Ponting to 3rd Highest in History

[Jono]

Well, Shane Warne disagrees. Suffice to say that it is close between the two of them in terms of playing spin bowling. They're both incredibly good and far better than Ponting in that regard.

I'd take Lara over Tendulkar against quality pace bowling every time though, especially on a wicket with some life.

Shane Warne rates Tendulkar over Lara because Tendulkar has got the better of him far more often, whereas Murali rates Lara over Tendulkar because Lara has got the better of him far more often. I think they are pretty close, with Lara being a little better. Uses his feet like no one can.

But its almost common knowledge that in their primes, Tendulkar was better at facing pace bowling, even if by only a little. Can't quite see why you'd rather Lara.

Even McGrath says he'd bowl to Lara everytime rather than Sachin, Tendulkar's technique is brilliant against the pacemen.

 

[mohammad16]

Shane Warne rates Tendulkar over Lara because Tendulkar has got the better of him far more often, whereas Murali rates Lara over Tendulkar because Lara has got the better of him far more often. I think they are pretty close, with Lara being a little better. Uses his feet like no one can.

But its almost common knowledge that in their primes, Tendulkar was better at facing pace bowling, even if by only a little. Can't quite see why you'd rather Lara.

Even McGrath says he'd bowl to Lara everytime rather than Sachin, Tendulkar's technique is brilliant against the pacemen.

i have a feeling its more then just the fact that tendulkar has played warne better
i think warne and mgrath are a little biased too, they seem to have a liking for tendular cuz he is a more humbler man, while lara has had heated verbal exchanges with mgrath atleast to my memory

 

[Jono]

Well Tendulkar is generally quiet but he has talked it up with McGrath before. What was that match when it famously happened a few years ago? Have to ask Sanz as he brought it up once.

Overall McGrath has criticised Lara mental side of the game, feeling at times when his head isn't in the game, McGrath would eat him up. I mean at one stage Lara's average was below 50, and then he came to Australia and went out to McGrath for a hat trick. The Aussies just feel like they have the wood on him, even though he will score runs.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Shane Warne rates Tendulkar over Lara because Tendulkar has got the better of him far more often, whereas Murali rates Lara over Tendulkar because Lara has got the better of him far more often. I think they are pretty close, with Lara being a little better. Uses his feet like no one can.

Yep, I agree with that. Personally I'd probably take Tendulkar against spin because it just looks so impossible for spinners to get him out all the time. Lara dominates spin like nobody else, but you still feel there's a chance against him. A bit like Pietersen I suppose, though obviously Lara is better.

But its almost common knowledge that in their primes, Tendulkar was better at facing pace bowling, even if by only a little. Can't quite see why you'd rather Lara.

Even McGrath says he'd bowl to Lara everytime rather than Sachin, Tendulkar's technique is brilliant against the pacemen.

No question that Tendulkar's technique against pace is better. His is pretty much perfect and Lara's obviously has a few problems which can get him into trouble outside off-stump. I think Dravid's got a better technique against pace bowling than Ponting as well though, but that doesn't mean he's necessarily a better player of it. Lara's got an amazing ability to dominate seamers on any sort of surface and in any situation, and he's simply phenomenal under pressure. Tendulkar is really someone I feel is an unstoppable player of pace bowling when things are going his way, but can go to pieces a bit when the pitch is lively or when the team is under real pressure. Obviously he doesn't always do that, but I do think it's a problem for him, and obviously it's gotten worse in recent times.

Lara on the other hand is often vulnerable early, but once he gets going he's just about impossible to stop, and really creates that feeling that there's simply nowhere you can bowl to him. He's really someone I feel can get on top in any situation, regardless of the surface or how the match is going.

Probably not much point in going any further with this argument as it's been done to death, but certainly they are both amazing players of spin, and there's no questioning Tendulkar's technique against pace bowling.

 

[Slifer]

SRT better against pace, BCL better against spin. Overall SRT. I have seen Lara dominate the two best spinners of all time at one point another,Like no other.

 

[JASON]

With the ICC world ratings updated at the end of the 2nd Ashes Test, Ricky Ponting has not only stayed at no.1 but has now pushed his rating to 942 - equal with Jack Hobbs as the third highest peak rating any batsman has ever achieved.

http://www.lgiccrankings.com/test/batting/all-time-ranking.php

It's interesting also to Yousuf and Hayden in the top 10, remembering that these ratings aren't an average over a full career, but rather the highest score the batsman ever achieved at the peak of his form.

