The better batsman the bettter #3 Ponting vs Dravid

[LongHopCassidy]

You've been missed.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

and his record in which country is anywhere near as miserable as 12.26?
dravid may not be great against spin, but at least hes fairly good against it, which is not the same that can be said about ponting. at the end of the day, the difference between dravid against pace and ponting against pace is nowhere near as big as the difference between ponting against spin and dravid against spin.

Ponting isn't "fairly good" against spin? You're kidding, right? His record in India is poor, but his record against spin everywhere else in the world (including against the same Indian spinners in Australia) is superb. At the peak of Ponting's career, injury has prevented him from rectifying his record in India, but aside from that he has performed against spin of all kinds in all conditions. He's not as good against spin as plenty of players, of course, but he's certainly a high quality player of all kinds of bowling, which is why after Ponting smashed a double century on a turning pitch against Pakistan, Danish Kaneria said he was, along side Lara, the best player of spin he had faced.

 

[Jono]

I was waiting for TEC to post in this thread because a little over a year ago there was a debate upon this and he was very strong in his opinion that Dravid is better.

Whilst I compliment him for not falling for the "What you see most or most recently is what is best" common downfall that I mentioned earlier in this thread, my only question to him is what about Dravid's below average record against McGrath/Warne. I'm one of Dravid's biggest fans and he's one of my favourite cricketers ever, but one can't deny that it is a hole in his career. One that Lara and Tendulkar don't have (and no I'm not getting into a Dravid v Tendulkar debate with you, all I'm saying, like I said earlier, its odd that people criticise Tendulkar for not getting important runs compared to Dravid when Dravid has not scored many against Warne/McGrath).

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I can perfectly understand arguing that Dravid is better than Ponting in tests, but it's not anything like as huge a gap as TEC suggests, and to base your -entire- argument around Ponting being poor in India when he is better than Dravid everywhere else is just ridiculous. Especially when you ignore the huge strides Ponting has made in his game since 2001, which are evident everywhere else in the world aside from India, because he has only played one test in India since then.

 

[tooextracool]

meh who cares tooextracool. you can think as passionately as you want about it. Fact is Ponting has made over 1500 test runs in a calendar year, and is making you look like even more blind in 2006.

is he really? i havent waivered in my opinion one bit, as i've said in the past i have no problems in putting ponting on a level pedestal with dravid after he scores runs in india. however until he does so i have no reason to put him at the same level with someone whos done it all, and any amount of runs in a calendar year wont change a thing.

 

[tooextracool]

Ponting isn't "fairly good" against spin? You're kidding, right? His record in India is poor, but his record against spin everywhere else in the world (including against the same Indian spinners in Australia) is superb. At the peak of Ponting's career, injury has prevented him from rectifying his record in India, but aside from that he has performed against spin of all kinds in all conditions. He's not as good against spin as plenty of players, of course, but he's certainly a high quality player of all kinds of bowling, which is why after Ponting smashed a double century on a turning pitch against Pakistan, Danish Kaneria said he was, along side Lara, the best player of spin he had faced.

ponting is weak against spin on a turner. he might not be completely shocking, but hes still extremely ordinary against spin in much the same way that gibbs, pietersen etc are.
and to say that injury prevented him from rectifying his record in India is quite ludicrous to say the least, given that he got one test in that series, poor wicket or not, to change that and a 50 on that pitch would have provided enough evidence to suggest that things were different.

 

[tooextracool]

I was waiting for TEC to post in this thread because a little over a year ago there was a debate upon this and he was very strong in his opinion that Dravid is better.

Whilst I compliment him for not falling for the "What you see most or most recently is what is best" common downfall that I mentioned earlier in this thread, my only question to him is what about Dravid's below average record against McGrath/Warne. I'm one of Dravid's biggest fans and he's one of my favourite cricketers ever, but one can't deny that it is a hole in his career. One that Lara and Tendulkar don't have (and no I'm not getting into a Dravid v Tendulkar debate with you, all I'm saying, like I said earlier, its odd that people criticise Tendulkar for not getting important runs compared to Dravid when Dravid has not scored many against Warne/McGrath).

Dravid struggles against warne yes, but i find it quite amusing that people can come up with an argument that involves him struggling only when both Mcgrath and Warne are playing. this defies logic IMO, how can a player have a weakness against 2 bowlers only when they bowl together? if he cant play against 2 quality bowlers then how in the world did he manage to play ambrose and walsh, or donald and pollock?
i dont mind admitting that dravid has had problems over the years against warne, but despite all of that hes managed to score runs and win games for his country while playing against both mcgrath and warne, which is clearly not the same that i can say about ponting in india.

 

[tooextracool]

I can perfectly understand arguing that Dravid is better than Ponting in tests, but it's not anything like as huge a gap as TEC suggests, and to base your -entire- argument around Ponting being poor in India when he is better than Dravid everywhere else is just ridiculous. Especially when you ignore the huge strides Ponting has made in his game since 2001, which are evident everywhere else in the world aside from India, because he has only played one test in India since then.

so tell me how many great players in the history of test match cricket had a record as poor as 12.26 after a significant number of games in or against any attack of significance?
i think you and i will both agree that since ponting hasnt had the opportunity to play australia, his toughest test as a player must be against india in india? a test that hes happened to fail oh so miserably.

 

[parttimer]

So you'd take Dravid in India and possibly in Sri Lanka, but Ponting everywhere else.That makes Ponting streaks ahead really

 

[Blaze]

I'd say Dravid, just cause I hate Ponting with a passion.

 

[tooextracool]

So you'd take Dravid in India and possibly in Sri Lanka, but Ponting everywhere else.That makes Ponting streaks ahead really

no id take dravid because i'd be far more comfortable knowing that whether the pitch is seamer friendly or spin friendly, my player's capabilities wouldnt be significantly reduced. Further i think most people would prefer to have Dravid bat for a draw than have Ponting do so.

