View Poll Results: A.Border vs S.Waugh, who is the greater batsman ?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Alan Border

    17 58.62%
  • Stephen Waugh

    12 41.38%
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Allan Border vs Stephen Waugh

  1. #1
    First Class Debutant
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    813

    Allan Border vs Stephen Waugh

    Alan Border and Stephen Waugh, one a LH bat, the other a RH bat, both fighters and generally mid-to-low order batsmen.

    Who's the greater batsman ?

    Border Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 4s 6s Ct St
    Tests 156 265 44 11174 205 50.56 27 63 1161 28 156 0
    ODIs 273 252 39 6524 127* 30.62 9134 71.42 3 39 500 43 127 0
    First-class 385 625 97 27131 205 51.38 70 142 379 0

    SWaugh Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 4s 6s Ct St
    Tests 168 260 46 10927 200 51.06 22461 48.64 32 50 1175 20 112 0
    ODIs 325 288 58 7569 120* 32.90 9971 75.91 3 45 530 68 111 0
    First-class 356 551 88 24052 216* 51.94 79 97 273 0

  2. #2
    Cricketer Of The Year Anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    9,837
    border for me...methodically efficient, flexible, scrappy, determined, consistent....waugh would also merit more or less the same adjectives but he is one rung lower for me...

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,727
    I also voted Border, played in an Australian team for a long period where he was the only thing between Aust and defeat. This meant that he was the main focus or a lot of attacks around the world, especially the Windies. I doubt too many could have played the 100 & 98 against the best in the world on a fast pitch.

    Not much in it tbh
    You know it makes sense.

  4. #4
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by archie mac View Post
    I also voted Border, played in an Australian team for a long period where he was the only thing between Aust and defeat. This meant that he was the main focus or a lot of attacks around the world, especially the Windies. I doubt too many could have played the 100 & 98 against the best in the world on a fast pitch.

    Not much in it tbh
    what he said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.


  5. #5
    School Boy/Girl Captain skipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    147
    For me, it is not the number of runs that matter. It is the circumstances in which the runs are scored that matters.

    I selected Waugh.

  6. #6
    Hall of Fame Member NUFAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Marrickville
    Posts
    18,247
    His name is Allan tbh.

    Border for mine aswell.
    NRL Tipping Champion 2014

    Over 0.2: Putland to Nevill, OUT, no run, full ball swings in late to crash into his pads. Nevill is almost falling over trying to get bat on it but can't. Huge shout for LBW and Umpire Martell eventually raises the finger! P.Nevill - lbw b:Putland 0 (1 ball, 1 minute).

  7. #7
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Quote Originally Posted by NUFAN View Post
    His name is Allan tbh.

    Border for mine aswell.
    Yeah, I thought that as well.

  8. #8
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Border vs Waugh (as batsmen) is such a difficult case. I often wonder how many people truly realise the magnitude of Stephen Waugh's achievements.

    Before 1993, Waugh was a batsman of no great class, being dropped at least twice, and relying in his bowling to keep him in the side for much of the time he did play. His only achievement of note before Australia visited New Zealand in early 1993 was in England in 1989 - exclude this and he averaged just 26 with the bat, over the course of nearly 50 Tests.

    However, for the next 8 years he stood alongside anyone, including even Sachin Tendulkar - though Tendulkar was obviously a better player, as he had come in at an age 4 years younger than Waugh and taken only a few months to come to terms, whereas Waugh took 8 years.

    Something that's always interested me is how would Waugh be perceived if he'd been picked for the first time much later in his career - in 1991, say, and had a much briefer poor period.

    Because between 1993 and English summer 2001, Waugh averaged 61.06, equable to Tendulkar at the same time. And he played 90 Tests, conquering all-comers. And being easily the best batsman as Australia ascended from the team who was fairly obviously the best in The World to one at absolutely indisputable hedgemony.