Given that these ratings are designed to take into account the quality of the opposition, pitch, influence of the performance etc. how much weight do people attach to this score - do you think that Ricky Ponting is batting at (or even close to) a level exceeded by only two players in Test history?

Would be interested to hear your thoughts.

I expect him to overtake Mohammed Yousuf's recently established record (with the Generosity of the English bowlers and Management) and perhaps get an all time high rating of perhaps 1001 - may be he might still be unsatisfied with that and want a rating of 2000 - any way these are my thoughts .

 

[PhoenixFire]

No matter how good Ponting is, he'll never be as good as Hobbs.

 

[shortpitched713]

Why, too modern for you?






Yes, I know that Hobbs was a legend.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

No matter how good Ponting is, he'll never be as good as Hobbs.

Haha. Why, is Hobbs on some sort of godlike pedestal nobody can ever reach? Obviously Ponting could be as good as Hobbs. Hell, he could be as good as Bradman if he made enough runs. He almost certainly won't be, but that's another thing entirely.

 

[Eclipse]

Personaly I think he is on his way to being rememberd as a better batsman than both Tendulkar and Lara. Maybe not so much Lara.

 

[marc71178]

Only by those who look solely at numbers.

 

[Zinzan]

Only by those who look solely at numbers.

You make me chuckle mark...you use numbers when it suits you

 

[PhoenixFire]

Haha. Why, is Hobbs on some sort of godlike pedestal nobody can ever reach? Obviously Ponting could be as good as Hobbs. Hell, he could be as good as Bradman if he made enough runs. He almost certainly won't be, but that's another thing entirely.

Maybe because he scored more runs than anyone ever??

 

[Eclipse]

Only by those who look solely at numbers.

Ponting for mine has played more match winning and better innings than Tendulkar. And he wouldn't be far off Lara in the regard either. I'm basing it on this more than just his numbers.

Obviously i'm biased to an extent but thats the way I fee.

 

[silentstriker]

He's close right now to both. Another year at this rate and I'll put him alongside them. Right now, he is not there.

1. Tendulkar
2. Lara
3. Ponting

And yes, if he keeps it up for longer than that, he has every chance to pass anyone, including Hobbs. Seriously people, no one is on a God-like pedestal that is impossible to surpass. Even Bradman maybe surpassed some day (unlikely), in sports odder things have happened.

 

[Eclipse]

The history of cricket is so great that I feel alot of the modern day players don't get the due respect they deserve.

It's funny that in 50 years time if Ponting ends up with better numbers than Tendulkar and co he will be rememberd as a greater player.. People will forget all other concerning factors having never seen any of them bat.

 

[Jono]

The history of cricket is so great that I feel alot of the modern day players don't get the due respect they deserve.

It's funny that in 50 years time if Ponting ends up with better numbers than Tendulkar and co he will be rememberd as a greater player.. People will forget all other concerning factors having never seen any of them bat.

Man batsmen have better numbers than Viv, but he's remembered as one of the best ever and better than almost everyone bar a few who have better numbers than him.

As long as their are contemporary players and cricket historians/journalists still around who have seen the great players, the greats (no matter what their numbers ends up as) will always be remembered.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Maybe because he scored more runs than anyone ever??

Err, you totally missed the point. You said that "no matter how good he is", Ponting will never be better than Hobbs. I'm perfectly aware that Hobbs was a fine player, but obviously people could be better than him. Bradman was, for one.

By the supporting logic you have here, Ponting would be better than Hobbs if he scored more runs than him. And of course, he already has scored more runs than him in test cricket. If your high point of achievement is being prolific in first class cricket, only England players could ever be great, as they play far more first class cricket than players from any other nation. Bradman had a mere 28,000 first class runs, which is less than half of what Hobbs managed. Incidentally, Ponting's only around 10,000 first class runs behind Bradman at this point, so if he plays until his late 30s he could be better than Bradman! Oh my.

 

[mohammad16]

The history of cricket is so great that I feel alot of the modern day players don't get the due respect they deserve.

It's funny that in 50 years time if Ponting ends up with better numbers than Tendulkar and co he will be rememberd as a greater player.. People will forget all other concerning factors having never seen any of them bat.

great players arent forgotten that easily, especially not to the point where stats are the only reminder of thier greatness