Where does Ricky Ponting rank?

[Ikki]

Kazaholic you make some valid points but if you think the England team that played in 05 and the one that just played in England are same than you are living in lala land.
Look at the bowling lineup in 05 and the one that was in Aus. James Anerson as 3rd seamer, thats all thats need to be said really.

Well there are more circumstances, but bar Simon Jones not making it, it was the same wasn't it?

The Ponting that was in the 05 Ashes was also a different Ponting to the one which played just recently. I just contend that Ponting did do well - and I refer to his knock in OT - against a quality bowling attack, and that is a definition I'd give to the 05 English bowling crew.

Furthermore, Ponting in Australia was just looking to hammer and grind the English side when they came down here. It was an Australian test side looking to prove again why they were the best and did so in a vengeful matter. In my humble opinion, with the kind of performances they displayed, I'd put my money on them beating most sides 5-0 in that series.

 

[C_C]

Sorry, that is ridiculous. Mileage? He has only played 25 tests more than Ponting. LOL, Mileage? Lara is even older than both of them and has only played 4 tests less than Sachin. What is Lara then? Solar powered? I'm sure he doesn't face pressure then because he is apart of a few small islands.

Look, i have already said i do not wish to engage you because of your blind hiney-kissing mentality and 'fitting in complex' because you deliberately ignore points i make or refuse to acknowledge them only to bring em up later like a broken record.
I have already explained to you how the combination of top level fitness rigours, travelling stress and the subject being very young and still growing is a massive factor for physical burnout. As far as i am concerned, you know squat on this topic and you refuse to even let yourself be educated on this. How very mature.

This is really not going to factor for most neutrals

Why don't you keep such moronic statements out of the debate ? How many articles written by 'neutrals' do you think there are that comment on the massive population-led pressures Sachin faces that is unheard of for any other cricketer ? How many times does Ponting have to say himself that the kind of pressure Tendulkar faces is mindboggling and he's never been in similar shoes ?
You honestly have no idea of how much pressure the population exerts on Tendulkar if you think Ponting or any other Aussie has faced remotely similar pressure.

Like who? Ponting, Warne, Lara - and these are just in cricketers. Talk about football players and anybody who all the past Fifa of the year players were Established by 30. Most got the award before then.

Again, this makes no sense.
I am commenting on the fact that Tendulkar was established and then a great batsman by an age where Lara or Ponting were relative nobodys in comparison.

So from 21 onwards Tendulkar started to decline?

No. I said 21 is by when Tendulkar had already established himself amongst the greats. Why does he have to head for decline immediately after establishing himself ??

So that means at about age 28 and having played 89 matches, that was it? That's it for Tendi? Mileage my behind.

You obviously are utterly and completely ignorant on the nature of the human physiology. I can hook you up with my uncle, a doctor, who may be better equipped to convince you of your retardedness on this topic. I have already explained to you what happens when a lot of exposure and fitness demands are placed on a still growing body as opposed to a developed one.

No, but you're trying to spread his earlier successes across the board simply because it happened 38 tests before Ponting.

And it matters. They'r both about the same age yet when Ponting was a next-to-nobody, Tendulkar was already a world star. That alone should be enough of a reason as to why Tendulkar is a better player.

 

[C_C]

Sorry, it's only a factor WHEN he is young. Unless that prodigy-like run continues then it's meaningless in this kind of debate where we're discussing their whole career.

How..very...******** and how very detached from the reality of how prodigies go.

Someone who shows such prodigal talent, and wants to be recognised for the same thing has to really lift his game up higher than he started off and sustain that class.

Not true. A prodigy is a better one by default because he/she can do stuff with less experience to help. Period. Mozart's compositions wern't superior to Bach's or Wagner's. He simply started composing at an age where Bach himself didnt know beyond basic music. Much like how Tendulkar started playing quality test innings when Ponting himself wasnt good enough for FC level.

He started off well and young, that's about it. He's rivalled by at least 2 players in his own era.

Sorry but only in the minds of the jingoistic, blatant hiney-kissers like yourself or the ones with short memory is there anybody but Lara who can be debated as Tendulkar's equal and superior in Tests.

I remind you, Ponting started young too, he just wasn't ushered to the front of the line.

Because he wasnt good enough.