 

[parttimer]

no id take dravid because i'd be far more comfortable knowing that whether the pitch is seamer friendly or spin friendly, my player's capabilities wouldnt be significantly reduced. Further i think most people would prefer to have Dravid bat for a draw than have Ponting do so.

What about if you had to choose right now, who would you take?

 

[tooextracool]

on current form ponting obviously, dravid hasnt been in the best form of late.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

so tell me how many great players in the history of test match cricket had a record as poor as 12.26 after a significant number of games in or against any attack of significance?
i think you and i will both agree that since ponting hasnt had the opportunity to play australia, his toughest test as a player must be against india in india? a test that hes happened to fail oh so miserably.

I'm not suggesting his record in India should be ignored, I'm saying you can't use it to dismiss him on its own. Ponting is a much better batsman now than he was in 2001, even ignoring his form at the time, and he's played one test in India since then, when he was again in relatively poor form and was on a dodgy pitch. I think if Ponting were to tour India right now he would do well, and that's what matters for me. He's done enough on turning wickets against quality spin all over the world to indicate to me that he can play spin on helpful pitches. If he was poor against it, he wouldn't get praise like that from Kaneria, or have a brilliant record at the SCG, or have the best of Murali, or achieve any of the other things he has achieved against good spin bowlers.

 

[Sanz]

. Further i think most people would prefer to have Dravid bat for a draw than have Ponting do so.

Yeah and most people would prefer to have Ponting for a WIN than have Dravid do so. Aus Require 287 in 76 overs, Ponting 110* in 122 balls, Aus require 45 runs in 25 over.

Obviously some people would consider a draw more important than a win, just to win an argument.

Nuff Said.

 

[tooextracool]

Yeah and most people would prefer to have Ponting for a WIN than have Dravid do so. Aus Require 287 in 76 overs, Ponting 110* in 122 balls, Aus require 45 runs in 25 over.

Obviously some people would consider a draw more important than a win, just to win an argument.

Nuff Said.

err batting out a draw is just as important as a win(Depending on the situation of course), incase you havent realised. if it werent for rudolph in that first test SA would have lost 3-0.
and as ive already said, I'd pick dravid because he can play both spin and pace quite well, without disgracing himself in any part of the world.

 

[tooextracool]

I'm not suggesting his record in India should be ignored, I'm saying you can't use it to dismiss him on its own. Ponting is a much better batsman now than he was in 2001, even ignoring his form at the time, and he's played one test in India since then, when he was again in relatively poor form and was on a dodgy pitch. I think if Ponting were to tour India right now he would do well, and that's what matters for me. He's done enough on turning wickets against quality spin all over the world to indicate to me that he can play spin on helpful pitches. If he was poor against it, he wouldn't get praise like that from Kaneria, or have a brilliant record at the SCG, or have the best of Murali, or achieve any of the other things he has achieved against good spin bowlers.

this is inane, you thinking that ponting will do well in India doesnt automatically mean that he will do well in India and therefore should be considered the equal of someone whos done well all over the world. Similarly i think SP Jones could do as well as any other fast bowler, but that doesnt mean i rate him along side Glenn Mcgrath because of that. you've produced an excuse that ponting has improved as a player since 2001,and yet used his performance against murali from 99 to suggest that he can play spin. and i certainly dont buy the excuse that he was out of form on all of the last 3 occasions that he came to India either. Im not willing to rate Ponting as a great until i see him score in India, and 8 tests spread over nearly 10 years cannot be simply ignored.

 

[Sanz]

err batting out a draw is just as important as a win(Depending on the situation of course), incase you havent realised. if it werent for rudolph in that first test SA would have lost 3-0.

If Ponting wanted he could have batte for a DRAW here(as Dravid would have done) but In my book a win is more important than a draw. Last year India were in a similar situation against Pak @ Banglore where we needed 313 runs from 90 overs on the 5th day with 10 wickets in hand, we all know what happened.

and as ive already said, I'd pick dravid because he can play both spin and pace quite well, without disgracing himself in any part of the world.

Yeah and 14.5 Vs. Mcgrath/Warne and Co. in Australia isn't a disgrace ??

 

[howardj]

The remarkable thing about Ponting has been his improvement since 2001. Mid way through the Ashes tour that year, he was averaging 40. I always thought back then why people made such a big deal of him. I think the last few years is the reason why. After the first fifteen minutes of his innings', he just looks immovable.

 

[tooextracool]

If Ponting wanted he could have batte for a DRAW here(as Dravid would have done) but In my book a win is more important than a draw. Last year India were in a similar situation against Pak @ Banglore where we needed 313 runs from 90 overs on the 5th day with 10 wickets in hand, we all know what happened.

firstly if ponting had batted for a draw he would most likely have gotten out earlier, given that hes a far better player playing aggresively than he is playing defensively.
and as i said before, in certain situations a draw is more important than a win and in others a win is more important. in the 5th Ashes test, England were better off going for the draw on the last day than a win. At Old Trafford, Australia were better off going for a draw than a win. in the first test of the SA-WI series, SA were better off going for a draw than a win. Fact is playing for a draw is just as important as going for a win. Im not sure what failures in certain innings from dravid in going for a draw is supposed to prove, surely it only proves as much as failed innings from Ponting going for the win?

Yeah and 14.5 Vs. Mcgrath/Warne and Co. in Australia isn't a disgrace ??

Wow hes played a whole 3 tests against Mcgrath and co in Australia(and please dont even bother including the joke of a series that is the super series), which is nowhere near as many as 8 tests spread over 8 years. good job coming up with that one.