Ricky Ponting Vs. Sachin Tendulkar - As Captains

[krkode]

Tendulkar's clearly the better batsman and it's also doubtful whether Australia would have fared any differently if he'd been captain of that side instead of Ponting.

I sort of agree with this. It's a bit unfair to Ponting because no one can ever really say how much of a part his leadership played in Australia's success because the team was just that good. But then again, I suppose the current setup is more indicative of his captaincy skills because for once in is career he is actually leading a weak-ish team. Despite having one of the best captaincy records in the history of cricket people still don't consider Ponting that great of a captain... depending on how he goes from here, he could very well change that perception.

 

[pup11]

From everything I've heard, Ponting commands a great deal of respect off the field and seems to bring the team together pretty well, aside from the '05 Ashes where I think things got a bit much for him in general.

It is worth noting that as a captain he's overseen two successful WC campaigns, which is easy to write off because of Australia's talent but it's still a significant achievement. He's also been the best captain I've seen in recent years in terms of showing up with the bat when it counts.

Tactically I don't think Ponting is anything special. But in terms of leadership, I think he's pretty good in most respects. Wouldn't be my pick to captain a World XI or anything but I don't think he's as bad as a lot of people make out.

I think you are right when you say he has done well to bring the team together or standing up in support of certain players and backing them, and you are right he receives way too much flak than required, but imo that only holds true for his ODI captaincy, in test cricket though he in general always seems to be behind the 8-ball, his captaincy is more reactive than pro-active.

The other thing i really don't like about Ponting is the way his body language changes dramatically with the state of the game, in case Aussies aren't doing well, you can see a grim look on his face, his body language turns negative which just rubs onto the other members of the team, and that is something he can work on.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Tendulkar is the better tactician (those who follow Indian cricket regularly and note his regular inputs will understand), but Ponting is the better man-manager. Both were good in one aspect, but piss poor in the other. That makes for some pretty poor leadership. Brian Lara was one in the Tendulkar mould of captaincy too.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Pretty much agree with Fuller. In respects that he is clearly a fantastically talented batsman, he can motivate his players in that way, with coming up with the goods time after time. He also seems to be a pretty decent man-manager, there has never seemed to be any problems of lack of control (bar Symonds) over his players.

That said, he is very poor tactically from what I have seen and that counts for just as much (if not more) of the overall rating for a captain.

 

[Migara]

Ponting is any day a better captain. Sachin of course is the better batsman.

 

[Athlai]

Always thought Ponting was a good man manager but a ****ty tactician. I went for Tendulkar because I consider him a very intelligent player on the field.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

He also seems to be a pretty decent man-manager, there has never seemed to be any problems of lack of control (bar Symonds) over his players.

TBF to Ponting, he wasn't with the squad and Clarke was the captain during the whole Symonds debacle in Darwin. He obviously was in England though.

 

[Rant0r]

tendulkar is one of those geniuses who expects people to play like him but can't, and can't inspire them by example, he strikes me as an intelligent person but not a leader, probably a good head to have around the team, also the teams he led weren't the best.

ponting is a gun batsmen and leads by absolute example, but hasn't got the brains for captaincy, he's been spoiled by inheriting a team where the hard work was done by captains and coaches years before him

 

[susudear]

This

tendulkar is one of those geniuses who expects people to play like him but can't, and can't inspire them by example, he strikes me as an intelligent person but not a leader, probably a good head to have around the team, also the teams he led weren't the best.

ponting is a gun batsmen and leads by absolute example, but hasn't got the brains for captaincy, he's been spoiled by inheriting a team where the hard work was done by captains and coaches years before him

Spot on.

 

[PhoenixFire]

TBF to Ponting, he wasn't with the squad and Clarke was the captain during the whole Symonds debacle in Darwin. He obviously was in England though.

Yeah fair enough, I'm not really all that clued up on the ins and outs of Australian cricket.

 

[inbox24]

Yes it's true

Ponting = better leader
Tendulkar = better tactician

 

[silentstriker]

I don't know how you can pick Tendulkar, considering the captaincy record Ponting has. I don't know who the better man-manager is, or the better tactician, but I don't see how you can compare a team with McGrath and Warne to what Tendulkar had to work with in terms of his bowling. On the other hand, when Ganguly became captain, with not much better people, he started doing much better. So you do have to put the finger on Tendulkar. With that said, if Ponting's attack and fellow players were as bad as what Tendulkar had to work with, could he have done better?

I don't see how people on this forum can judge the man-management skills of a particular player - most of it goes on behind the scenes.

But, all that considered, one has results on his side, the other doesn't. It's quite clearly Ponting for me. I'll always take the guy with the record over the guy who 'might have but didn't', in every situation - batting, bowling, captaincy, whatever.

 

[Jono]

Hard to compare Ponting suddenly not having two all-time great bowlers, to actually being Tendulkar and also captain of India, with some extreme and fickle fans, and a ridiculous board. I know what's tougher. Sachin had an impossible job.

That being said, I'd say Ponting handles it better, and enjoys being captain more than Sachin. I think Sachin quite enjoys telling the captain (be it Ganguly, Dravid, Kumble or Dhoni) when he thinks there should be a field or bowling change, but yet stays out of the spotlight from most press conferences etc.

Sachin the better tactician IMO.

What's Sachin's record with the bat as captain I wonder?

 

[Ikki]

I don't know how you can pick Tendulkar, considering the captaincy record Ponting has. I don't know who the better man-manager is, or the better tactician, but I don't see how you can compare a team with McGrath and Warne to what Tendulkar had to work with in terms of his bowling. On the other hand, when Ganguly became captain, with not much better people, he started doing much better. So you do have to put the finger on Tendulkar.

I'd say Gavaskar had even less to work with and did much more than Tendulkar. For me, Tendulkar's captaincy record, even with that team, is poor. It's very easy to be on the field, give little tidbits of advise, look like a genius whilst never being culpable.

 

[silentstriker]

I'd say Gavaskar had even less to work with and did much more than Tendulkar. For me, Tendulkar's captaincy record, even with that team, is poor.

Of course, hence what I said regarding Ganguly . On the other hand, it'd be hard to lose with McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Hayden, Ponting and Gilchrist in your team. Regardless of who you bring on to bowl at a particular time.

So I don't know what would happen if they had the other side to captain. But Ponting did it and won 70%+ of the time. That's exceptional and results > no results. Always. So Ponting is clearly better, as I said before.

 

[Jono]

It's very easy to be on the field, give little tidbits of advise, look like a genius whilst never being culpable.

Haha. I don't necessarily agree, but touche.

 

[susudear]

Tendulkar as captain

Hard to compare Ponting suddenly not having two all-time great bowlers, to actually being Tendulkar and also captain of India, with some extreme and fickle fans, and a ridiculous board. I know what's tougher. Sachin had an impossible job.

That being said, I'd say Ponting handles it better, and enjoys being captain more than Sachin. I think Sachin quite enjoys telling the captain (be it Ganguly, Dravid, Kumble or Dhoni) when he thinks there should be a field or bowling change, but yet stays out of the spotlight from most press conferences etc.

Sachin the better tactician IMO.

What's Sachin's record with the bat as captain I wonder?

Tendulkar's stats as captain.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

2,054 runs from 25 matches @ 51.35

 

[susudear]

Slightly disagree

I'd say Gavaskar had even less to work with and did much more than Tendulkar. For me, Tendulkar's captaincy record, even with that team, is poor. It's very easy to be on the field, give little tidbits of advise, look like a genius whilst never being culpable.

Gavaskar had atleast one world class fast bowler on his side, and the comparisons really don't match up. I personally think that while Tendulkar was never the kind of man-manager that Ganguly was, he did a reasonably good job as captain, especially with the resources he had.

Anyway Ponting of today has much better resources than Tendulkar did, and is he doing a good job?

 

[Rant0r]

I'd say Gavaskar had even less to work with and did much more than Tendulkar. For me, Tendulkar's captaincy record, even with that team, is poor. It's very easy to be on the field, give little tidbits of advise, look like a genius whilst never being culpable.

so true, handy nonetheless, lehmann can credit this with being in the team whilst past his best

 

[Jono]

Tendulkar's stats as captain.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

2,054 runs from 25 matches @ 51.35

Not Pontingesque, but still very impressive.