See that's another thing about Australian cricket, while it takes you to climb mountains to get into the team, it takes you slipping up over a rock to get dropped. That's pressure too.

That is aussie cricket today. Not Aussie cricket of the early 90s when Aussies were still rebuilding.

I'd like to know who you think is that much better that you quote my statement as hyperbole.

Gibbs, Yuvraj, deVilliers are all better fielders than Ponting in my book.

But Warne seems to be okay to tarnish?

You mean injuries that still allow the bowler to majically bowl every game for full quota/most quota, get whacked, spend hours at the crease and then whine when gets owned ? Yeah, its called making excuses - which sits well with Warne's character.

Uh, Ponting is kind of a prodigy too btw.

Err.no.
Ponting, like many great players, started and did stuff at an age well beyond the normal population. But prodigies are truly unique. Football's equivalent would be Pele. Cricket has Tendulkar. Music has Mozart, Mathematics have Gauss. They simply are way more deserving of prodigy tag than any of their contemporaries or subsequent challengers in the field. And the reason is evident enough.

Don't worry, I get it, the problem is MENTAL.

Yes it is mental- which doesnt necessarily have to indicate a dip in interest level as you quoted and indicated to be directly linked to mental burnouts.

And you don't have to make it up, you just make more runs than him, more often than him and score more centuries than him and more consistently. Reminds me of someone?

Yes, it reminds me of someone- a lot of someones when the bowling quality is toned down to nothing, pitches are made flat and given hugely strong batting lineups as backups.

Maybe history will reflect a bit kinder.

Considering most cricket history is written by anglo-australian sources, it will be easier on Ponting as it has been on Aussies/English players of the antiquity. Don't worry.

Regardless, if this is the case it makes Tendulkar from at least 2000 even poorer if "the opposition isn't as good".

Not when the career is contiunously interrupted by injuries.

He's definitely won more, and I can tell you that Tendulkar won't be able to touch those.

Yeah even a monkey inducted in the Aussie team would win more than Tendulkar. So monkey >> Tendulkar. Go logic !

Whatever you reckon sunshine

Kindly desist from addressing me in such fashion.

Haha, and why not? Ponting has 100+ less matches yet is posting the same kind of numbers.

Same 'kind of' numbers ?

Tendulkar has about 100 more ODIs and almost double the # of tons, higher strike rate and a lot more runs. And he is still playing. Unless Tendulkar like retires after this world cup ( might happen btw if India wins it), Ponting's got zero,literally zero chance of touching Tendulkar's record in ODIs.

 

[Eclipse]

Ponting is way better than Tendulkar if only based on the fact he makes runs for his team when they need them,

When he's needed he plays true captains knocks.

There are sevral Ponting innings Tendulkar has never came close to matching.

 

[C_C]

There are sevral Ponting innings Tendulkar has never came close to matching.

Rubbish.
Infact, there are several Tendulkar innings that Ponting has never come close to matching- his 130-odd in Kolkata being the most obvious example.

 

[social]

Rubbish.
Infact, there are several Tendulkar innings that Ponting has never come close to matching- his 130-odd in Kolkata being the most obvious example.

I assume u mean the group match where India lost (not his fault obviously)

Please explain how any innings Tendy has played in ODIs remotely approaches the 140 odd Ponting scored in the 2003 final

I rate Tendy above Ponting (in tests at least) but your defence of him based on examples such as this is rubbish

 

[Jono]

Because Ponting's 140 odd in the 2003 final, as good as it was, was against a fairly average bowling line-up which despite being in form, had already been demoralised by Hayden and Gilchrist before Ponting even had to walk to the middle.

 

[C_C]

I assume u mean the group match where India lost (not his fault obviously)

Err you assume incorrectly.I was referring to his 130-odd in the Chennai test facing Akram,Waqar and Saqlain.

Please explain how any innings Tendy has played in ODIs remotely approaches the 140 odd Ponting scored in the 2003 final

That inning doesnt. His desert storm innings does surpass it significantly. Literally won the match singlehandedly against a superior bowling and fielding unit while chasing a target.
Much more valuable than just a bashfest of a mediocre bowling attack setting a target.

