Better to watch=better player??

[vcs]

Tendulkar was considered vulnerable to the incoming delivery. Was bowled through the gate by Allan Donald at Durban in '97.

 

[Black_Warrior]

And by Razzaq in 99. And the great man worked extra hard on this..And that thats why its so dfifficult now.. Notice the 5-6 years in my post

 

[Uppercut]

Such as?

The problem with any examples is that you might disagree .

Ponting's a perfectly good example. Compare him with, say, Steve Waugh, and there's very little by way of an objective measure to suggest that Ponting's a league above Waugh other than a slightly higher career average (heavily qualified by all of the era-specific differences that inevitably crop up in every CC comparison). Waugh's name usually doesn't even come up when discussing great modern batsmen. It's not because he didn't do it against the best, or because he didn't do it under pressure (lol), and he scored pretty much as heavily as anyone else of his time. I propose that this is largely because of aesthetics.

 

[vcs]

True. I commented a few days back that his balance looks better than ever these days even though he scores a high percentage of runs on the onside.

On Ponting, hasn't he been getting out a lot to the pull shot in recent times? Even in the recent innings of 60 odd against Pakistan in Headingley, he hit one almost straight to the guy at deep square leg early on.

 

[Uppercut]

He pulled a few to fielders around Christmas. Was notably dropped at fine leg on 0 against Pakistan then went on to score 200. With plenty of excellent pull shots, ironically.

I suspect that caught behind the wicket on the off side is the most common Ponting dismissal.

 

[Black_Warrior]

The problem with any examples is that you might disagree .

Ponting's a perfectly good example. Compare him with, say, Steve Waugh, and there's very little by way of an objective measure to suggest that Ponting's a league above Waugh other than a slightly higher career average (heavily qualified by all of the era-specific differences that inevitably crop up in every CC comparison). Waugh's name usually doesn't even come up when discussing great modern batsmen. It's not because he didn't do it against the best, or because he didn't do it under pressure (lol), and he scored pretty much as heavily as anyone else of his time. I propose that this is largely because of aesthetics.

Yeah I agree with that. The reason Steve Waugh doesnt crop up is because of aesthetics.. His greatest strength was his courage and fighting ability and these are hardly qualities that are reflected in a shot or averages.
On the other hand, I do believe that Ponting is a better batsman than Steve Waugh and its not just his slightly higher average. He also has more 100s and runs than Waugh.

On Ponting, hasn't he been getting out a lot to the pull shot in recent times? Even in the recent innings of 60 odd against Pakistan in Headingley, he hit one almost straight to the guy at deep square leg early on.

Yepp I said this before in another topic. He is not playing it as well as he used to. I think its due to age. Your reflexes get slower.
Not just getting out, I saw him miss a half tracker from Asif at 80 mph.. It hit him on his stomach. Ponting 2 years ago would have dispatched it with disdain.

 

[vcs]

Steve Waugh should receive some points over Ponting for his Ashes record alone, considering that it's the biggest series for Australia/England. Averages 74.22 in England with 7 hundreds and 4 fifties.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah I agree with that. The reason Steve Waugh doesnt crop up is because of aesthetics.. His greatest strength was his courage and fighting ability and these are hardly qualities that are reflected in a shot or averages.
On the other hand, I do believe that Ponting is a better batsman than Steve Waugh and its not just his slightly higher average. He also has more 100s and runs than Waugh.

I think they are reflected in his average tbf .

He certainly didn't score tons as often as Ponting did, I suppose that has to count against him. It's just that when people are comparing Lara/Tendulkar/Ponting the argument almost always boils down to who scored against the best attacks, who scored when the team needed the runs most and who scored under pressure. Waugh is a batsman who dominates the field in all of these departments with an average only very slightly lower. And was a successful captain in a successful team, too. But he never even gets a mention. Whether he's actually in the same league as Ponting or not is rather besides the initial point. The fact that can't be denied is that aesthetics are a big factor in why his reputation doesn't quite match up to his phenomenal record.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Yep yep yep agree...
And since I had the good fortune of seeing that epic innings of his against Ambrose...let me tell you, if my team was 50/4 with Donald/Ambrose/Waqar steaming in, I would bet all my money on Waugh and none at all on Lara, Tendulkar or Ponting.

 

[GIMH]

CW's resident really old man whose name escapes me .

FFS Uppercut, BoyBrumby posted earlier in the thread

 

[Top_Cat]

I reckon it's merely the illusion of a weakness. Ponting is statistically less likely to get out lbw for less than 10 than Sachin Tendulkar. In spite of the fact that everyone bowls on his pads when he arrives at the crease because of what you just said.

