The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[tooextracool]

Yet I've seen so many times over the years on the WACA (a pitch which, historically, had almost nothing but bounce. Otherwise, it had little inconsistency even on the 5th day, fast outfields, no cloud cover etc. i.e. ideal for batting) we've seen visiting players fending off deliveries which have bounced more than they expected like they've never played on bouncy pitches in their lives. Any batsman will tell you, adjusting to pitches which bounce less than you're used to is far easier than those which bounce more.

To ram home the point, why do you think bowlers are cautioned specifically every year to not get too excited by the bounce on the WACA and just continue to bowl line-and-length as usual? Because just about every time, if you bowl short, you get spanked. Use the bounce properly and you'll get wickets.



Again, explain why visiting batsmen continue to struggle on the WACA then. And, explain why a pitch which is slow but with so much movement in it (Sydney) generally produces big scores.

firstly quite often the WACA offers plenty of seam movement and has therefore assisted pace bowlers as a result. more importantly though the WACA is different from other wickets in Australia because it offers far more pace and bounce than the rest. visiting batsman usually have never played on such a wicket and therefore most of them tend to fail due to a lack of experience. however if you gave a player sufficient practice at the WACA, assuming no seam movement, most players would have no problems getting used to the pace and bounce that have historically troubled visiting players.

 

[Top_Cat]

ok then, let me make it clearer for you to understand, when i say once i dont refer to one off games, i refer to entire series.

Yet you refer to the one-off Test in 1997 at Dehli as a 'series'. Interesting omission, that.

And, like it or not, the Super Test counts as a bonafide Test so you *have* to include it. Even if you don't like it. It would be intellectually dishonest to do otherwise, epecially since you have said that you 1) count the one-off Test in 1997 as a 'series' and 2) count Ponting's one-off Test failure in 2004 as another 'series'. Realistically, Rick Ponting has only played two full Test series' against India away and has been a consistent failure.

[PERSONAL OPINION] I maintain, however, that the pitches had very little to do with his failure because they were, by and large, pretty good for batting (as the big scores in both the 1998 and 2001 series showed and I watched both series so I'm not going on stats alone here). He was undone by excellent bowling to a not-so-well-developed technique by Kumble in 1998 and Harbhajan in 2001 who, combined, knocked him over 8 out of 10 knocks in those two series'. I personally would back him, given the opportunity to play one more full series, to average 45+. [/PERSONAL OPINION]

 

[Top_Cat]

firstly quite often the WACA offers plenty of seam movement and has therefore assisted pace bowlers as a result.

Really? When? Aside from the 1997 Test against the WI when the pitch had cracks 2cm wide, largely it's been bouncy but straight up-and-down.

more importantly though the WACA is different from other wickets in Australia because it offers far more pace and bounce than the rest. visiting batsman usually have never played on such a wicket and therefore most of them tend to fail due to a lack of experience. however if you gave a player sufficient practice at the WACA, assuming no seam movement, most players would have no problems getting used to the pace and bounce that have historically troubled visiting players.

And this diminishes my point that it's harder to adjust for higher bounce than lower bounce how exactly?

Additionally, I think you'll find that the WACA has been much bouncier in the past. Even in the last 10 years, it's only been marginally bouncier than most other pitches (Ashes 1997 possible exception) and about the same as The Oval from what I've seen. People comment every year that the bounce has diminished and the scores get higher and higher. Explain that.

 

[tooextracool]

Ever heard the name NICKY BOJE or How about Saqlain Mushtaq, Danish Kaneria, Shahid Afridi, Ray Price ??

Nicky Boje avg in India 15.71
Shahid Afridi avg. in India - 25.36
Saqlain Mushtaq avg. in India - 20.95
Danish Kaneria avg. India - 31.52
Ray Price avg. in India - 31.40

And you know what I have just started...There coule be more...Even Murali averages 39.6 despite playing in one of the flattest series ever in 1997-98.

you make quite an argument. the fact that you have to use someone who is arguably the worst spinner in international cricket at the moment(at least out of the ones that have played a significant number of games) says a fair bit about your argument. Boje had 1 good game in India, which is rarely ever supposed to prove anything. 2 spinner on that list have averages of over 30, and this in conditions that is supposed to suit them is hardly an achievement. which really leaves saqlain and afridi who've had any sort of success in India, which comes back to the 'almost no one' argument.
and you would of course manage to convince me as to how murali managed to terrorise the indian players on his most recent tour to India where he still managed to average over 30. his average of 39.6 only goes on to show how hard it is for any spin bowler to take wickets against india in india.

That's debatable @ best. One saw him get thrashed all over by local mumbai boys (Ask him who Rajesh Sutar is, he will remember it)

and bowlers arent allowed to have bad games apparently? especially when it is a domestic game. Warne has put in several successful individual performances in India, and his failure in India is largely due to excellent batting rather than poor bowling.

