Ricky Ponting vs. Kumar Sangakkara (ODIs)

[viriya]

Don't be weird on purpose

Ponting as a Test batsman was amazing for 4-5 years but was in the mid-2000s, but his overall career can't be evaluated just looking at that part of his career - it should be the whole thing.

 

[viriya]

Ponting and Lara also suffer because they didn't get to play 25 matches against Bangladesh/Zimbabwe and score 2000 runs against a **** team like Sanga, Sachin, Kallis. It's as simple as that for me.

That argument makes very little sense since Sanga averages more vs top 8 opposition than Ponting (54 vs 51), while having to face the Australian bowling attack (the best ever arguably) which Ponting never had to.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That argument makes very little sense since Sanga averages more vs top 8 opposition than Ponting, while having to face the Australian bowling attack (the best ever arguably) which Ponting never had to.

I simply said he's underrated because of his overall average of 51 which is slightly lower than the other greats simply because he played the minnows less. That's all.

 

[Spark]

amazing for only a few years which is why he averaged 60 after 100 tests

 

[weldone]

Ponting and Lara also suffer because they didn't get to play 25 matches against Bangladesh/Zimbabwe and score 2000 runs against a **** team like Sanga, Sachin, Kallis. It's as simple as that for me.

...as if the records against non-Zimbabwe/Bangladesh opponents aren't comparable at all

 

[viriya]

amazing for only a few years which is why he averaged 60 after 100 tests

Yea because he averaged 100 in 2003, 71 in 2002 and 89 in 2006. Those are an "amazing few years". I don't think anyone would disagree that he had a Bradman-esque peak.

It's that he averaged barely above 40 for the next 60 tests of his career - never averaging 50+ in an year after 2006.

 

[OverratedSanity]

...as if the records against non-Zimbabwe/Bangladesh opponents aren't comparable at all

Which was my point wasn't it? The overall average undersells Lara and Ponting because they got fewer useless minnow bashing opportunities. Against proper teams, it's pretty amazing how similar all their records are. There's virtually no difference.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I sense this thread is going to be extremely pedantic. The new Warne vs Murali. Should be fun. Not.

 

[viriya]

Which was my point wasn't it? The overall average undersells Lara and Ponting because they got fewer useless minnow bashing opportunities. Against proper teams, it's pretty amazing how similar all their records are. There's virtually no difference.

Against common top 8 opposition (no Aus or SL), Sanga averages 55, Ponting averages 51.5. I wouldn't say "there's virtually no difference" there.

I also disagree that minnow runs are "useless" - there are players who fail vs minnows - it shouldn't be considered a good thing. Doing well vs minnows should be expected. In the Murali vs Warne argument the Bangladesh games are brought up - ignoring the fact that Warne was pretty meh vs Ban when he actually bowled to them.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Removing Aus and SL. So convenient to your argument. Classic viriya

Actually it's not funny, that was dumb.

 

[weldone]

Which was my point wasn't it? The overall average undersells Lara and Ponting because they got fewer useless minnow bashing opportunities. Against proper teams, it's pretty amazing how similar all their records are. There's virtually no difference.

Fair enough, if that was your point. But your original post sounded like 'Ponting and Lara are better because Tendulkar, Sanga and Kallis scored 2000 runs against minnows.'

For me, Tendulkar wins this fairly comfortably because of his longevity. Second place is debatable imo (but I'll have Lara). Also don't forget Waugh and Dravid.

 

[viriya]

Removing Aus and SL. So convenient to your argument. Classic viriya

Actually it's not funny, that was dumb.

That would be a fair comparison. Even with Aus and SL in, its ~54 vs 51 so not sure what you're trying to imply. "Ponting didn't play as much vs minnows" is not an argument when his record minus minnows is not better. It's that simple.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'm implying he and Lara didn't play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe much and didn't get to plump their averages as much as Sachin, kallis and Sanga, Nothing complicated in what I've saying.

Unfortunately you're getting defensive and insinuating that I said bashing minnows is a bad thing.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Fair enough, if that was your point. But your original post sounded like 'Ponting and Lara are better because Tendulkar, Sanga and Kallis scored 2000 runs against minnows.

No my original post didn't sound like that. That's absurd. You'd have to be a stupider than Ishant Sharma giving death bowling instructions at a bowling camp if you got that from the post.

 

[viriya]

I'm implying he and Lara didn't play Bangladesh and Zimbabwe much and didn't get to plump their averages as much as Sachin, kallis and Sanga, Nothing complicated in what I've saying.

Unfortunately you're getting defensive and insinuating that I said bashing minnows is a bad thing.

When you say they didn't get to "plump their averages bashing minnows", you are discounting the records of those who did well vs minnows while ignoring the fact that their records are still better minus-minnows.

For completion's sake, the averages minus-Ban+Zim:
Sanga: 54
Kallis: 53
Lara: 52.5
Ponting: 51
Sachin: 51

Your argument only applies to Sachin.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Do you understand what underselling means? Please, tell me.

As I've said repeatedly, regardless of who I think is better, the pure average for Ponting and Lara undersells their ability compared to the pure averages of others who bashed Bang/Zim. I didn't even say who's better. But the fact that the difference between Ponting, Lara vs the rest in terms of purely the average is exaggerated by minnows is just that.... a fact. Was that simple enough for you?

 

[viriya]

Ponting and Lara also suffer because they didn't get to play 25 matches against Bangladesh/Zimbabwe and score 2000 runs against a **** team like Sanga, Sachin, Kallis. It's as simple as that for me.

As I've said repeatedly, regardless of who I think is better, the pure average for Ponting and Lara undersells their ability compared to the pure averages of others who bashed Bang/Zim. I didn't even say who's better. But the fact that the difference between Ponting, Lara vs the rest in terms of purely the average is exaggerated by minnows is just that.... a fact. Was that simple enough for you?

You did insinuate that this minnow bashing fact was enough for you: "It's as simple as that for me."

Nice that now you're trying to act like you just said it without implying it meant one player was better than the other.

 

[Migara]

No brainer, it's Ponting. Sanga had an unbel,ievable three years in ODIs, and that's what it is all about. Ponting did it for a decade. Sanga vs Ponting in test matches is a much closer comparison.

 

[Furball]

Anyone who doesn't rank the Tendulkar Era batsmen Tendulkar-Lara-Ponting is frankly bonkers.

I will seriously consider Sangakkara for a place in the top 3 but I feel that he will fall just short because I don't think he quite has a really, really great, memorable innings like the other 3 - and I'm quite happy to concede that that's possibly as a result of an unconscious bias on my part that doesn't quite rate cricket played by Sri Lanka as highly.

But anyway, he runs them close. Dravid quite comfortably rounds out the top 5 IMO.

 

[OverratedSanity]

You did insinuate that this minnow bashing fact was enough for you: "It's as simple as that for me."

Nice that now you're trying to act like you just said it without implying it meant one player was better than the other.

Ha, ridiculous. There was no insinuation. If you want to twist my words which quite plainly stated just one thing: that Lara and Ponting bashed minnows less and thus didn't get enough opportunities to pump their averages, then go on, it's pretty entertaining.

And how in the **** does "It's as simple as that" = "Ponting>Sanga".