Best Batsman of 2000-2007

[cover drive man]

West Indies have nothing to do with this, I was merely stating that Hayden's 380 was against some seriously weak oppo.

Suppose you've got a point.

 

[Jono]

Ponting has been the best overall. Dravid, Hayden and Kallis all up there.

LOL @ Chamara Silva in the poll. Even Gibbs, Gayle etc. are laughable ahead of Rahul.

 

[Ikki]

Ponting has been the best. But funny poll, Dravid not in it...uh?

 

[Tom Halsey]

I think you'd have a tough time justifying any answer other than Ponting.

 

[Swervy]

West Indies have nothing to do with this, I was merely stating that Hayden's 380 was against some seriously weak oppo.

well...I think there have been weaker bowling teams than that Zimb attack, just for the fact that Heath Streak is/was a class bowler, and I don't think Blignaut was too bad a bowler either.

 

[Richard]

Haha, you're kidding, surely? Blignaut was about as bad as you could wish a Test bowler to be.

Zimbabwe were not a Test-class side by the time of that innings and if it was down to me that game, the 2 before it and every single one after it would be stripped of Test status.

 

[Swervy]

Haha, you're kidding, surely? Blignaut was about as bad as you could wish a Test bowler to be.

Zimbabwe were not a Test-class side by the time of that innings and if it was down to me that game, the 2 before it and every single one after it would be stripped of Test status.

Blignaut wasn't THAT bad...and as I say with Heath Steak in there, there is no way you could consider them to be that desparatly weak.

For me, the cut off is a bit later....the first test vs SL in May 2004 is where they fielded a seriously weak team. Before then, they could compete, as shown by when they almost beat (and should have done) WI.

 

[SJS]

While I have no intention of getting into this debate, I did find some of the names in the list a bit surprising as was the ommission of some others. So I decided to do a bit of research to provide some background to the arguments on the thread.

Note: I agree that stats alone do not determine everything in such a debate but a view of them does help somewhat.

CRITERIA :

1. Since it was not clear as to which form of the game (tests or ODI's) were being debated, I decided to combine the stats of the two.

2. In order to leave out some wierd results (Matt Prior tops the batting averages of all test cricketers from 1/1/2001 till date !!) I decided to make minimum of 20 matches as the eligibility criteria for both forms of the game. I must confess that this had just one significant impact. Hussey got left out since he has played only 16 tests so far. It is unfortunate since he has the most impressive figures for this period but as most will agrree, time is a great leveller and a great start to a fledgling career can mislead. Hussey may still end up on top of the list after another twenty tests but we need to stick top the criteria.

3. After I got the batsmen all lined up with their stats, I decided to take a cut off point from the batting averages in both forms of the games - 50 for tests and 40 for ODI's (for the period in question). Batsmen who failed to qualify for even one of these were left out. I realise that this is a bit arbitrary but we have to restrict the lists and a diluted criteria would have just increased the numbers.

4. I then took a simple average fo both forms of the game. Again it is simplistic but better than nothing

Here are the results.

TEST RANKING BY AVERAGE

Player.....Innings.....Runs.....Average​

1. R T Ponting.....124.....6958.....65.64
2. Mohd Yousuf.....81..... 4817.....65.09
3. Jaque Kallis.....111..... 5718.....62.84
4. Rahul Dravid.....114..... 6021.....60.82
5. M L Hayden.....139..... 7211.....57.23
6. K P Pietersen....47..... 2448.....54.4
7. SR Tendulkar.....95 .....4506.....53.01
8. Gary Kirsten......58..... 2785.....52.55
9. Steve Waugh.....52..... 2346.....52.13

ODI RANKING BY AVERAGE

Player.....Innings.....Runs.....Average​

1. K P Pietersen.....47..... 2008..... 59.06
2. Jaque Kallis.....111..... 5126..... 50.75
3. S R Tendulkar....95..... 4948..... 48.04
4. M L Hayden.....139..... 5020..... 46.48
5. R T Ponting......124..... 6562..... 44.95
6. Mohd Yousuf.....81..... 5705..... 42.89
7. Rahul Dravid.....114..... 5618..... 42.89
8. Steve Waugh.....52..... 672..... 42
9. Gary Kirsten......58..... 1287..... 40.22

RANKING BY COMBINED AVERAGE

Player.....Innings.....Runs.....Average​

1. Jaque Kallis.....236..... 10844..... 56.5
2. K P Pietersen.....90..... 4456..... 56.4
3. R T Ponting.....290..... 13520..... 53.7
4. M L Hayden.....260..... 12231..... 52.3
5. Mohd Yousuf....235..... 10522..... 50.8
6. Rahul Dravid.....272..... 11639..... 50.6
7. S R Tendulkar....213..... 9454.... 50.3
8. Steve Waugh.....72..... 3018..... 49.5
9. Gary Kirsten..... 95..... 4072..... 47.9

Surprised ??

I suppose one could leave out the last two since they finished their careers by early 2004. That still has only Kallis, Ponting, Haydenand Pietersen from the ten offered in the poll.

The figures of the six players in the poll that do not find a place, follow.

 

[Piper]

I think KP. Some of the shots he plays are just incredible. He has the ability to hit bowls all over the park and some of them going miles too.

 

[pasag]

KPs only been around for 2 of the 7 years though and even in that time period Ponting has been a fair bit better than him, Yousuf as well imo.

 

[Piper]

KPs only been around for 2 of the 7 years though and even in that time period Ponting has been a fair bit better than him, Yousuf as well imo.

Yeah I know. I think all the players mentioned here are amazing. I just like KP more for his style and the potential he has.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I'd probably go as far to say KP will be better than all of those players, should he live up to his potential.

 

[Richard]

Well be, hopefully. But hasn't been in said timeframe.

(I don't know why I'm saying that, TBH. Not like this question can be taken seriously).

 

[Richard]

Blignaut wasn't THAT bad...and as I say with Heath Steak in there, there is no way you could consider them to be that desparatly weak.

For me, the cut off is a bit later....the first test vs SL in May 2004 is where they fielded a seriously weak team. Before then, they could compete, as shown by when they almost beat (and should have done) WI.

They were described in summer 2003 by almost everyone (even those barely old enough to remember anything before the 1970s) as the worst team ever to tour England. Their bowling might have been vaguely respectible (Streak was pretty good, but no more than that, and the rest of post-WC2003 WERE dreadful IMO) but the team was nowhere close to being Test standard once they lost 5 or 6 players after WC2003.

Hence, I was of the opinion, after the 2003 England tour (even though they won one "ODI" on that tour) that no match involving them was deserving of Test or ODI status... and if it were down to me I'd strip it from the 'ole lot of 'em.