I rate Tendy above Ponting (in tests at least)

In tests atleast ? If anything, ODIs is not even a question - Tendy is clearly and categorically ahead of Ponting in ODIs in every which way imaginable - is more consistent, scores way more tons, better strike rate and above all, utter domination of Aussie bowling attack ( best bowling + fielding unit in ODIs over the last 10 years) the like of which Ponting has never faced.

 

[Jono]

Ponting is way better than Tendulkar if only based on the fact he makes runs for his team when they need them,

When he's needed he plays true captains knocks.

There are sevral Ponting innings Tendulkar has never came close to matching.

Yeah 'way' better

 

[Johnners]

Hmmmmm interesting argument there Social, Ponting & Sachin are far more evenly matched in Tests than in ODI's (where sachin is clearly superior)

 

[social]

That inning doesnt. His desert storm innings does surpass it significantly. Literally won the match singlehandedly against a superior bowling and fielding unit while chasing a target.
Much more valuable than just a bashfest of a mediocre bowling attack setting a target.



In tests atleast ? If anything, ODIs is not even a question - Tendy is clearly and categorically ahead of Ponting in ODIs in every which way imaginable - is more consistent, scores way more tons, better strike rate and above all, utter domination of Aussie bowling attack ( best bowling + fielding unit in ODIs over the last 10 years) the like of which Ponting has never faced.

A made for television exhibition match played vs OZ without Warne and McGrath - **** me, you've totally lost it if youre comparing that to the WC final

As for ODI s as a whole, name the last "significant" innings Tendy played

 

[C_C]

A made for television exhibition match played vs OZ without Warne and McGrath

Err only McGrath was missing. Warne, as usual, was clobbered by Tendulkar for figures of 10-0-61-0

**** me, you've totally lost it if youre comparing that to the WC final

I think precisely the opposite- you've totally lost it if you can compare the world cup bashfest innings of Ponting on a substandard pitch vs substandard bowling while setting a target to Tendulkar facing down (the-then) one of the best attacks, chasing a stiff total ( 273- back in the day when 250+ against a good bowling unit was a challenge even on best of situations) and winning the match singlehandedly ( Tendulkar departed with 25 runs in 33 balls required and six wickets left) all the more while being injured.

As for ODI s as a whole, name the last "significant" innings Tendy played

100* in 77 balls vs west indies just a few weeks ago.

 

[Jono]

As for ODI s as a whole, name the last "significant" innings Tendy played

Haha so you're pretty much just limiting it to World Cup and CT Finals?

Otherwise his ton against Pakistan in 2006 against Gul and Asif chasing a large total is definitely up there.

 

[Johnners]

Social, I don't see how many significant innings Tendulkar has played of late has to do with anything. No-ones denying that on current form, Ponting is well ahead of Sachin, however, in their respective ODI careers, Sachins career far outweighs pontings in terms of signifcant innings. Even i can see that and i'm a selfconfessed Ponting nut.

 

[Ikki]

Look, i have already said i do not wish to engage you because of your blind hiney-kissing mentality and 'fitting in complex' because you deliberately ignore points i make or refuse to acknowledge them only to bring em up later like a broken record.
I have already explained to you how the combination of top level fitness rigours, travelling stress and the subject being very young and still growing is a massive factor for physical burnout. As far as i am concerned, you know squat on this topic and you refuse to even let yourself be educated on this. How very mature.

No, you know squat. You don't even sound like you've ever played sports. I remember you one time going on about how you played against Xavier, I told you my cousin personally trains and knows him and you wouldn't even give your name. And your post...talk about immature.

Back to the top: you're working in a circular argument here. One will only accept what you think based on the conditions you set/accept prior. You have to be some kind of nut to think that Tendulkar is getting that much more pressure than someone like Ponting or any other world star in any other sport that in his late 20s he was done. It's a stupid argument and it's frankly insulting to the player in question.

Why don't you keep such moronic statements out of the debate ? How many articles written by 'neutrals' do you think there are that comment on the massive population-led pressures Sachin faces that is unheard of for any other cricketer ? How many times does Ponting have to say himself that the kind of pressure Tendulkar faces is mindboggling and he's never been in similar shoes ?
You honestly have no idea of how much pressure the population exerts on Tendulkar if you think Ponting or any other Aussie has faced remotely similar pressure.

