The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[Anil]

Umm sorry but stats arent every thing.

EDIT - Border scored a lot of runs but many would still not have him in the all time Aussie XI.

border's performance was anything but "just stats"...did you actually watch cricket during that time? the aussies were a really bad team when lillee, marsh and chappell departed almost all together and it was a.b who gave aussie cricket some respectability during that time....he was an even better pressure player than steve waugh, almost always scored runs when it counted and could score quickly or slowly depending on the situation...he is a genuine contender for an all-time aussie middle order....

 

[Pratters]

border's performance was anything but "just stats"....

I know.

I was not dismissing Border.

 

[howardj]

Okay - the thing is Ponting may score 15,000 test runs and still it may be difficult for him to make the all time Australia XI.

Australia has had such a strong side over the decades. Just like Border, despite all his runs, wouldnt make the all time Australian team of many people.

A team of Faip when I did a quick search - http://forum.cricketweb.net/showpost.php?p=433609&postcount=56

Ponting would have to compete for a spot with the likes of Steve Waugh, Greg Chappell, Border, Neil Harvey.

Border would get in ahead of SWaugh, in my view. They averaged around the same, but Border faced better bowling and, more often that not, had to carry the team.

 

[Anil]

I know.

I was not dismissing Border.

ok then that's fine...it actually sounded like you were belittling his record as "just" a lot of runs which don't really show all that much....and i just wanted to show that his runs were actually more meaningful than most other aussie batsmen....

 

[Anil]

Border would get in ahead of SWaugh, in my view. They averaged around the same, but Border faced better bowling and, more often that not, had to carry the team.

spot on!

 

[aussie]

You what?

It's clearly yet again a case of Australian is better in your eyes since you've used the same average to put one down whilst championed it from another.

bull once again you accuse me of something i'm not doing. The fact is what you are accusing me of here doesn't make any sense to what i'm arguing at ALL, Ponting averaging 33 in SRI simply shows the point that i have made from the start the he is better player of spin on turners since 2001.

Dravids average of 33 vs McGrath & Warne is known & its has not been part of my arguement at ALL thus far, so before you come up with your nonsense check your facts.

 

[age_master]

Ponting is the better number 3 - personally i would have Dravid at 5 though

 

[Jono]

Ponting is the better number 3 - personally i would have Dravid at 5 though

For India or are you talking in regards to a World XI?

 

[age_master]

both

 

[Jono]

Don't you think his solid technique and batting style suits #3? I'm guessing you'd have Laxman at 3?

 

[Deja moo]

Don't you think his solid technique and batting style suits #3? I'm guessing you'd have Laxman at 3?

Depends on what people perceive as the role of a number 3 batsman.

 

[marc71178]

bull once again you accuse me of something i'm not doing. The fact is what you are accusing me of here doesn't make any sense to what i'm arguing at ALL, Ponting averaging 33 in SRI simply shows the point that i have made from the start the he is better player of spin on turners since 2001.

Dravids average of 33 vs McGrath & Warne is known & its has not been part of my arguement at ALL thus far, so before you come up with your nonsense check your facts.

Right so please exaplin the following 2 comments then:

Ponting only cashes in on weak bowling slightly that Dravid yes, using OZ for an example Dravid has failed all the time when he came up againts Warne & Pigeon the only time he scored runs againts OZ was againts a weakened attack in 2003/04.

1. No he had one good series in SRI & one decent one how averaging 33 a **** poor one?, plus all those who say that series would have seen the strides that Ponting has made againt spin since 2001 even though his average wasn't fantastic, he didn't look out of place at all, made a lot of starts just didn't carry on.

1 33 is failing, but the other isn't...

 

[aussie]

Right so please exaplin the following 2 comments then:





1 33 is failing, but the other isn't...

christ, like you dont get it. The argument here has always been that Ponting is poor againts spin on turners, but i'm saying that since 2001 he has improved on his ability to do that which was showed in SRI 2004. I never said it was excellent or anything of fantastic, all i'm saying is that its an improvement from his past horrors in India.

