againts quality pace where probably equal though & better than Lara. But overall Tendy would be superior to them both vs pace overall because Tendy never had a serious technical flaw early in his innings like how Lara & Punter where shown to have.

Well, that's your opinion and it's fine. I've watched their careers pretty much in whole and I can't split them. If judging simply by looks or their seeming dominance on the pitch, I'd rate Lara ahead, however countered with the mass of runs they've actually made, I concede Ponting has simply been more successful.

Well back me up then, ha

I think you're doing well, anyway. Many more batsmen let us down than Ponting in those series. In 05, for example, had Martyn even been average, we might have won without Ponting ever needing to be superlative. It's just too much blaming on Ponting. In 09 we had lots of batsmen doing well and lots of bowlers, we just failed at crucial times. You could say something about captaincy, but his batting was fine and you certainly could not blame him for the series losses.

 

[bagapath]

but his batting was fine and you certainly could not blame him for the series losses.

and in india???

 

[Ikki]

and in india???

I don't understand your point, are you saying us losing to India was down to him? IIRC Hayden and Clarke had even worse series there. Let's not even mention the bowlers.

 

[bagapath]

I don't understand your point, are you saying us losing to India was down to him?

yes. i am. i have already written my thoughts on this in this thread. should be there a couple of pages before this.

IIRC Hayden and Clarke had even worse series there. Let's not even mention the bowlers.

hayden had a superb series in 2001. australia still lost 2-1.

clarke had a very fine debut series in 04-05 and australia won the series. ponting came back and australia lost the test.

 

[Richard]

The cover drive was Fleming's signature shot. I'm talking right from the very first international he played, people were in raptures about his driving through the off-side. It's the sort of thing where, even though he might have hardly played a cover drive apart from the first 2 or 3 years of his career, people still saw it as "his shot".

Later on I think his shot was the tuck off the hip, where he looked like he was almost playing a defensive shot yet the ball would absolutely rocket to the boundary, often straight of mid-wicket. He played that particularly shot with uncanny power.

At any point between 1994 and 1998/99 if you'd mentioned the name Stephen Fleming my response would've been "who?" As I say, my first connection with him was the 1999 World Cup.

 

[Richard]

Haa well i dont know about TEC telling me that for anything.

My mistake, it was "inaccurate" rather than "incorrect".

As i said i dont remember that Ramprakash incident in Punters Leeds hundred, but no need to bring it up. Since even if it was taken, Ponting would have still been the batsman he is today, by bringing it up your trending on your usual FCA theory which is crap.

It's of course exceedingly likely that Ponting would've still become the batsman he is today had the catch been taken, but most if not everyone in cricket recognises how important small breaks can be, even if they refuse to accept that the idea of first-chance averages is a very fine one indeed. So many players have reflected that if they didn't have a let-off at a certain point in their career things later would have happened differently, possibly a hell of a lot differently.

I brought it up as a means of demonstrating how one small break proved the catalyst. This is an interesting little piece of information. It wasn't even, quite, a let-off - Ramprakash standing where he was standing was never going to take the catch. Ever.

 

[NUFAN]

I always think of this Test Match 1st Test: Sri Lanka v Australia at Kandy, Sep 9-11, 1999 when I first realized Ponting wasn't just good, but great.

 

[Richard]

That series was the one that finally established him, once and for all, in the side. He has never been dropped since then. Previously he'd been dropped three times, though never for all that long.

But in my book he didn't go from good to outstanding until Headingley 2001.

 

[Ikki]

yes. i am. i have already written my thoughts on this in this thread. should be there a couple of pages before this.

hayden had a superb series in 2001. australia still lost 2-1.

clarke had a very fine debut series in 04-05 and australia won the series. ponting came back and australia lost the test.

And so how does that relate to their losing it last time? Or are you referring to times before? You'd have to go all the way to 98 to argue that and I don't think it's a strong argument as Ponting was hardly the kind of senior player to be expected to shoulder that kind of responsibility.

EDIT: I missed 2001, yeh he was really bad there. Although I think th ebowling has to take some slack over the Eden Gardens test. I guess, I find it hard to ever blame 1 player for a series loss.