    He then went on for another 2-and-a-half years, batting reasonably but nowhere near the level he had previously been at.

    Border, on the other hand, was a truly remarkable species. He came into the side midway through the Packer Schism and was a rare case in that he stayed in the side after the reunion. Deduct performances in Packer games and it makes no difference at all to his career record (he didn't cash-in on equally depleted teams).

    Post-Packer, Border just kept on and on scoring runs, he simply never failed. He played 100 more Tests before his average started to go down a little (but not much - he averaged 42 in his last 44 Tests). The most impressive thing about Border, of course, was how he was master batsman and captain of Australia at their lowest ebb - he was often the difference between defeat and humiliation. Kind of the Andy Flower of his day.

    All in all, Border may not quite have matched Stephen Waugh's performances in their (very, very long in both cases) heydays, but there's little in it, and Border was unquestionably the more durable. If I had the choice of an exact repeat of the career of one, I'd have to go for Border.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  9. #9
    International 12th Man neville cardus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,683
    Allan Border takes my vote. To average fifty at a time when 35 was considered pretty good is a mark of something like greatness. His leadership, too, trumps Waugh's in that his resources were comparatively meagre. Indeed, we may trace Australia's present indomitable sway back to the timely revival that he inspired.
    Last edited by neville cardus; 01-01-2008 at 07:18 AM.
    Cheers,
    Rodney Ulyate

  10. #10
    International Coach pup11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    India
    Posts
    12,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Border vs Waugh (as batsmen) is such a difficult case. I often wonder how many people truly realise the magnitude of Stephen Waugh's achievements.

    Before 1993, Waugh was a batsman of no great class, being dropped at least twice, and relying in his bowling to keep him in the side for much of the time he did play. His only achievement of note before Australia visited New Zealand in early 1993 was in England in 1989 - exclude this and he averaged just 26 with the bat, over the course of nearly 50 Tests.

    However, for the next 8 years he stood alongside anyone, including even Sachin Tendulkar - though Tendulkar was obviously a better player, as he had come in at an age 4 years younger than Waugh and taken only a few months to come to terms, whereas Waugh took 8 years.

    Something that's always interested me is how would Waugh be perceived if he'd been picked for the first time much later in his career - in 1991, say, and had a much briefer poor period.

    Because between 1993 and English summer 2001, Waugh averaged 61.06, equable to Tendulkar at the same time. And he played 90 Tests, conquering all-comers. And being easily the best batsman as Australia ascended from the team who was fairly obviously the best in The World to one at absolutely indisputable hedgemony.

    He then went on for another 2-and-a-half years, batting reasonably but nowhere near the level he had previously been at.

    Border, on the other hand, was a truly remarkable species. He came into the side midway through the Packer Schism and was a rare case in that he stayed in the side after the reunion. Deduct performances in Packer games and it makes no difference at all to his career record (he didn't cash-in on equally depleted teams).

    Post-Packer, Border just kept on and on scoring runs, he simply never failed. He played 100 more Tests before his average started to go down a little (but not much - he averaged 42 in his last 44 Tests). The most impressive thing about Border, of course, was how he was master batsman and captain of Australia at their lowest ebb - he was often the difference between defeat and humiliation. Kind of the Andy Flower of his day.

    All in all, Border may not quite have matched Stephen Waugh's performances in their (very, very long in both cases) heydays, but there's little in it, and Border was unquestionably the more durable. If I had the choice of an exact repeat of the career of one, I'd have to go for Border.
    AWTA. Very well said both are greats in their own way so there isn't much between them but still i would go with Waugh, he was just an awesome overall package and a real fighter to the core.

  11. #11
    Hall of Fame Member aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cricket
    Posts
    16,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Border vs Waugh (as batsmen) is such a difficult case. I often wonder how many people truly realise the magnitude of Stephen Waugh's achievements.

