The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[aussie]

Overall againts all the major test playing nations Ponting averages better than Dravid in all except England where Dravid averages 75 to Ponting 41, you can see their career summaries here:

QUOTE]

Yes, but Ponting hasn't had to face Mcgrath, Lee, Warne and co, thus hasn't faced the best attack in the world in the last 4 years

so i think compararing them on this basis is unfair, would you say then that Greg Chappel was a better batsman than ViV richards because Chappell played the mighty WI pacers?, just leave it as undefined i say..

 

[ohtani's jacket]

C_C has a point that batsmen can be separated by how they fare against the best attacks, but at the same time, quality bowlers should take quality wickets, otherwise everyone's an f-ing minnow basher.

If a batsman routinely fails against the best bowling attacks, I can understand the criticism, but if they're undone by quality bowling, it doesn't mean they're a lesser player. When batsmen score against a great attack, we don't perceive the bowlers to be of a lesser quality, so why is the batsman's reputation at stake?

 

[aussie]

He is cashing in against weak bowling attacks. All batsmen do. But Ponting more so than Dravid IMO.

Dravid has an excellent record- far superior to Ponting away from home. While both are excellent at playing pace bowling ( Ponting marginally better than Dravid IMO), Ponting cannot hold a candle to Dravid while batting against spin, especially on spin-friendly tracks.
Ponting's record in india is pathetic- and has always been pathetic. No alltime great batsman has such a glaring weakness against a particular good bowling opposition.

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.

Its obvious that Ponting record in India is pathetic, but since that shcoker in 2001 for all those who ahs seen Ponting againts top-quality spin on spineer-friendly tracks he has really improved. Has i said before i have never heard of much occassions where Dravid has made much runs under these circumstances & i have seen his struggles againts Warne enough to know he aint that great vs spin either. But aggreable for now i would give Dravid a slight edge over Punters vs Spin but its not as big as you are making it sound

 

[Pratters]

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.

Umm

To quote Faip

In the 99/00 away series, he faced both, and averaged 15 with a top score of 35.

In the 2001 home series, he faced both, and averaged 56.33 with a top score of 180.

In the 04/05 home series, he faced both, and averaged 27.83 with a top score of 60.

And in the Super Series a few months ago, he faced both and averaged 11.5 with a duck and a score of 23.

All up - 11 tests, 21 innings, 1 NO, 767 runs @ 38.35, 2x50, 1x100

I repeat - he had a torrid time in 99/00 when he was truly out of sorts.

Despite that he finishes with an average of 38.35 vs Australia (mCGrath plus Warne). So it is not such a bad record really in perspective..

 

[aussie]

He's had one good series in SL and one ****-poor one.

Overall, he is a huge question-mark in Asia and a huge disappointment in spin-friendly tracks.
Dravid, Tendulkar, Lara and Steve Waugh didnt have/don't have such a glaring weakness and as such, Ponting cannot be classed along those alltime great batsmen.

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.

 

[Jono]

Its interesting. When the argument over who is India's better batsman/match-winner between Tendulkar and Dravid comes up, many argue Dravid because he scores the runs much more often when it counts compared to Sachin. Yet, many of the same people criticise Dravid when he's compared to another batsman because he doesn't have a good record against Warne/McGrath. Yet Sachin's record is absolutely devine against them (and all other champion attacks of the past bar SA where his fairly decent but not spectacular). And I'd classify scoring runs against two of the best bowlers of all time in Warne & McGrath (and Gillespie too) scoring runs "when it counts."

I'm not trying to belittle Dravid at all as he's one of my favourite batsman to watch, I just am kind of amused at the inconsistency in arguments.

I can't really choose between Ponting or Dravid, but its easy to pick Ponting now because he's in absolutely ripping form, but it was only just over 12 months in 2004 when Ponting had not scored a ton and averaged only 41 compared to Dravid who averaged 63.07 in 2004 despite his poor series against Australia that year. Many would have chosen Dravid at that time. Hell Dravid hasn't had a year when he's averaged less than 50 since 2001.

Its a case of choosing what you have seen most recently. Just like all of a sudden many English on this board are touting Inzy as one of the best batsman around because he's belted around their team, yet only a while ago he had a shocking test tour of Australia (once again not belittling Inzy, just showing that what people see most or see most recently people think is best).

 

[deeps]

It depends on the team structure

A team like india, with many dashers already, Dravid would be picked ahead of Ponting every time. India need a solid player, and that's what Dravid gives them.

I'd pick Dravid anyway, i think he's the better player, and has proven it against mcgrath and co. Mind you Ponting hasn't had the opportunity

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

If that isn't a pressure hundred, I don't know what is.

 

[Paid The Umpire]

It was a good hundred. But Dravid is also a good batsman.

I'd say the following, they are both great players each of whom can rightfully deserve the mantle of best #3 of the current number 3's.

But what about Boony.

 

[Pratters]

 

[Dissector]

Come on. South Africa has two good bowlers and one of them isn't playing this test. A pressure hundred is having to face McGrath, Warne and Gillespie after your team has followed on and is in danger of losing the series.

Anyway I rate Dravid and Ponting about equal. Both have cashed in against weaker attacks and both have mediocre records against the top quality attacks. Ponting was really lucky in that he reached his peak just when the South Africa, West Indies and Pakistan attacks declined. Really the only major challenges he has faced this decade are the recent Ashes and Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka. And he averages below 40 in both series.