 

[Sanz]

for the millionth time the super series doesnt count. remove that and its 19 innings. considering that one was a not out its 18 innings.and hes actually scored 2 half centuries against mcgrath and warne. this at an average of 33 which is nearly 3 times as good as pontings. enough said.

Why dont you do one thing, leave out all the innings where Dravid has failed and then calculate, you know he will surpass Bradman. Talk about selectivly quoting stats.

One Last time Dravid's Avg. Against Australiai in Australia when both Mcgrath/Warne played is <15 is pretty similar to Ponting's avg. in India.

 

[Slats4ever]

Why dont you do one thing, leave out all the innings where Dravid has failed and then calculate, you know he will surpass Bradman. Talk about selectivly quoting stats.

One Last time Dravid's Avg. Against Australiai in Australia when both Mcgrath/Warne played is <15 is pretty similar to Ponting's avg. in India.

haha yeah i love it when people pick out all the crap series. TBH I think Ponting's the best cos he avgs 260 odd in tests in 2006.

 

[tooextracool]

Really? When? Aside from the 1997 Test against the WI when the pitch had cracks 2cm wide, largely it's been bouncy but straight up-and-down..

it seemed around a fair bit when mcgrath took that 8/24 i can assure you. and it definetly seamed around all over the place in the ashes series of 98/99 as well

And this diminishes my point that it's harder to adjust for higher bounce than lower bounce how exactly?

lower bounce + seam movement is far more difficult to handle not only for someone who hasnt played on such a wicket before, but also for someone whos played on them over time. higher bounce is only really hard for someone whos never played on such a wicket in his life.

Additionally, I think you'll find that the WACA has been much bouncier in the past. Even in the last 10 years, it's only been marginally bouncier than most other pitches (Ashes 1997 possible exception) and about the same as The Oval from what I've seen. People comment every year that the bounce has diminished and the scores get higher and higher. Explain that.

the scores havent really got higher and higher. the WACA pitch that was made for the game against NZ in 2001 was as solid as a rock and offered plenty of bounce, yet it was one of the flattest WACA wickets prepared for a very long long time. on the occasions that it has offered seam movement most teams have struggled to get near 300.....

 

[tooextracool]

One Last time Dravid's Avg. Against Australiai in Australia when both Mcgrath/Warne played is <15 is pretty similar to Ponting's avg. in India.

and once again, 3 tests(1 series) as opposed to 8 is not comparable.

 

[tooextracool]

Yet you refer to the one-off Test in 1997 at Dehli as a 'series'. Interesting omission, that.

nope ive only ever included it as part of his 8 test failures in India.

And, like it or not, the Super Test counts as a bonafide Test so you *have* to include it. Even if you don't like it. It would be intellectually dishonest to do otherwise, epecially since you have said that you 1) count the one-off Test in 1997 as a 'series' and 2) count Ponting's one-off Test failure in 2004 as another 'series'. Realistically, Rick Ponting has only played two full Test series' against India away and has been a consistent failure.

yes you could say that hes played 2 full series off 4 games each in India and failed miserably on both occasions. however it must not be ignored that if it is considered to be 2 series, it must be considered as 2 series spread over 8 years, as opposed to just 2 series in 2 different years.

 

[Sanz]

fponting has failed in india not just in the presence of both harbhajan and kumble. hes failed with the combination of raju/kumble, ashish kapur/kumble, harbhajan/kumble, harbhajan/raju etc..

What difference does it make that who bowls with Kumble/Harbhajan ? If the pitch is assisting spinners and India is bowling on the last day of the game, India will win if anyone of Kumble/Bhajji is in the team. Harbhajan and SRT beat Australia in 2000-01(Remember Kumble wasn't there).

you make quite an argument. the fact that you have to use someone who is arguably the worst spinner in international cricket at the moment(at least out of the ones that have played a significant number of games) says a fair bit about your argument. Boje had 1 good game in India, which is rarely ever supposed to prove anything. 2 spinner on that list have averages of over 30, and this in conditions that is supposed to suit them is hardly an achievement. which really leaves saqlain and afridi who've had any sort of success in India, which comes back to the 'almost no one' argument.
and you would of course manage to convince me as to how murali managed to terrorise the indian players on his most recent tour to India where he still managed to average over 30. his average of 39.6 only goes on to show how hard it is for any spin bowler to take wickets against india in india.

Yeah right, Ray Price, Kaneria, Saqlain, Boje, afridi are almost no one. In my book it counts to 5. May be you should learn to count first.

Fact is that The guys I have mentioned have had pretty decent success in India compared Warnie's 43+ avg. (Thanks to his last series else it was 50+). Even Murali in his first series had an avg. of 35 (compared to Warnie's 54), and last series 31 (warnie 30). Murali played in one of the flattest series ever in 1997-98 (infact he missed 3rd test which offered some help to the spinners - I was there in the Wankhede Stadium to watch the game) he still has much better figures compared to Warnie.

Warne has put in several successful individual performances in India, and his failure in India is largely due to excellent batting rather than poor bowling.

Oh so warne fails it is because of excellent batting but when Ponting fails it isn't because of excellent bowling..

I think I am wasting my time over here and I leave the floor to you. Exclude all the stats where Dravid has failed, and you know what you will have someone who can average better than Bradman.

 

[tooextracool]

What difference does it make that who bowls with Kumble/Harbhajan ? If the pitch is assisting spinners and India is bowling on the last day of the game, India will win if anyone of Kumble/Bhajji is in the team. Harbhajan and SRT beat Australia in 2000-01(Remember Kumble wasn't there).

no you've missed the point completely. what ive suggested is that for ponting any one of harbhajan or kumble without the need for both have been enough to give him a miserable time. your argument for dravid involves having both warne and mcgrath playing together rather than just one of them.

Yeah right, Ray Price, Kaneria, Saqlain, Boje, afridi are almost no one. In my book it counts to 5. May be you should learn to count first.

or maybe you should learn to read and go back and read the above post?

Fact is that The guys I have mentioned have had pretty decent success in India compared Warnie's 43+ avg. (Thanks to his last series else it was 50+). Even Murali in his first series had an avg. of 35 (compared to Warnie's 54), and last series 31 (warnie 30). Murali played in one of the flattest series ever in 1997-98 (infact he missed 3rd test which offered some help to the spinners - I was there in the Wankhede Stadium to watch the game) he still has much better figures compared to Warnie.

oh yes and what fantastic averages all those bowlers have in india. my argument is that almost no one has succeeded in indian, and bringing up bowlers that struggled to keep their averages in the low 30s doesnt prove anything.

Oh so warne fails it is because of excellent batting but when Ponting fails it isn't because of excellent bowling..

so howcome then so many of the other australian players have had success in India then? howcome players like steve waugh, damien martyn,matthew hayden, mark waugh etc have all managed to score runs in india while playing in the same side with ponting? Warne simply didnt accomplish what very few had accomplished before, while Ponting disgraced himself while several of his teammates prospered.

I think I am wasting my time over here and I leave the floor to you. Exclude all the stats where Dravid has failed, and you know what you will have someone who can average better than Bradman.

i havent excluded any such thing. the comparison is 3 tests vs 8 tests, and i think its glaringly obvious which one is more likely to be relevant.

 

[tooextracool]

stop talking too extra cool. Save your breath. Your point is laughable and believed only by yourself.

if its laughable why not come up with a convincing argument against it, instead of posting rather pointless one liners that arent going to affect me one bit.

 

[Buddhmaster]

2 hour internet arguments = cool

 

[Tom Halsey]

and as has been said a million times, bounce without lateral movement is almost always useless, and as such i dont think either Australia or Indian conditions have offered more to the pace bowlers. if anything reverse swing is far more prominent in India than it is in Australia.

No, it's not all that helpful, but it's not completely useless.

Aussie pitches do occasionally seam around (you admitted it yourself in a later post) and they always bounce. I'd say it's definately not the worst place in the World to bowl seam, and I'd rather bowl seam in Australia than India.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Yeah right, Ray Price, Kaneria, Saqlain, Boje, afridi are almost no one. In my book it counts to 5. May be you should learn to count first.

That's not what he said.

 

[marc71178]

I can certainly recall more attacking innings to set up wins - Ponting's 143*, Pietersen's 158, Hussey's 122 etc etc.

Pietersen's knock was to get a draw, and in some ways that game might not have ended up a draw if at the other end there hadn't been battling knocks from Collingwood (one of the most crucial 10's ever) and then Giles (at 199-7, Australia should've had a chance)

 

[marc71178]

stop talking too extra cool. Save your breath. Your point is laughable and believed only by yourself.

Just because he's daring to question that Australians are the best?

 

[marc71178]

Yeah right, Ray Price, Kaneria, Saqlain, Boje, afridi are almost no one. In my book it counts to 5. May be you should learn to count first.

Interestingly, all of those have played a maximum of 3 Tests in India (except Afridi, who has bowled about 100 overs in 5 games)

 

[luckyeddie]

stop talking too extra cool. Save your breath. Your point is laughable and believed only by yourself.

DO NOT stop TEC when he's in full rant. It could be dangerous.

 

[aussie]

The fact is he (Ponting) has had the cattle around him throughout his career, i would like to see how he goes when Warne and McGrath retire and Hayden, Langer and Gilchrist get on in years, then he might understand the meaning of the word pressure.

whats your point?