Ricky Ponting vs. Kumar Sangakkara (ODIs)

[OverratedSanity]

Your post was specifically comparing longevity, and claiming that Sanga's better average against non-minnows is offset by the fact that Lara and Ponting played 30 more tests. Fair enough - but after that you conclude by saying therefore they can't be separated by statistics, including Tendulkar. I called out the sheer hypocricy in that post, because Tendulkar played 90 more tests.

Get the point now or should I elaborate more, eh?

There's no hypocrisy. You're posting like an idiot, looking for an argument when there isn't one.

 

[weldone]

This is pretty frustrating. Didn't know you were that kind of Sachin fanboy who gets sensitive when I wasn't even criticizing him. Good to know. Won't bother next time.

Haha
Fact #1. I don't think Tendulkar is unarguably the 2nd best of all-time.
Fact #2. I think Lara was better in the first half of the '90s.
Fact #3. I think Ponting and Dravid were better in the first half of '00s.

Fact #4. This is unrelated - but you are super-defensive after being called out for your sheer hypocricy in 2 posts in this thread. Sadly, the only way you can retaliate is by calling me a Tendulkar-fanboy.

 

[weldone]

There's no hypocrisy.

You are selectively blind and deaf, then.

 

[GotSpin]

Pretty standard to complain about Tendulkar not being mentioned enough in a Ponting v Sangers thread

 

[OverratedSanity]

What hypocrisy? This is hilarious.

Please post your reply quickly.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Pretty standard to complain about Tendulkar not being mentioned enough in a Ponting v Sangers thread

Yep. weldone proving all the complaints about Sachin fanboys right.

 

[weldone]

@OS: Does the following statement seem non-sensical to you?

"I don't think there is much to choose between Mohammad Yousuf and Mahela Jayawardene statistically. They both were extremely successful in the sub-continent, but outside the SC against good pace attacks they both were rather ordinary. That is the reason I think you can't statistcally differentiate Yousuf, Jayawardene and Sobers."

Yes or no? Please post your reply quickly

 

[OverratedSanity]

So the difference between Sachin and Ponting/Sanga is as big as Sobers and Jayawardene now? Oh my

You're still making no sense by the way.

 

[weldone]

Yep. weldone proving all the complaints about Sachin fanboys right.

Yes, that is the only way you can retaliate.

 

[weldone]

So the difference between Sachin and Ponting/Sanga is as big as Sobers and Jayawardene now? Oh my

You're still making no sense by the way.

You are now being extremely idiotic. Do you agree that bringing Sobers in that post doesn't make sense because the point doesn't apply to Sobers?

Am I making such a difficult point that it's so tough for you to grasp? I don't know how to put it in a simpler way.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I assume the bolded part is the line you have a problem with.

Yeah Australia has had some of the flattest pitches in it's history in the last decade or so.

Regarding Sanga and minnows, the fact that he averages higher even without minnows is definitely awesome, and shows he's deservedly at their level as a batsman. However, it should be kept in mind that his non minnow average is 54 over something like 105 tests I think. While Ponting and Lara's non minnow (pretty much career) average is around 52 it's over a lot more tests, too. 30-40 tests more, which is pretty sizeable. So ,really 54 over 100 tests and 52 over 140 tests are pretty similar.

The only reason I keep pointing this out is not to bring Sanga down, but just that Sanga isn't "statistically better" like some people insist. His statistics seen in context are just as impressive as Lara, Ponting, Sachin. Only subjective preferences of style of play can truly decisively separate them imo.

Don't know what's wrong in what I've said. They're all statistically virtually dead even. Sanga and Lara trump the others on stuff like big doubles, Ponting arguably had the best, concentrated peak, and Sachin had longevity.

As I said, statistically, not much to choose between them at all. All comes down to what statistic you put more weight to. Hope this was simple enough for you to process, though the original post was good enough.

 

[Maximas]

The only reason I keep pointing this out is not to bring Sanga down, but just that Sanga isn't "statistically better" like some people insist. His statistics seen in context are just as impressive as Lara, Ponting, Sachin. Only subjective preferences of style of play can truly decisively separate them imo.

I think I agree with this, it was more the point about Lara/Ponting ect in Sanga's shoes would have averaged 70+ or whatever that I take issue with

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think I agree with this, it was more the point about Lara/Ponting ect in Sanga's shoes would have averaged 70+ or whatever that I take issue with

Yeah that was silly.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah that was silly.

Also not to be taken completely literally. Was just trying to troll viriya.

In all seriousness, for mine Sangakarra and Ponting would be pretty even from a pure batting perspective. But of course it depends on what aspects you rate higher as you said earlier.

 

[cnerd123]

Riggins post on page 1 still the best post in this thread.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Spark's post with rob's Ponting runouts video easily the best.

 

[weldone]

They're all statistically virtually dead even.

Explain to me how Tendulkar and Ponting are statistically dead even. Tendulkar averages more, scored more runs, more centuries, played more matches, played for many many more years, faced better bowlers of the '90s and also McGrath-Warne, averages 40+ in all countries unlike Ponting. What makes Ponting statistically 'dead even' with Tendulkar?

Edit: I also think Tendulkar has better peak imo (1993-2010: more test runs in that period than anyone else's career, at an average of 60).

 

[TheJediBrah]

Explain to me how Tendulkar and Ponting are statistically dead even. Tendulkar averages more, scored more runs, more centuries, played more matches, played for many many more years, faced better bowlers of the '90s and also McGrath-Warne, averages 40+ in all countries unlike Ponting. What makes Ponting statistically even with Tendulkar?

Ponting got tired at the end of his career carrying 3 world cups around. Tendulkar didn't have that burden.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Explain to me how Tendulkar and Ponting are statistically dead even. Tendulkar averages more, scored more runs, more centuries, played more matches, played for many many more years, faced better bowlers of the '90s and also McGrath-Warne, averages 40+ in all countries unlike Ponting. What makes Ponting statistically 'dead even' with Tendulkar?

Might help if you didn't selectively feign deafness yet again and read the very next sentence after the one you quoted.

They're all statistically virtually dead even. Sanga and Lara trump the others on stuff like big doubles, Ponting arguably had the best, concentrated peak, and Sachin had longevity.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Ponting got tired at the end of his career carrying 3 world cups around. Tendulkar didn't have that burden.