    Before 1993, Waugh was a batsman of no great class, being dropped at least twice, and relying in his bowling to keep him in the side for much of the time he did play. His only achievement of note before Australia visited New Zealand in early 1993 was in England in 1989 - exclude this and he averaged just 26 with the bat, over the course of nearly 50 Tests.

    However, for the next 8 years he stood alongside anyone, including even Sachin Tendulkar - though Tendulkar was obviously a better player, as he had come in at an age 4 years younger than Waugh and taken only a few months to come to terms, whereas Waugh took 8 years.

    Something that's always interested me is how would Waugh be perceived if he'd been picked for the first time much later in his career - in 1991, say, and had a much briefer poor period.

    Because between 1993 and English summer 2001, Waugh averaged 61.06, equable to Tendulkar at the same time. And he played 90 Tests, conquering all-comers. And being easily the best batsman as Australia ascended from the team who was fairly obviously the best in The World to one at absolutely indisputable hedgemony.

    He then went on for another 2-and-a-half years, batting reasonably but nowhere near the level he had previously been at.

    Border, on the other hand, was a truly remarkable species. He came into the side midway through the Packer Schism and was a rare case in that he stayed in the side after the reunion. Deduct performances in Packer games and it makes no difference at all to his career record (he didn't cash-in on equally depleted teams).

    Post-Packer, Border just kept on and on scoring runs, he simply never failed. He played 100 more Tests before his average started to go down a little (but not much - he averaged 42 in his last 44 Tests). The most impressive thing about Border, of course, was how he was master batsman and captain of Australia at their lowest ebb - he was often the difference between defeat and humiliation. Kind of the Andy Flower of his day.

    All in all, Border may not quite have matched Stephen Waugh's performances in their (very, very long in both cases) heydays, but there's little in it, and Border was unquestionably the more durable. If I had the choice of an exact repeat of the career of one, I'd have to go for Border.
    Well said, although Waugh in the 90s became a much more talented batsmen from what i've seen & read would give it to Border here as well since he played in a weaker team & was captain & as another poster rightly mentioned he was Australia's best bestman so opposition targeted him & he still still did superbly well even though he was the most talented batsman around.

  12. #12
    International 12th Man neville cardus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,683
    How does one suddenly become "more talented"?

  13. #13
    International Regular shortpitched713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,220
    Purely as batsmen I'd have to go with Stephen Waugh, by a not insignificant amount. Both great leaders though, and I'd probably have Border ahead in that regard, tbh.
    Proud 2nd member of GM-OLAS
    Honorary Assistant Vice-President and Inquisitor General of T2IBS (Twenty-20 is Boring Society)

    Fraz highlights the defining aspect of Shoaib's legacy:
    Quote Originally Posted by FRAZ View Post
    Those humanitarian works etc ?
    Quote Originally Posted by andruid View Post
    I feel Tendulkar's association with the money minting exploitation of cricket fandom by certain varying commercial interests tarnishes his greatness a tad.

  14. #14
    First Class Debutant ozone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    805
    Waugh as the superior batsman but would probably have Border for all-round leadership. Border was great, but when Waugh was at his best he was nearly as good (IMO) as Tendulkar and Lara.
    There's only one Dimitri Mascarenhas!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BoyBrumby View Post
    It's surely a piss take that in the country who gave us Robert Nesta Marley, King Tubby & Jimmy Cliff that we're tortured with Chumba-fuggin'-Wamba between overs?



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Allan Border vs Courtney Walsh
    By aussie in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 17-09-2006, 10:39 PM
  2. ICC 2005 Allan Border Medal
    By SIX AND OUT in forum General
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-11-2005, 06:08 AM
  3. The Allan Border Medal
    By LongHopCassidy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 01-02-2005, 04:40 AM
  4. Allan Border Cricket
    By Lach in forum General
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 19-08-2004, 05:05 PM
  5. Allan Border Medal
    By Ford_GTHO351 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-02-2004, 01:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •