Probably nothingi wonder how much he would have scored if he had faced the tripe served by Ind bowlers in that game
Probably nothingi wonder how much he would have scored if he had faced the tripe served by Ind bowlers in that game
Helps having McGrath and Warne, when they don't give up 358 in the finals for you to chase. But nah, it was all Ponting.Ponting has delivered when it matters
I think that's pretty much the reason the ACA voted him the best Australian ODI player ever.Good point
Is Gilchrist, who has arguably won Oz 3 WCs Finals (the only games that matter btw) on the trot, the best ever?
Haha, OK.Probably nothing
Nor should he be. He isn't in the top five, and not close either.Ponting
Oooops - triple WC winner not even noimnated
well, it's you who is arguing that it's playing in the final that counts as, i reckon, you assumed that SRT would not match Ponting but SRT owns him .... then you streamlined it to that WC final and now you are bringing in GillyGood point
Is Gilchrist, who has arguably won Oz 3 WCs Finals (the only games that matter btw) on the trot, the best ever?
Warne wasn't there.Helps having McGrath and Warne, when they don't give up 358 in the finals for you to chase. But nah, it was all Ponting.
Oh OK, so finals aren't important, just the WC finals. So if your team doesn't have the bowling to win World Cup, you are just SOL as a batsman then, right?Richard's or Ponting's efforts in finals
I think Gilchrist should have been mentioned. I've gone back and forth with him and Sachin as openers. Essentially, Gilly gives you 36 runs from 37 balls and Sachin gives you 44 from 50. Sachin scores 8 runs more and Gilly saves you about 13 balls more. Very close. And Gilly was awesome when it mattered.well, it's you who is arguing that it's playing in the final that counts as, i reckon, you assumed that SRT would not match Ponting but SRT owns him .... then you streamlined it to that WC final and now you are bringing in Gilly
the Q - is Gilly the best coz of the virtue of playing well in 3 WC finals? - is the one you should have asked yourself before making the point that Ponting > Sachin coz of the finals
if you say no to Gilly's Q then why bring the final in the first place, if yes then why bring Pointing in
They are both openers and Gilly gives you a century every seventeen innings, while Tendulkar gives you a century every 9.6 innings - huge difference. Gilly is also much more hit and miss.I think Gilchrist should have been mentioned. I've gone back and forth with him and Sachin as openers. Essentially, Gilly gives you 36 runs from 37 balls and Sachin gives you 44 from 50. Sachin scores 8 runs more and Gilly saves you about 13 balls more. Very close. And Gilly was awesome when it mattered.
And that's because everyone remembers SO VIVIDLY who won the last Tri-series played anywhere at any timeNor should he be. He isn't in the top five, and not close either.
Aravinda scores, on average, about 10 runs less than Tendulkar and Ponting and also slightly slower as well.Oh OK, so finals aren't important, just the WC finals. So if your team doesn't have the bowling to win World Cup, you are just SOL as a batsman then, right?
Hey you know who else won more world cups than Sachin Tendulkar? PA de Silva. And he also scored a century in a world cup final.
Therefore, he is a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar.
And I love how you're using a sample size of one to make a judgment. I'm glad I have that on record for the future .
I repeatThey are both openers and Gilly gives you a century every seventeen innings, while Tendulkar gives you a century every 9.6 innings - huge difference. Gilly is also much more hit and miss.
Oh right. You are right, Tendulkar is 0/1. In your mind, apparently, this is enough. You will be OK when I use 0/1 as proof of failure when discussing other players?Tendy has not performed when its counted - Ponting, Gilchrist and Richards have
The man scores a lot more runs than Gilchrist. Yes, he's a statistician's dream, because he gives the statisticians fantastic statistics to work with. It's patently obvious.I repeat
Care factor = 0
Test matches and Tendy is great
ODIs and he is nothing more than a statisticians dream
now if someone brings in someone who gives you x runs of x or less balls, i.e. then does than make him better than Gilly?I think Gilchrist should have been mentioned. I've gone back and forth with him and Sachin as openers. Essentially, Gilly gives you 36 runs from 37 balls and Sachin gives you 44 from 50. Sachin scores 8 runs more and Gilly saves you about 13 balls more. Very close. And Gilly was awesome when it mattered.
It is a huge difference, however their averages compared to their SRs show why that stat might be so wide. Gilly is not much hit and miss at all. He just scores less on average because he goes for so many more shots saving the team much more time - there is an argument in that, that had Tendulkar had the freedom maybe he could have done it, but let's not digress.They are both openers and Gilly gives you a century every seventeen innings, while Tendulkar gives you a century every 9.6 innings - huge difference. Gilly is also much more hit and miss.