Ponting vs. Steve Waugh, Who Was the Better Batsman?

[Athlai]

Found an old thread on this but it didn't have a poll. So often see Ponting's name thrown around these days as the 2nd or 3rd greatest Australian batsman (after Bradman and Chappell-not always him though).

Reckon Ponting arguably was more talented but Waugh was the more complete batsman. Everything you want in a good Test batsman IMO, so I'd go for Waugh. Potential for a Border thread as well.

[Top_Cat]

Ponting but so, so, so close.

EDIT: It'd be a hung jury in my mind if Ponting retired tomorrow. If he has a decent run before retiring, as I suspect he's gearing up for, reckon that'll put him comfortably over the line.

[vic_orthdox]

Who "was"? Hmm...

[Athlai]

One way to look at this is in the bowlers they played against. Waugh did play 24 more matches than Ponting so there is a chance a few bigger names will make Ponting's list before he is through.


Waugh (7 matches or more)
Walsh 28 matches
Ambrose 23 matches
Caddick 17 matches
Gough 16 matches
Cairns 14 matches
Wasim, Malcolm 13 matches
Donald, Waqar, Kallis 12 matches
Fraser, Danny Morrison, Defreitas 11 matches
D Patel, Tuffnell, Emburey 10 matches
Kumble, Ian Bishop 9 matches
Mushtaq Ahmed, Saqlain Mushtaq, Vettori, Pollock, Agarkar, McMillan (x2) 8 matches
Hadlee, Akhtar, Malcolm Marshall, Benjamin, Dillon, Patterson, C White, Doull 7 matches

Ponting (7 matches or more)
Kallis 21 matches
Harmison, Kumble 17 matches
Vettori 16 matches
Flintoff, Ntini 15 matches
Harbhajan, Hoggard 12 matches
Caddick, Murali, Pollock, Vaas 11 matches
Z Khan, Martin 10 matches
Giles, Gough, Akhtar, Walsh 9 matches
Agarkar, Anderson, Bravo 8 matches
Kaneria, Nel, Samuels, Sharma, C White 7 matches

Just a huge difference for mine in the quality of those great bowlers. Ponting is an excellent batsman but Waugh did it at a harder time IMO.

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

Who "was"? Hmm...

Ponting is still playing etc etc.

[wfdu_ben91]

Originally Posted by Athlai

Just a huge difference for mine in the quality of those great bowlers. Ponting is an excellent batsman but Waugh did it at a harder time IMO.

It's not Ponting's fault that he faced lesser bowlers and he shouldn't be penalised for that, IMO. Pretty confident that Ponting would've succeeded in any era.

[Athlai]

The figures where they played in the same matches are also interesting and lean towards Ponting who was beginning his dominance and Waugh who had some of the best years of his career before winding down.

Ponting 111 innings 5377 @ 56.01
19 100s 18 50s
Waugh 104 innings 4719 @ 53.62
16 100s 19 50s

(and Ben may be interested in noting that Hayden in 65 innings had figures of 3875 @ 67.98
15 100s 13 50s with them both in the team)

[Athlai]

Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91

It's not Ponting's fault that he faced lesser bowlers and he shouldn't be penalised for that, IMO. Pretty confident that Ponting would've succeeded in any era.

I also think Ponting would've succeeded, I just think he would have been a slightly lesser batsman than Waugh. My point about the bowlers they faced is more or less to indicate the difference in their averages, Ponting who has a fair margin did play against lesser bowlers to Waugh. The fact Waugh averaged 51 against despite so often playing such high quality opposition I find very impressive.

[Athlai]

Who we measure them up against

Players who averaged 50+ with over 3000 runs during Waugh's career
11
Players who averaged this during Pontings
17

[silentstriker]

Waugh

[Top_Cat]

What is he good for?

[silentstriker]

Getting annoyed by Ganguly.

[Top_Cat]

DWTA. Waugh = good for absolutely nothing.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Athlai

Just a huge difference for mine in the quality of those great bowlers. Ponting is an excellent batsman but Waugh did it at a harder time IMO.

Ponting debuted later so he played the better bowlers less. But he did play them. His record against many of those bowlers listed for Waugh is pretty fantastic actually. Waugh was a great batsman but he is just slightly below Ponting who is not only supremely gifted, but supremely consistent. Probably the best player of pace in the last 20 years. He would have done more than fine had he debuted earlier and peaked as Waugh did in the 90s.

[wfdu_ben91]

Originally Posted by Athlai

I also think Ponting would've succeeded, I just think he would have been a slightly lesser batsman than Waugh. My point about the bowlers they faced is more or less to indicate the difference in their averages, Ponting who has a fair margin did play against lesser bowlers to Waugh. The fact Waugh averaged 51 against despite so often playing such high quality opposition I find very impressive.

Waugh's record against the best bowling attacks of the 90s is very impressive, averaging 58 in Pakistan, 72 in South Africa and 66 in the West Indies. However, Ponting in his early 20's averaged well those same attacks whilst Waugh struggled at the start of his career.