The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[social]

why because anything that you disagree with automatically has to be?...or because i criticized an australian icon?...or maybe both?



a few people do consider him so and i guess you are in that category, but most are willing to see his drawbacks/limitations while acknowledging his greatness...



how? there are still far more pace bowlers than spinners....how many quality spinners have followed in warne's footsteps in australia? other countries have produced good-to-great spinners in around the same time period, are you asserting that each and everyone of them were inspired by warne...? he along with qadir and saqlain and mushtaq and kumble and murali and a few others have certainly brought greater respectability to the art of spin bowling but "changed the nature of the game" is a melodramatic declaration that doesn't have much basis in reality.....



now that i totally agree with...and in my opinion that had a lot to do with his selection as well....



might have....i don't know....but the question is does he really belong there?...and the answer isn't as dismissively simple as you think it is...

1. Whether he's Aus or not is totally irrelevant, he's simply one of the greatest cricketers ever. In terms of spin bowling, only Murali comes close and his deficiencies in batting and fielding mean Warne will always get the nod before him IMO.

2. Nobody's perfect.

3. There was hardly a decent spinner produced world-wide for 15 years before Warne. Off the top of my head, Qadir (who wasnt a patch on Warne), Doshi, and Iqbal Qasim were about it. Warne came along when most people were toally sick of seeing fast bowlers operating at 10 overs per hour and bombarding batsmen incessantly. Not only did he remind people that spinning existed but he bowled leg-spin better than anyone in history and with enough flair that people actually came to a ground to watch him bowl.

4. How the others bring greater respectability is beyond me.

Murali's career has been mired in controversy from day one and the others are simply not as good.

5. Probably belongs there as much as anyone bar Bradman.

From memory, Richards was also selected. There was a thread here recently where his greatness was questioned. Many people used stats to show that this player or that was better. Having lived through his career and the beginnings of Warne, theyre both reasonable choices.

 

[aussie]

Ponting 5th greatest batsman of all-time

According to this rating system, intersting.

 

[tooextracool]

Compared to 54 of Warne's debute series, 30 is a success and pretty decent for spinners of Giles/Price caliber.

wow simply brilliant. because as we all know we are now comparing the debut series. and whether its decent for giles/price calibre or not is irrelevant, fact is that they both didnt 'succeed' in the subcontinent, which was the point that i had made.

That's rich comeing from someone who keeps mentioning Ponting's failure over a period of 8 years counting one off test in 2003-2004.

so should we then agree upon the fact that ponting has had 4 series failures in India as opposed to rahul dravids 2? still a pretty big difference, and you know your argument is desperate when it includes an exhibition series.

Yeah and you conveniently forget Ponting's performance against Pakistani (in Sri Lanka and UAE) spinners..

mushtaq ahmad and saqlain mushtaq were clearly past it towards the end of their careers

Compared to Warnie's debute series's avg. (54) or overall avg. (43) it is a success. In either case yes an avg. of 31 is a success.

so we can then say that robin smith was successful in india because he has a better batting average than ponting in India?
Despite the blatantly obvious fact that robin smith was worked out by the indian spinners
whether they averaged 35 or 70, fact is that neither of them succeeded. and as said earlier, averages of 31 and 33 arent too far off from 43, certainly nowhere near the difference between averaging 12 and averaging 56 as ponting has done in india and overall in his career.

Not to forget that in the last tour Warnie didn't get to face SRT for most of the series.

of course, since the true test of any bowler is having to bowl to SRT past his prime isnt it? almost all the indian players bar yuvraj, are exceptional players of spin anyways, not having another one barely makes a difference.

Yeah an avg. of 54 in the first series for a spinner of Warne's calibre isn't too much worse and there is not much difference in 54 and 31, Right ??

because we've been talking about debut series right?
also since steve waugh was averaging 7.4 after 3 tests, while matthew maynard was averaging over 10 after 4, matthew maynard was obviously quite successful given that he performed better than someone who was far beyond his calibre.

Typical hysterical response from you, who called Ray Price an all time great ? Warne averages 30 in India ?? You need to get your eyes examined. But I should have guessed considering your penchant for selective quoting.Ray Price avg. in debute series 31, Warne's avg. in debut series 54.

speaking of getting their eyes checked, can you point out where exactly i mentioned that we were comparing players in their debut series?

Yeah SRT was injured because aussie bowlers bowled well.

is that why he averaged 17.50 in the series then?

VVS laxman was out of form before that check his performance in Pak series...

except that the pakistan series was a whole 6 months before the series against australia.however in the first test on his way to 31 he looked to be in the form of his life. and isnt is ironic that he scored his only half century of the series in the game in which shane warne didnt play in?

The other batsmen were Ganguly, Yuvraj, Kaif and Sehwag, Karthick..wow what a great batting ling up to bowl to.

sehwag averaged over 40 in that series, and is certainly one of the better openers around.
whether you like it or not tendulkar played 2 tests in that series without doing too much special.
i dont think anyone would question how good vvs laxman can be.
and mohammad kaif hardly disgraced himself when he scored 2 half centuries in that series.
oh and there was also dravid, who is without doubt one of the best players around today.

 

[C_C]

1. Whether he's Aus or not is totally irrelevant, he's simply one of the greatest cricketers ever. In terms of spin bowling, only Murali comes close and his deficiencies in batting and fielding mean Warne will always get the nod before him IMO.

Warne is a better catcher than Murali but Murali is a far far far better fielder than Warne. If you actually bother seeing Murali fielding, you'd get the distinct impression of a master fielder who can stop boundaries and hold improbable catches far far more than a certain blonde rotund Aussie. Comparing Warne to Murali w.r.t. fielding is a bit like comparing Mark Waugh' and Jonty Rhodes in the field.
As for batting, its irrelevant. Both are horrible batsmen and it doesnt enter the equation. Murali's superiority as a bowler overshadows Warne significantly for any little chump-change batting to make a difference.

