Best #3 between 1986-2006 (Preliminary Vote)

[Beleg]

Did... did... did you just say first chance average?

I was hoping it might bring certain people out of the wood-works.

 

[a massive zebra]

Speaking of first chance averages, what on earth has happened to the legendary Richard?

 

[silentstriker]

Mate, just because you think someone has to be in it, doesn't make it law. That's why it's a vote, everyone has a chance to vote on it, so it represents the opinions of the CW community as a whole.

Yes, and I'm telling you that it would be a farce if Lara somehow missed it :P I did not know that the top three runner ups would go to the next position, so I feel a little better now that he will be in at #5.

 

[aussie tragic]

... that's a different story but the way things are going, it seems like people here are a little confused about what this poll really represents. Is it strictly position-related, or are middle-order batsmen adjustable?

Just to clarify, so that we didn't have a poll with 32 middle order batsmen in it, we broke it down to about 10-11 in each position based on where they achieved their most success.

However as it was felt that the most highly voted # 3 batsmen could also rightfully earn the # 4 or # 5 position, it was decided that the 3 runner-ups of each Poll be allowed to enter the prelimanary vote of the next batting position (Based on the fact that most batsmen gradually worked their way up the order and could therefore easily drop to a lower position in the World XI).

In addition, due to many requests for a tighter group in the Polls, it was decided to have a preliminary round to find the top 4 players, which would then enter a selection poll to fight it out.

In hindsight, I'm not sure that this selection round would be required in this Poll (as only 3 main players have been voted for), however I'm pretty certain it will be required for # 4 and # 5 once the likes of Tendulker, Border, Kallis, Miandad, Waugh, Inzy and Sir Viv are added to the equation.

 

[aussie tragic]

Yes, and I'm telling you that it would be a farce if Lara somehow missed it :P I did not know that the top three runner ups would go to the next position, so I feel a little better now that he will be in at #5.

I think a certain S Waugh and Sir Viv might have something to say about that

 

[open365]

I vote Dravid because although Ponting is amazing, i feel Dravid can score runs in any conditions know to man and is incredibly dependable, he scores runs when others in the team don't.

 

[aussie tragic]

Just some more stats whilst batting at # 3.

In the first Innings of tests:

Lara: 35 innings, 2400 runs @ 70.58, 5 hundreds, 9 fifties
Ponting: 65 Innings, 4406 runs @ 68.84, 18 hundreds; 14 fifties
Dravid: 74 Innings, 4577 runs @ 65.38, 13 hundreds; 20 fifties

Well, Lara has the best average, however the lowest conversion rate for hundreds, therefore Punter has the best record IMO.

Meanwhile for 2nd Innings performance

Ponting: 46 Innings; 1888 runs @ 60.90, 6 hundreds, 7 fifties
Dravid: 52 Innings, 2241 runs @ 54.65, 4 hundreds, 14 fifties
Lara: 28 Innings, 1084 runs @ 43.36, 3 hundreds, 4 fifties

No contest, Punter is clearly ahead of Dravid and miles ahead of Lara...

Sorry, yet again Ponting wins IMO

 

[silentstriker]

Stats rarely tell the whole story, and many times they do not tell even half of it. When Ponting scores that many runs facing W & W, Donald, and other great bowlers, maybe the comparisons will be apt. When about four all time great bowlers retired within 18 months of each other, all batsmans' averages jumped by ten. When comparing, subtract about 10-15 points from everyones' average, after about 01, and maybe then you can compare.

 

[marc71178]

I think a certain S Waugh and Sir Viv might have something to say about that

It was also assuming he'd lose the 4th place as well.

 

[Bob Bamber]

Lara 375 and 400*. Say no more.

 

[silentstriker]

It was also assuming he'd lose the 4th place as well.

He most likely would. But if he is 4th, then one of Tendulkar/Sir Viv would miss out...both of whom are also locks.


Either way, it ends up being the same thing. Ponting and Dravid do not deserve to go before any of them. Ponting and Dravid do not even deserve to go before Waugh.

Every other position is debatable, but the middle order of the last twenty years could very well be the middle order of an all time XI, so therefore I see very little room for argument. I am astounded that someone besides Lara even got any votes. But to each their own, I guess.

 

[C_C]

between Dravid and Lara. I simply do not consider Ponting to be as good as the big three of cricket batting - Lara, Tendulkar and Dravid.

 

[adharcric]

When about four all time great bowlers retired within 18 months of each other, all batsmans' averages jumped by ten. When comparing, subtract about 10-15 points from everyones' average, after about 01, and maybe then you can compare.

Where'd you pull that one from?

 

[marc71178]

Every other position is debatable, but the middle order of the last twenty years could very well be the middle order of an all time XI

Erm no, it couldn't at all.

Bradman ring a bell?

 

[silentstriker]

Erm no, it couldn't at all.

Bradman ring a bell?

Well yes. Bradman and Sobers would obviously be in there. I meant to say that any of them wouldn't be out of place in an all time XI. Not that they would all go in at once.

 

[adharcric]

He most likely would. But if he is 4th, then one of Tendulkar/Sir Viv would miss out...both of whom are also locks.

I don't think Viv Richards belongs in this team if it's a post-1986 XI. In that period, he averaged only 43 compared to his career average of 50.
Definitely not a performance-based "lock".

 

[JBH001]

Hmmm, so we are on #3 are we?

I don't think we will need the recount on this one, as it is clearly between 3 batsman but I guess that is upto aussie tragic and bagapth.

This is a difficult one though - real difficult, I shan't vote yet, btw when does the polling close? It is a toss up between Lara and Ponting - imo, Dravid is too defensive to be a proper no. 3 test batsman, though no. 5 may find him ideally placed.

Lara or Ponting?
I got to think about this...

Stats rarely tell the whole story, and many times they do not tell even half of it. When Ponting scores that many runs facing W & W, Donald, and other great bowlers, maybe the comparisons will be apt. When about four all time great bowlers retired within 18 months of each other, all batsmans' averages jumped by ten. When comparing, subtract about 10-15 points from everyones' average, after about 01, and maybe then you can compare.

Hmmmm, interesting, and yet these stats and this approach do not seem to apply to Sehwag vs Anwar?

 

[Matteh]

This is a difficult one though - real difficult, I shan't vote yet, btw when does the polling close?

This poll will close on 07-09-2006 at 08:06 AM - Says at the top of the poll.

Hmmmm, interesting, and yet these stats and this approach do not seem to apply to Sehwag vs Anwar?

Pretty sure somone said the same thing tbh.

 

[silentstriker]

Hmmm, so we are on #3 are we?

I don't think we will need the recount on this one, as it is clearly between 3 batsman but I guess that is upto aussie tragic and bagapth.

This is a difficult one though - real difficult, I shan't vote yet, btw when does the polling close? It is a toss up between Lara and Ponting - imo, Dravid is too defensive to be a proper no. 3 test batsman, though no. 5 may find him ideally placed.

Shouldn't that be the other way? Defensive batsman need to be placed a bit higher up, that way they have time to get going. Ponting can thrive anywhere in the order, ditto for Lara. And though Dravid has enough class to contribute anywhere, he is ideally suited near the top. In any case, neither Dravid nor Ponting are good enough to be in this lineup IMO.

 

[luffy]

Punter but Lara was close.