 

[aussie]

Anyway I rate Dravid and Ponting about equal. Both have cashed in against weaker attacks and both have mediocre records against the top quality attacks. Ponting was really lucky in that he reached his peak just when the South Africa, West Indies and Pakistan attacks declined. Really the only major challenges he has faced this decade are the recent Ashes and Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka. And he averages below 40 in both series.

This may be true but he has made hundreds againts Walsh, Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Donald & Pollock even if they weren't at their peaks.

 

[howardj]

I would say Dravid is superior to Kallis, simply because his record against McGrath + Warne + Wasim + Waqar + Murali + Donald + Pollock is superior to Kallis's. Add in Dravid's superb average away from home and i think he has a genuine case for being considered the third best batsman of his era after Tendulkar and Lara. Ponting has a glaring weakness when it comes to playing spin bowling on spin-friendly tracks- something Dravid doesnt have. As long as Ponting doesnt rectify that, it is hard to consider him a true alltime-great batsman in the same patch as Tendulkar/Lara/Dravid. Dravid also is significantly superior away from home, which is a big thing in batsmanship, considering that most batsmen struggle away from home.

Dravid averages 33 in Tests involving both McGrath and Warne, and 123 in Tests involving Australia without those two bowlers. Instructive.

 

[Pratters]

Dravid averages 33 in Tests involving both McGrath and Warne, and 123 in Tests involving Australia without those two bowlers. Instructive.

Faip says 38. Confirm which the correct figure is?

 

[howardj]

Faip says 38. Confirm which the correct figure is?

With both McGrath and Warne it's definitely 33. May be a little higher for Tests involving Warne or McGrath (such as the 1998 series where Warne played - with an injured shoulder - and McGrath did not play).

 

[Sanz]

You stated -
Actually he hasnt like in that inning. I just brought out an example. Others could have been produced but arent needed.

I was happy that you had put me on your IGNORE list.Do me a favor, Get inside the mosquito net.

NIT PICKING, that is what you are best at. Keep doing wont change the fact that Dravid has struggled against Warne.

 

[Pratters]

I was happy that you had put me on your IGNORE list.Do me a favor, Get inside the mosquito net.

Stop advicing me. Because you look far worse doing the same.

Keep doing wont change the fact that Dravid has struggled against Warne.

Ealier you said

Dravid has always struggled against Warne and Murali

So you change your stance. Big difference between always struggled and struggled.

Instance of him not struggling -

I have given you the example of a test. You can take the example of a series as well

Border-Gavaskar Trophy (Aus/Ind) in India, 1997/98 [Series]
Ind 3 5 0 223 86 56 52 44.60 0 3 0

Now are you going to coveniently ignore that and the 2000/01 series where he hit 180 in a test and a crucial 81 in another test because it suits your sweeping statements of course.

 

[Deja moo]

Its interesting. When the argument over who is India's better batsman/match-winner between Tendulkar and Dravid comes up, many argue Dravid because he scores the runs much more often when it counts compared to Sachin. Yet, many of the same people criticise Dravid when he's compared to another batsman because he doesn't have a good record against Warne/McGrath. Yet Sachin's record is absolutely devine against them (and all other champion attacks of the past bar SA where his fairly decent but not spectacular). And I'd classify scoring runs against two of the best bowlers of all time in Warne & McGrath (and Gillespie too) scoring runs "when it counts."

I'm not trying to belittle Dravid at all as he's one of my favourite batsman to watch, I just am kind of amused at the inconsistency in arguments.

I can't really choose between Ponting or Dravid, but its easy to pick Ponting now because he's in absolutely ripping form, but it was only just over 12 months in 2004 when Ponting had not scored a ton and averaged only 41 compared to Dravid who averaged 63.07 in 2004 despite his poor series against Australia that year. Many would have chosen Dravid at that time. Hell Dravid hasn't had a year when he's averaged less than 50 since 2001.

Its a case of choosing what you have seen most recently. Just like all of a sudden many English on this board are touting Inzy as one of the best batsman around because he's belted around their team, yet only a while ago he had a shocking test tour of Australia (once again not belittling Inzy, just showing that what people see most or see most recently people think is best).

You can add Kallis to that ever changing list too. Interesting how hes suddenly God on the forums.

 

[Sanz]

Now are you going to coveniently ignore that and the 2000/01 series where he hit 180 in a test and a crucial 81 in another test because it suits your sweeping statements of course.

I am not changing my stance, it will still remain that Dravid has always struggled against Warne.In your nit picking world no batsmen would struggle against any bowler.

Oh look Dravid didn't struggle on the 6th ball of the 25th over bowled by Warne..Oh there you go 5th ball of the 39th over Dravid didn't struggle.. and how about the easy single he was able to take on 4th ball of 38th over bowled by Warne..He didn't struggle there.. .

That proves Dravid doesn't always struggle against Warnie...

 

[Pratters]

I am not changing my stance, it will still remain that Dravid has always struggled against Warne.In your nit picking world no batsmen would struggle against any bowler.

Oh look Dravid didn't struggle on the 6th ball of the 25th over bowled by Warne..Oh there you go 5th ball of the 39th over Dravid didn't struggle.. and how about the easy single he was able to take on 4th ball of 38th over bowled by Warne..He didn't struggle there.. .

That proves Dravid doesn't always struggle against Warnie...

Actually its more than a specific ball or a few balls.

Its a series and a half.