Or you're exaggerating for Tendi's sake. Listen, when cricketers get judged by their respective careers, you will hardly mention anyone facing hardships due to pressure. By any commentator or expert of the game. Why? Because it's simply a factor that everyone has to play with - Tendi moreso, but that will never be his excuse. Now you can wail and cry as loud as you want.

Again, this makes no sense.
I am commenting on the fact that Tendulkar was established and then a great batsman by an age where Lara or Ponting were relative nobodys in comparison.

You said at age 30. At age 30 both Ponting and Lara were great batsmen. Now I also mentioned footballers. Most footballers today, who are stars, were noted at around ages from 18-22. These examples are enough to refute your silly logic.

No. I said 21 is by when Tendulkar had already established himself amongst the greats. Why does he have to head for decline immediately after establishing himself ??

You don't establish yourself for the rest of your career. You establish yourself and then you move on. You will go through periods of growth and fall. The point being that some players vary when they are established. Tendulkar is one of those rare cases that hit the ground running, some are not so. Why this should take away from any other person who is compared to Tendi is beyond me. It's a + for Sachin, but not a - for anyone else.

You obviously are utterly and completely ignorant on the nature of the human physiology. I can hook you up with my uncle, a doctor, who may be better equipped to convince you of your retardedness on this topic. I have already explained to you what happens when a lot of exposure and fitness demands are placed on a still growing body as opposed to a developed one.

I don't need to talk with your uncle, or your brother or your cousin. It really doesn't matter. You have to be a complete dolt not to see world class players, in every sport, where 28 is their prime. You have to be completely out-of-it to argue otherwise. EVEN when that played started at age 16. And we're talking Cricket here boy, we're not talking about more physical intensive games.

Arguing the psychological aspect is one thing, but even that is a lame takeaway from Tendulkar's stature. You really do more harm in arguing his case than good. You might as well stop while you're only a little behind.

And it matters. They'r both about the same age yet when Ponting was a next-to-nobody, Tendulkar was already a world star. That alone should be enough of a reason as to why Tendulkar is a better player.

Which is completely a non-point. No one is going to debut with the same established class compared to someone who has played even 1 game, let alone 38. But from that point onwards Ponting has taken over.

 

[Ikki]

How..very...******** and how very detached from the reality of how prodigies go.

There are two meanings to Prodigy. One that a youth exhibits an extreme level of skill, or one that a person - regardless of age - exhibits this prodigious talent.

When a player from age 16-21 is averaging in the low 50s, you think of that person as a prodigy and one that will surely improve. Sachin has gone on occasions above those figures, yet has always remained in the close vicinity of them. This same prodigal talent is attributed to Ponting. yet not in the sense that he started off as well as Sachin.

Apart from the novelty that Sachin started so well, you've explained f-all why it should mean anymore than it does. The actual implication you have of the concept is self-defeating.

Not true. A prodigy is a better one by default because he/she can do stuff with less experience to help. Period. Mozart's compositions wern't superior to Bach's or Wagner's. He simply started composing at an age where Bach himself didnt know beyond basic music. Much like how Tendulkar started playing quality test innings when Ponting himself wasnt good enough for FC level.



Sorry but only in the minds of the jingoistic, blatant hiney-kissers like yourself or the ones with short memory is there anybody but Lara who can be debated as Tendulkar's equal and superior in Tests.

THANK you for proving my point.

Yes, Tendulkar started off greatly with less experience than his contemporaries and that includes Ponting. But after 100 tests, this factor means nothing when Ponting is now outscoring Tendulkar. Get it? Now they have the same experience, no one is arguing how they started out - this is their whole career we're talking about.

And no, only racist anti-white forms of life will think Tendulkar can't be compared to white-Australian Ponting.

Because he wasnt good enough.

Haha sure, Rod Marsh says "he's the greatest batsmen I've ever seen" and he's not good enough . Ponting was invited to the test side in 93, but guess what, they didn't give him a go. This is a whole can of worms, one that I won't indulge as it's a digression. I think Sean has already hammered this point into that thick cranium of yours.

That is aussie cricket today. Not Aussie cricket of the early 90s when Aussies were still rebuilding.

