The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[aussie]

You've not yet told us whether you think 33 is good or bad, since you've used it to praise one but put down another.

So which is it?

christ lets go over this again, the fact that Dravid averages 33 vs McGrath & Warne in Australia is bad looking at how well he has done elsewhere. You are trying to say because Ponting averages 33 in SRI 2 years ago its poor as well since you are bringing in the irrelevant fact that his career average is also high, when i'm simply taking about PONTING RECORD AGAINTS SPINNERS ON TURNERS, geez.

So him averaging 33 in SRI compared to the shocker he had in India in 2001 can be nothing more than an improvement.

But has i have been saying recently overall he is very inconsistent on turners.

 

[luckyeddie]

People who base their entire argument on statistics are idiots.

There's a lot of them about.

 

[Slats4ever]

People who base their entire argument on statistics are idiots.

There's a lot of them about.

unfortunately some people however are too blind to even acknowledge them as being a primary source of evidence. So many people feel obliged to highlight them.

 

[luckyeddie]

unfortunately some people however are too blind to even acknowledge them as being a primary source of evidence. So many people feel obliged to highlight them.

I agree that they have a place in the game (after all, without statistics you cannot have a result) - however, they are rarely the complete answer to any argument - just further fuel for more discussion as this thread seems to bear out. That's why I said "... entire argument".

 

[marc71178]

christ lets go over this again, the fact that Dravid averages 33 vs McGrath & Warne in Australia is bad looking at how well he has done elsewhere. You are trying to say because Ponting averages 33 in SRI 2 years ago its poor as well since you are bringing in the irrelevant fact that his career average is also high, when i'm simply taking about PONTING RECORD AGAINTS SPINNERS ON TURNERS, geez.

No, I'm trying to ask whether 33 is a failure or not, because you seem to say that it's both.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Just wondering - if Ponting has a good/awesome series in India next time around, yet because of his career record so far there he still averages less than 40, does that mean that he gets marked as a useless player of spin by the stats merchants?

 

[honestbharani]

Just wondering - if Ponting has a good/awesome series in India next time around, yet because of his career record so far there he still averages less than 40, does that mean that he gets marked as a useless player of spin by the stats merchants?

Well, it would show he has improved but how can it take away from the previous failings of his? I mean, if he has 3 poor series in INdia and one excellent one, you cannot still call him a great player in India over the whole of his career.

 

[aussie]

Well, it would show he has improved but how can it take away from the previous failings of his? I mean, if he has 3 poor series in INdia and one excellent one, you cannot still call him a great player in India over the whole of his career.

2 poor series you mean...

 

[aussie]

No, I'm trying to ask whether 33 is a failure or not, because you seem to say that it's both.

for whome Pontong only or Dravid & Ponting.

 

[Jono]

We can end this argument relatively soon, well at least in terms of who is the better #3 batsman, because Dravid could possibly open for India in the 1st test against Pakistan.

 

[honestbharani]

2 poor series you mean...

I am including the two single tests he played in India as a series as well.

 

[aussie]

ok, but their are one of tests why classify them as series, just them one-off tests.

 

[marc71178]

for whome Pontong only or Dravid & Ponting.

Overall - it can't be good for one and bad for the other.

 

[luckyeddie]

Just wondering - if Ponting has a good/awesome series in India next time around, yet because of his career record so far there he still averages less than 40, does that mean that he gets marked as a useless player of spin by the stats merchants?

Quite possibly - some people (going on past experience) will no doubt remove those stats on the grounds that they are 'uncharacteristic' - meaning they don't comply with what it is they are trying to 'prove'.

 

[luckyeddie]

for whome Pontong only or Dravid & Ponting.

Is that Prodney Pontong?

 

[shankar]

Just wondering - if Ponting has a good/awesome series in India next time around, yet because of his career record so far there he still averages less than 40, does that mean that he gets marked as a useless player of spin by the stats merchants?

I dont understand how the argument based on the very obvious fact that Ponting has been very ordinary in India throughout his career (And I dont necessarily subscribe to the argument) can be characterised as a stats based one having no basis in reality?

 

[luckyeddie]

I dont understand how the argument based on the very obvious fact that Ponting has been very ordinary in India throughout his career (And I dont necessarily subscribe to the argument) can be characterised as a stats based one having no basis in reality?

Context, dear boy, context.

It can have all the relevance in the world to you (not necessarily you) now at this precise moment in time, but it really doesn't mean Jack to anyone else - neither does it mean that those stats are going to be repeated ad nauseum.

They might, though.

 

[shankar]

Context, dear boy, context.

It can have all the relevance in the world to you (not necessarily you) now at this precise moment in time, but it really doesn't mean Jack to anyone else - neither does it mean that those stats are going to be repeated ad nauseum.

They might, though.

The point is not the validity of the argument. The point is that it's not a "just based on selective stats" argument. Saying that he averages just averages XX in India is just another way of saying he's not done well in India. It may or may not be a relevant argument, but it's not one that can be brushed away on the basis of being purely statistical.

 

[aussie]

Overall - it can't be good for one and bad for the other.

your problem is that you making an irrelevant point to what i'm arguing.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Just wondering - if Ponting has a good/awesome series in India next time around, yet because of his career record so far there he still averages less than 40, does that mean that he gets marked as a useless player of spin by the stats merchants?

What I find interesting is the idea that Ponting -cannot- be an all-time great while he has a poor statistical record in India. This point has been made before in this debate, but I'll make it again.

Let's say Ponting plays another 6 or 7 years and performs just as he has since 2003, exactly, repeating it twice more... meaning he averages 71.44 for the rest of his career, but suffers an injury before his next tour of India and never improves his record there (while still performing in the rest of the subcontinent and against India in Australia).

Ponting's end-of-career record:

174 tests, 300 innings, 45 not outs, 16267 runs @ 63.79, 62 50s, 56 100s

And... he's not an all-time great, because he averages 12 in India.

Obviously he's going to drop off and he's not going to finish with a record like that, but it really does show how silly the idea of writing him off because of his record in one country is.