Dravid averaging 33 vs OZ when McGrath & Warne have played would obviously be classified has a failure looking has his glittering record in most area's.

 

[open365]

Ponting is the better number 3.

 

[marc71178]

christ, like you dont get it. The argument here has always been that Ponting is poor againts spin on turners, but i'm saying that since 2001 he has improved on his ability to do that which was showed in SRI 2004. I never said it was excellent or anything of fantastic, all i'm saying is that its an improvement from his past horrors in India.

Dravid averaging 33 vs OZ when McGrath & Warne have played would obviously be classified has a failure looking has his glittering record in most area's.

Erm that changes nothing, because surely by looking at Ponting's glitterng record in most areas, that series averaging 33 is also a failure.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[aussie]

Erm that changes nothing, because surely by looking at Ponting's glitterng record in most areas, that series averaging 33 is also a failure.

You can't have it both ways.

wtf, how could it be a failure when he had poor performances in similar conditions in the past & improved on it in that series?, it was an improvement for the life of me i cant see how its a failure.

Dravid's case is different because he has always looked below par vs AUS when the pigeon & Warne have played & based on recent clashes hasn't shown any signs of being able to counter them. But this isn't really relevant because i'm arguing about Ponting ability to play spin on turners...

 

[marc71178]

Keep digging. Compared to previous performances (such as averaging 84.33 in SL), Ponting's 33 is a failure.

So which is 33 - is it proof of improvement or is it a failure?

 

[aussie]

Well i'll backup on what i've been saying all along since maybe i didn't go throught this thoroughly. Ponting has played 4 series in the sub-continent on turners India 98 & 2001 & SRI 99 & 2004. He failed twice in India & did exceptional in 1 series in SRI & was mediocre in the other.

So probably he hasn't really improved, he is just a very inconsisitent in these conditions because if he can average 84 vs Murali in his own back is a testament that he can play spin on tuners but also the fact that he failed miserably vs Harbhajan in India shows he's very inconsistent, but doesn’t say he cant play spin.

But i still stand on the fact that the way he plays spin when he has had to confront them on turners has improved i.e he doesn't go at the ball with hard hands anymore, plays the sweep shots more effeciently & comes down the track to them with more conviction

 

[tooextracool]

Blah Blah Blah....
If a spinner has succeeded in India in more than one series, it is because he has been lucky. If he has succeeded in the only series he has failed, it is only because he has played in only one series and you are 100 % sure that he is going to fail in the next series. So much for your argument.

and before that last game in bangalore, afridi was averaging 39 with the ball after 4 games. fact is that afridi has only bowled in india as a part timer, and as such has been spared from being hammered all over the park when he wasnt getting any wickets.

Who is comparing Warne to Price, Saqlain, giles etc. I brought their stats only to illustrate that there have spinners who have succedded in India. No one is saying that Hussey is better than Bradman, but to conclude that Hussey has failed despite making 500 runs (because he played only in 2 tests) is utterly foolish.

and i of course claimed that hussey has failed havent i? in much the same way that you cant call hussey a success based on the number of tests hes played you cannot call boje a success when he had 1 good inning in the subcontinent.

Are you saying that Ray Price, Ashley Giles, Saqlain Mushtaq, Afridi etc have failed in INDIA ? Let's hear it from you.

have they succeeded? NO. i said that warne simply couldnt do what almost no one else had managed to do before, i.e succeed in India. and for heavens sake stop including bowlers like ray price when they couldnt even maintain averages of below 30 despite getting favorable conditions to do so. ashley giles averaged 33, that isnt success either. you have 2 bowlers, 1 a part timer, the other saqlain, both of whom fit in the category of almost no one.

 

[tooextracool]

That's because they're not very good (though I do think Tait has potential).

They'll produce a few more in time.

tait isnt even a seamer, hes more of an outswing/reverse swing bowler who relies more on the conditions as opposed to the wicket. nonetheless it comes as no surprise that ever since they've started producing dead flat wickets, they've also seen a lack of potential in their fast bowling ranks.