Uh, no it's been that way for I could say all of Ponting's career. I remind you, a certain Mike Hussey is only 1 year younger than Ponting. Hayden, Langer? Ring any bells. Exactly, as I thought.

Gibbs, Yuvraj, deVilliers are all better fielders than Ponting in my book.

Make a poll then sunshine.

You mean injuries that still allow the bowler to majically bowl every game for full quota/most quota, get whacked, spend hours at the crease and then whine when gets owned ? Yeah, its called making excuses - which sits well with Warne's character.

Haha, so it's a character assassination you're going after? Warne, no matter what he was off the field was the HARDEST competitor on the field. The last man you would expect to make up an excuse to fail. But you being you, and Warne being White-Australian...I guess you can't see that fact.

Err.no.
Ponting, like many great players, started and did stuff at an age well beyond the normal population. But prodigies are truly unique. Football's equivalent would be Pele. Cricket has Tendulkar. Music has Mozart, Mathematics have Gauss. They simply are way more deserving of prodigy tag than any of their contemporaries or subsequent challengers in the field. And the reason is evident enough.

Uh, no, prodigies like those aren't unique. They're just rare. Ponting was scouted around the same age as Tendi. The Aussie team was doing a bit better than the English side. Besides, this wasn't my point. I was referring to the otherd definition of prodigy. Regardless, it does not make a player better simply because he had the talent earlier on.

Bradman debuted at around the same age as Ponting. Hopefully, you won't hold that against The Don.

Yes it is mental- which doesnt necessarily have to indicate a dip in interest level as you quoted and indicated to be directly linked to mental burnouts.

You're talking crap mate. After Tendi got Sachin's record he was invigorated and showed no sign of this 'mental strain'. That has nothing to do with 'interest'.

Besides, I wasn't saying his problem was mental...

Yes, it reminds me of someone- a lot of someones when the bowling quality is toned down to nothing, pitches are made flat and given hugely strong batting lineups as backups.

Same conditions Tendulkar doesn't seem to take advantage of...

Considering most cricket history is written by anglo-australian sources, it will be easier on Ponting as it has been on Aussies/English players of the antiquity. Don't worry.

Hahaha, BINGO. Do I get a CW award for this one? Come on guys.

Yeah even a monkey inducted in the Aussie team would win more than Tendulkar. So monkey >> Tendulkar. Go logic !

Haha, that's hilarious. Most players in the world wouldn't get into the Aussie side, a monkey?

Kindly desist from addressing me in such fashion.

Calling someone ignorant and implying their inferior knowledge is a much ruder manner. Kindly or not, I will reply with the same tone I am given, sunshine?

Same 'kind of' numbers ?

Tendulkar has about 100 more ODIs and almost double the # of tons, higher strike rate and a lot more runs. And he is still playing. Unless Tendulkar like retires after this world cup ( might happen btw if India wins it), Ponting's got zero,literally zero chance of touching Tendulkar's record in ODIs.

Already posted the stats, don't need to dumb yourself down.

 

[C_C]

You have to be some kind of nut to think that Tendulkar is getting that much more pressure than someone like Ponting or any other world star in any other sport that in his late 20s he was done. It's a stupid argument and it's frankly insulting to the player in question.

Okay. So basically, Ponting himself is a nut because Ponting himself has commented of the incredible ammounts of pressure Tendulkar faces and how amazed he's with the way Tendulkar deals with it. This has been noted by several authors over and over. So all of them, ponting included, are nuts. Fine, if you think that, i have nothing more to look or read of your comments.

 

[C_C]

When a player from age 16-21 is averaging in the low 50s, you think of that person as a prodigy and one that will surely improve.

Err commonly,that is not the case. Prodigies improve slightly as their career keeps developing but just like Tendulkar, Mozart's works didnt improve radically as he aged. He just started producing opera works at age 12 which were of good quality and kept doing so.

And i agree that there are two definitions to the prodigy. The reason i don't focus on the 'other' definition ( ie, prodigious production) is because there really is only one person who fits the bill : Bradman. For all the production 'peaks' that Ponting or Tendulkar or Lara have/have had, its not that much different in numbers from the peaks of Sobers/Waugh/Richards, etc. except maybe in terms of number of matches played in that peak period.
So yes, if Ponting was putting nutty numbers up - like say a 65-70 average today while the next best guys are in the 55-58 zone, then yes, i'd say he is a prodigal talent worth considering. But so far, he didnt start abnormally young and neither is his peak that much more astonishing than peaks of great players previously at the height of their powers.
Only difference would be # of matches played.

