• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Ricky Ponting v Sachin Tendulkar

Who is the better batsman?


  • Total voters
    66

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Tendulkar has not failed against Pollock, you can call him inconsistent. He scored 2 centuries in Pollock's home country. Ponting has how many ? (Hint :- That Number was given to the world by India)
Inconsistent, poor, what have you. An average of 35 over 20 tests and 36 innings.

Well in that case, at least I can't be accused of having a bias toward Tendulkar because he happens to be from my home country.
You go for the bias claim, yet all your points have been so poorly constructed one feels that bias is your only motivation. But I didn't say you have bias...you see, when I am losing an argument I don't pull in the "you've got bias" to smokescreen my losing battle.

It's almost become a serious question, you've made such poor points that if I were a Tendulkar fan I'd be stepping in and trying to take the attention away from you.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
. But I didn't say you have bias...you see, when I am losing an argument I don't pull in the "you've got bias" to smokescreen my losing battle..
You didn't ? The other thread is still open and I can quote you from there. :wacko:
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Inconsistent, poor, what have you. An average of 35 over 20 tests and 36 innings..
He still scored 3 100s (2 when Pollock played) against them in their home country. Hardly a failure against Pollock.

I dont understand how anyone can compare the same to Ponting's performance against Harbhajan. :)
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
So Sydney in 2000 was helpful to spinners ? It basically tells how much cricket you have actually watched, it is very close to the no. of test 100s Ponting has scored in India.

Even the 2004 and 2008 pitches were flatter than ever and Ponting still averaged a sub par 32 in those two tests.
Sydney has, for as long as these two have played, a spinner's pitch. If you disagree with this then you should really stop arguing and go read a book. Sometimes pitches act up and don't play as they usually do, but that's variable and is out of place in a discussion that involves career figures. Use some common sense.

Ponting, in the bigger context, averages 75 in Sydney over some odd 13 Tests. Out of the teams that actually possess good spinners, he averages 83 in 5 tests. Let's get a grip here.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
He still scored 3 100s (2 when Pollock played) against them in their home country. Hardly a failure against Pollock.

I dont understand how anyone can compare the same to Ponting's performance against Harbhajan. :)
Ponting has been dismal against Harbhajan. But Harbhajan isn't even the best spin bowler in his team, hence to say just because Ponting has a problem with Harbhajan he is poor against spin is...inane.

But at least we're making progress, it's now just Harbhajan.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Sydney has, for as long as these two have played, a spinner's pitch. If you disagree with this then you should really stop arguing and go read a book. Sometimes pitches act up and don't play as they usually do, but that's variable and is out of place in a discussion that involves career figures. Use some common sense.

Ponting, in the bigger context, averages 75 in Sydney over some odd 13 Tests. Out of the teams that actually possess good spinners, he averages 83 in 5 tests. Let's get a grip here.
Same old crap. Dont watch a match, read cricinfo, make an assumption, argue till death.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Quote me, I don't remember using it the same fashion as you do.
I hope people reading the thread will read through the arguments with an unbiased mind and get some new conclusions from them.

I mean, really, you ever actually objectively looked at his record? Or is this thread like someone taking away your hero?
I dont care in what fashion you accuse people of, the fact is that you do. And you dont need me to accuse of biased, you yourself have accepted the bias in your response to 'aussie'.

*waits for new spin from KaZoH0lic*
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Same old crap. Dont watch a match, read cricinfo, make an assumption, argue till death.
:laugh: I've been watching Cricket since the 80s. And I am not careless enough to get facts regarding matches wrong in an attempt to prove my intelligence. As long as you seem to make stuff up or argue the inane, I'll try to reply.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
I dont care in what fashion you accuse people of, the fact is that you do. And you dont need me to accuse of biased, you yourself have accepted the bias in your response to 'aussie'.

*waits for new spin from KaZoH0lic*
Oh lord, was that it? One is not even directed at you and was a general plea for people to put away their tinted glasses - not just Indians, all the people in the forum.

The other was a question after having dismissed every bit of your non-sense and was a serious question. Is Tendulkar that important for you that you are willing to argue, for example, that his record against S.Africa is good?

And you should care what fashion it is used in...because that was my whole point. If you ask me if I have bias, it's a plain question I can ask easily and move on from. Do I have bias when talking about guys like Warne and Lillee, yes I do. But do I try to imply other peoples' bias simply because the contention is not one I agree with? I was called biased without even having gone half-through the reasoning why I consider Ponting better. That's the difference and that matters.

Unlike You, I dont come here and discuss things with a nationalistic bias.
This kind of drivel is littered through the thread. By you, by others...hence that plea. I mean, how many times did you accuse me of saying something I didn't even say? Ponting better than Richards? :laugh: It's just sad.

LOL, I didn't even accuse you of nationalistic bias, I just cared if you were biased in general.

As aforesaid, I didn't use it the same fashion as you. Nor the same frequency. I didn't need to. Every little argument you brought forward I replied to in a detailed fashion - with facts, figures and logic.
 
Last edited:

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Must have missed the Sydney Tests then and also the tests wehre Tendulkar batted against Pakistan/SA.
If I had made a comment regarding the pitch in Sydney in 2000 being a spinner's haven or that Tendulkar was NEVER successful against Pakistan/SA you may have a slight point. But like your other points they're dead as they start because I never once said Tendulkar always failed, I was always talking about his record in general. I can excuse these mistakes because reading is not exactly your strongest suit, neither are facts, as you've shown.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Oh lord, was that it? One is not even directed at you and was a general plea for people to put away their tinted glasses - not just Indians, all the people in the forum..
Does that mean you are the blessed one i.e. the only one on this forum without the tinted Glasses ? 8-) 8-)
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Does that mean you are the blessed one i.e. the only one on this forum without the tinted Glasses ? 8-) 8-)
Haha see? Exactly what I meant before. As soon as you can't muster up a decent point, straight into the "you're biased" bit. :happy:
 

biased indian

International Coach
laugh at the poll result..what more kazo need to get convinced.....

First lara now sachin ...both have hit ponting out of the ground in their respective polls...may be it will be more close if he plays like this for say 3-4 more years
 

Top