The Latest Comparison - Ponting or Chappell?

[Matt79]

I'll agree to that - is there an actual reason for doing this - other than crowds and TV highlights liking fours and sixes?

The only thing I can think of is to avoid players injuring themselves running into the boundary trying to make a save. But that doesn't explain why, at times, the boundary is brought in five/ten meters, rather than one or two.

 

[andyc]

Yeah I heard somewhere boundary ropes were brought in because some player got injured when he slid and ended up crashing into the fence or something. You are right in saying that it does seem a bit ridiculous, though.

 

[Jono]

Its one of the things I hate the most about modern day cricket, the ropes. They suck. At least the length which they're in anyway.

 

[aussie]

I seriously disagree. I am not debating who is best amongst Nash, Doull, Altott, Brian Strang, Olonga etc. but they are all in the same level.
And Paul Strang was a pretty fine spinner i might add. Better than Vettori back then.

Come on Streak was Zim's only respectable test bowler back then along with paul strang for a while. The rest of the attack was pretty mediocre. Allot, Doull & Nash while they played all were better than streak its just unfortunate in the case of Allot & Doull that they were injured so much.

But the few times they all plus Cairns played together the Kiwis definately had a decent attack. way ahead of Zim.

 

[social]

Umm.... i find this whole ' hitting prime' argument to be pretty weak, since we are talking about two players who are within a year or two of each other in age and made a debut within a year or two of each other as well. this whole 'didnt hit their prime' is avoidance of the real issue - one was very good and one was worldclass/boderline great when pitches were juicy and bowling attacks potent- both cashed in later on easier pitches on much inferior bowling attacks.

Garbage

Wickets suddenly became flat in 2002?

Any bowler that had the ability to bowl decently retired at the same time?

 

[social]

Err. Few innings here and there doesnt prove diddly squat. The fact remains- when pitches were juicy and bowling standards high, Ponting couldnt average 45 when Dravid averaged jjust over 50.[/QUOTE]

Or perhaps we could say "when Ponting was going out and getting drunk and beaten up in bar fights, he did unbelievably well to average 45."

12 months ago, Dravid boosters were saying that because he averaged more than Ponting, he was obviously a better player.

Now, we have the utterly ridiculous contention that he is a better player because he averaged more in the period leading up to the end of 2001.

 

[Dasa]

12 months ago, Dravid boosters were saying that because he averaged more than Ponting, he was obviously a better player.

Don't remember anyone saying that.

 

[aussie]

Don't remember anyone saying that.

i heard the comment made around cricketing circles but i'm not too sure if i say it made on this forum.

 

[sideshowtim]

ponting is better than any other current player.

the thing most people ignore when looking at pontings innings is the value they have to the teams situation. not only does ponting have marvellous statistics (average of 58, nearly 9,000 runs, 31 tons) yet he produces the big innings EXACTLY when his side needs them. this is something that dravid, tendulkar, lara and any other current player have failed to do. ponting has scored a ridiculous amount of tons since the ashes and plenty of them have been vital to his teams cause.

* the 150 at old trafford

* 149 against the west indies when no one else contributed

* 142* against the south africans in an unlikely chase of 280

* the back-to-back tons in the south african 2nd test which put the test out of their reach

* 118* against the bangers which got us home safely

and if we're counting one dayers

* we were 3/10 and he helped us post 369 with a marvellous ton

* that awesome 160 in that unforgettable day nighter

pontings innings are not only magnificent because of the runs he scores or the tons he makes. but he makes them at times when the side needs them and in difficult conditions too. dravid, tendulkar and lara pull out the big scores...but only when the series is lost...all of laras big scores in recent times have come in matches that mean nothing. dravid had a perfect chance to play a ponting-esque innings against england in the third test but failed. and sachin hasn't been himself since his injury.

 

[Jono]

Dravid doesn't pull out the big scores when the team needs him too?

Gee now I've heard it all.

I think you should look past that Cricket Australia logo in your avatar. Its blocking your perspective.

 

[sideshowtim]

Dravid doesn't pull out the big scores when the team needs him too?

Gee now I've heard it all.

I think you should look past that Cricket Australia logo in your avatar. Its blocking your perspective.

can i have some examples then? i gave some, i'd like you to too. ponting wins more games off his bat for australia than dravid does for india. not only are pontings stats better than dravids, I BELIEVE he is more valuable in times of trouble than dravid.

 

[Sanz]

can i have some examples then? i gave some, i'd like you to too. ponting wins more games off his bat for australia than dravid does for india. not only are pontings stats better than dravids, I BELIEVE he is more valuable in times of trouble than dravid.

Dravid Away avg :- 64, Ponting Away avg. - 51
Avg in Matches won - Dravid 79, Ponting - 65
Avg. in Matches drawn - Dravid 79, Ponting 55
Avg. in team 2nd innings - Dravid 50, Ponting 49
Avg. in 4th innings of test - Dravid 48, Ponting 60

Dravid has century in every test playing country, ponting yet to score one in India

That said :- on current form Ponting is batting way above anyone else in the right now, butg to use his current form to make crap statement about players like Tendulkar, Dravid and LAra is stupid.

 

[sideshowtim]

how about the only average that really matters in the long run? the test average. i believe pontings is about 1 point higher than dravids at the moment. both are in a rich vein of form and playing better than they have in their career. both are magnificent batsmen and i have a huge admiration for dravid, he is a more valuable player to india than tendulkar. but i just feel that ponting is in a bit of a league of his own at the moment. since 2003 ponting has scored 20 tons at over 60.

 

[Jono]

No one is denying that Ponting isn't in a league of his own at the moment. By you're justifying that Ponting is in a league of his own by being detrimental of two of the greatest ever (Lara and Sachin) and someone who along with Ponting is the best bat since the turn of the century.

Why you're doing that is beyond my comprehension, and you're stating things that are absolutely absurd. Dravid hasn't won a game off his own bat? Hasn't stoood up when India needs him? That's the quality he is most renowned for. It's fair enough (not really but anyway) if you claim that Lara and Sachin don't stand up until the series is dead or when the pressure is on, because that's the main misguided criticism they receive all the time for people wanting to criticise greats for the hell of it, but Dravid?

Firstly, Ponting has the opportunity to win more games off his bat because he plays in a better team with much better bowlers. Secondly, matches when Dravid has stood up when his team needed him and/or won the game off his own bat:

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004-05/PAK_IN_IND/SCORECARDS/PAK_IND_T2_16-20MAR2005.html

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2003-04/IND_IN_PAK/SCORECARDS/IND_PAK_T3_13-17APR2004.html

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2003-04/IND_IN_AUS/SCORECARDS/IND_AUS_T2_12-16DEC2003.html

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2002-03/IND_IN_NZ/SCORECARDS/IND_NZ_T1_12-16DEC2002.html (Anyone that scores 76 on that pitch against Bond is God IMO)

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2000-01/AUS_IN_IND/SCORECARDS/AUS_IND_T2_11-15MAR2001.html

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1998-99/IND_IN_NZ/SCORECARDS/IND_NZ_T3_02-06JAN1999.html (Saved India from losing 2-0 in that series, and if India had any good bowlers India possible could have levelled the series 1-1 thanks to Dravid)

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1996-97/IND_IN_RSA/IND_RSA_T3_16-20JAN1997.html (148 & 81 against Donald, Pollock and Klusener in their own backyard! Saves India from a whitewash)

 

[Sanz]

how about the only average that really matters in the long run? .

How about waiting till the end of their careers and then decide ?