 

[C_C]

You have to be a complete dolt not to see world class players, in every sport, where 28 is their prime. You have to be completely out-of-it to argue otherwise. EVEN when that played started at age 16. And we're talking Cricket here boy, we're not talking about more physical intensive games.

*sigh*

It is the prime for most players- who have started around a normal age ( 20-21 for debut in international cricket and regularly featuring from then on). But when you start really young, you also break down really young because the effects of the physical strain ( continuous fitness programs + travelling + wear and tear) seriously impedes the full development of the body. You have to be a pretty big dolt not to see that and realize that people who have started playing at the highest level at an extremely young age also wear out faster physically.
Wayne Gretsky, another prodigy is pretty much the same story. Pavel Bure, the greatest goal scorer in hockey history, is the same way.

In my opinion, Tendulkar is at the very top because of what he achieved relative to others when he was at the top of the game, as well as under what conditions he achieved them.
It is indisputable that when Tendulkar scored most of his runs, pitches were significantly harder to bat on and bowling attacks on average were much stronger.
When Tendulkar was sitting at a similar stage as Ponting ( just over 100 matches or so) and at his peak, his figures were identical to what Ponting's are today. Except for the fact that those runs came against much tougher opposition, on much tougher pitches while batting in a much weaker batting lineup for most part.

What stands out for Tendulkar is what he's done relative to others at his peak and seeing that in Ponting's case.
When Tendulkar started averaging 50, only 3 others were averaging 50 in test cricket : Border, Viv and Miandad. All of them were over a decade older than the 21 year old Tendulkar. So basically, he reached the top level at an age where most great batsmen ( Ponting, Dravid, Waugh, Viv, etc) are barely getting their feet wet in Test cricket.

Secondly, when Tendulkar was at his peak, he was averaging 58+ while the 'next best' guy around was averaging 51-52 and there were only 4 of them apart from Tendulkar ( Inzy, Tugga, Lara and Flower) averaging 50+. Ponting's averaging almost 60, great and all that but he's got Dravid sitting around at 58, Kallis, Yousuf and Tendulkar sitting in the 54-57 range, Lara in 53-54 area, Inzy, Sehwag, Smith and a bunch of others in the 47-51 zone.
So it is pretty evident that Ponting's peak doesnt stand out as much as Tendulkar's did despite the fact that Ponting bats under easier conditions pressure-wise ( not only the population factor, the fact that Ponting plays for a lot better side means there is lot less riding on him) and on easier pitches against tripe bowling.

It boggles my mind when people dont see that Tendulkar has come down a notch or two due to his injury problems and it is unlikely to ever improve because of the injury damage. That is pretty much the prime reason he isnt taking as heavy advantage as some others under easier conditions.
Guy is playing with a permanently messed up back, shattered toe and consistent elbow problems. Even if i were to grant you that Warne's injury in the games he played in India were genuine, its still clear to see why Tendulkar stands out just that much more - Warne's bowling went to pieces while Tendulkar's performance since being rocked by injuries is still very much good in relative terms ( mid 40s average and almost 2000 runs) and his ODI form has come down from 'mindboggling' level to rest of 'next best' folks. ( 7 tons, 2500+ runs and 43+ average)

 

[Hamilton B]

Ponting is handicapped by the fact that he did pretty much diddly squat in the 90s against the likes of Wasim/Waqar/Donald/Pollock/Klusener/Walsh/Ambrose etc. Tendulkar averaged 59 towards the start of the 2000s against that bunch + McGrath/Warne, while Ponting is doing the same against a significantly poorer batch of bowlers.

It could very well be that the current Ponting could have averaged 59 against that bunch if he were transported today back into the 90s, but it is also equally plausible that the Tendulkar of the 90s could average 70+ against the current batch of bowlers.

The only reasonn why we're witnessing this argument is because Ponting's ascent has coincided with Tendulkar's decline (and much of that decline is injury imposed if I'm not mistaken).

I'd give Tendulkar the nod ahead of Ponting in both forms of the game.