 

[social]

Warne is a better catcher than Murali but Murali is a far far far better fielder than Warne. If you actually bother seeing Murali fielding, you'd get the distinct impression of a master fielder who can stop boundaries and hold improbable catches far far more than a certain blonde rotund Aussie. Comparing Warne to Murali w.r.t. fielding is a bit like comparing Mark Waugh' and Jonty Rhodes in the field.
As for batting, its irrelevant. Both are horrible batsmen and it doesnt enter the equation. Murali's superiority as a bowler overshadows Warne significantly for any little chump-change batting to make a difference.

You talk absolute rot.

Murali has a buggered shoulder and cant throw whilst about the only time you see Warne out of the slips is ....

Honeslty, I cant be bothered, particularly when ita thread about something altogether different.

 

[C_C]

You talk absolute rot.

Murali has a buggered shoulder and cant throw whilst about the only time you see Warne out of the slips is ....

Honeslty, I cant be bothered, particularly when ita thread about something altogether different.

This comming from a dude who seeks to analyse and comment/draw conclusions from a 2-d single perspective view of a 3-d motion ?
Oh the irony !

Murali isnt a strong thrower but a pretty accurate one. And while his fielding has slipped a bit due to being on the wrong side of the 30s, in his youth, he was a far better fielder than Warne ever could dream to be- diving stops, incredible catches and the like.

 

[tooextracool]

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?

ive said this before and i'll say it again. if ponting has one good series in India, i'll be willing to admit that hes done enough to suggest that hes an all time great. im not really bothered about the fact that he averages 12.26 in India, what worries me more is that hes never had a successful series in india, hes never even managed a 100.

 

[luckyeddie]

Warne is a better catcher than Murali but Murali is a far far far better fielder than Warne. If you actually bother seeing Murali fielding, you'd get the distinct impression of a master fielder who can stop boundaries and hold improbable catches far far more than a certain blonde rotund Aussie. Comparing Warne to Murali w.r.t. fielding is a bit like comparing Mark Waugh' and Jonty Rhodes in the field.
As for batting, its irrelevant. Both are horrible batsmen and it doesnt enter the equation. Murali's superiority as a bowler overshadows Warne significantly for any little chump-change batting to make a difference.

Good God, C_C, you've excelled even your own standards with this pile. You never seem to know when to stop - keep the puerile stuff in the Murali v Warne thread where it belongs and stop polluting other threads - please.

 

[PY]

Eddie's right guys, please keep the discussion here on topic and if things have to be taken from here to the Murali thread then I reckon you're all competent enough to copy and paste the quote and reply in there.

The Murali v Warne stuff stops here in this thread or it'll be shut.

 

[social]

ive said this before and i'll say it again. if ponting has one good series in India, i'll be willing to admit that hes done enough to suggest that hes an all time great. im not really bothered about the fact that he averages 12.26 in India, what worries me more is that hes never had a successful series in india, hes never even managed a 100.

Realistic assessment.

 

[luckyeddie]

Eddie's right guys, please keep the discussion here on topic and if things have to be taken from here to the Murali thread then I reckon you're all competent enough to copy and paste the quote and reply in there.

The Murali v Warne stuff stops here in this thread or it'll be shut.

You always were more of a diplomat than me.

 

[marc71178]

you aint gonna drag me into this arguement all over again, because it seems like you aint getting what i'm trying to say, so for my own good i'm done with you...

So in other words, you cannot use the SL series to show anything for Ponting then, because by definition you will show that Dravid's "failure" isn't actually a failure, thus he's better.

 

[tooextracool]

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.

a poor 'statistical' record in india? im sorry but in what 'non-statistical way' is pontings performances in India actually anything beyond rubbish? statistics simply underline the fact that ponting has been exceedingly poor in India without hiding anything else, and whether or not his overall statistics mask his performances in India is completely irrelevant. cricket is not about runs scored or runs scored per game, its about scoring in all conditions and being there when your team needs you to be. ponting has obviously been sleeping while his team has been in india.

 

[marc71178]

According to this rating system, intersting.

under the system invented by leading Australian statisticians Ric Finlay and David Fitzgerald.

 

[marc71178]

As for batting, its irrelevant. Both are horrible batsmen and it doesnt enter the equation.

Yes, and Black is also White.

 

[C_C]

Good God, C_C, you've excelled even your own standards with this pile. You never seem to know when to stop - keep the puerile stuff in the Murali v Warne thread where it belongs and stop polluting other threads - please.

Do you seek to dispute the statement that Murali is a far better fielder today and in his prime than Warne ever was ?

 

[C_C]

Yes, and Black is also White.

I am sure when we try to narrow down the list of batsmen amongst Allan Border, Viv Richards, Tendulkar, Lara, Steve Waugh, etc., their bowling prowess comes into play.

 

[PY]

Do you seek to dispute the statement that Murali is a far better fielder today and in his prime than Warne ever was ?

Ahem I did warn you and yes, the rules do apply to you.

Here would be a good place.

 

[aussie]

ive said this before and i'll say it again. if ponting has one good series in India, i'll be willing to admit that hes done enough to suggest that hes an all time great. im not really bothered about the fact that he averages 12.26 in India, what worries me more is that hes never had a successful series in india, hes never even managed a 100.

i can live with this.

 

[Jono]

But in other series has he had to face top quality spin from both ends in tandem?

The odd thing is, in the 2001 series where he really looked very ordinary being dismissed by Harbhajan 5 times in 5 innings, Kumble was injured and didn't play. So he really didn't even face quality spin from both ends (Raju and whoever else played that series are far from quality spin).