Yep and before you know it, he's 35 with, maybe, one flicked boundary, your team has lost the momentum and he's barely raised a sweat.

Get the feeling that's where Ponting's game has fallen over a bit. He just doesn't seem as patient as he did when he was scoring big runs. Statements in the press about how he's going to take on all-comers, etc. more accurately characterise his early career when he was throwing the bat everywhere. At his peak, he was an extremely patient batter.

 

[Furball]

Get the feeling that's where Ponting's game has fallen over a bit. He just doesn't seem as patient as he did when he was scoring big runs. Statements in the press about how he's going to take on all-comers, etc. more accurately characterise his early career when he was throwing the bat everywhere. At his peak, he was an extremely patient batter.

Definitely seems to have some arrogance issues, his continuing refusal to put away the pull shot over the winter despite it getting him into trouble on numerous occasions bordered on the stupid at times.

The other thing with Ponting is that he seems to have more of an air of vulnerability around him. Even when he passes 50, there's still a chance to get him out, which simply didn't exist 4-5 years ago.

Just checking his stats: between September 2002 until the end of the Ashes, Ponting played 54 Tests, scoring 5,863 runs at an average of 72.38. In those 54 Tests he passed 50 a total of 43 times - with 23 of those occasions becoming 3 figures.

Since the 2006/07 Ashes his 36 Tests have brought him 2,658 runs @ 42.87. He's passed 50 22 times in those 36 Test, but has only scored 6 centuries.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Yeah, when you look at Ponting and Hayden's conversion rates during that period, it's easy to see why Australia continually racked up huge scores.

 

[Top_Cat]

I thought it was decided Hayden was just a flat-track bully?

 

[Top_Cat]

The other thing with Ponting is that he seems to have more of an air of vulnerability around him. Even when he passes 50, there's still a chance to get him out, which simply didn't exist 4-5 years ago.

Just checking his stats: between September 2002 until the end of the Ashes, Ponting played 54 Tests, scoring 5,863 runs at an average of 72.38. In those 54 Tests he passed 50 a total of 43 times - with 23 of those occasions becoming 3 figures.

Since the 2006/07 Ashes his 36 Tests have brought him 2,658 runs @ 42.87. He's passed 50 22 times in those 36 Test, but has only scored 6 centuries.

Yeah, good point. I remember going to the Adelaide Test against NZ two seasons ago, Ponting looked impregnable between lunch and tea. Really looked like he was cruising too, a monty for a big, big double in ideal conditions. Second over after lunch, was goneee.

Take a guess what shot he got out to.

 

[Spark]

The bizarre thing about Ponting is that he doesn't look out of form. He still looks reasonably balanced, his eye is good, he still can smash it on the up. But batting is all mind over matter and his mind has been awry. Not just the hooks to fine leg, but some really uncharacteristically loose carves outside off stump.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Yeah, good point. I remember going to the Adelaide Test against NZ two seasons ago, Ponting looked impregnable between lunch and tea. Really looked like he was cruising too, a monty for a big, big double in ideal conditions. Second over after lunch, was goneee.

Take a guess what shot he got out to.

O'Brien got him, from memory?

 

[Top_Cat]

O'Brien got him, from memory?

Yep. Ponting seemed to suggest the ball held up a bit, in fairness.

 

[Uppercut]

Definitely seems to have some arrogance issues, his continuing refusal to put away the pull shot over the winter despite it getting him into trouble on numerous occasions bordered on the stupid at times.

Tbf he hit a double century filled with glorious pull shots the second such criticisms were levelled at him. Although he did sky one to fine leg on 0 .

But getting out pulling 3 or 4 times doesn't necessarily mean it's not a percentage shot, Ponting knows his game better than anyone. I think he'd have the maturity to put the pull shot away if he really felt it was a bad shot, but it's hard to say. It's such a big part of his game that it might be more beneficial just to work really hard on getting it back to where it was.

 

[Himannv]

Oh man, Ponting is wayy better than Border..no comparison really.. Ponting is slotted in the same group as Lara and Tendulkar..

And no if Ponting retired in 2006, he would not be rated higher, at least not by me.
He would have less runs, less centuries. Ponting's strongest argument for greatness are his runs and centuries. The lower they are, the weaker the argument becomes.

Hmm, its just that during those times he used to score a century almost every match. I remember a time when even if I didn't know the score or watch the match I would take it for granted that he had scored a century. He had that good a run and I think that at that point in time there was no better batsman in the world. Same cannot be said now.