Ponting for the first one.
I'm undecided on the second one though.I've always felt that Anwar was extremley underated.During his peak years,he was one of the,if not the best batsmen in the world,although his best days were always more common in ODIs than Test Matches.He for me,is probably the best opening batsman that we've ever produced.
Ganguly on the other hand,played more,piled up more runs,and was a better captain than Anwar. Strictly from the batting perspective though,both had weaknesses that bowlers regularly exploited - width for Anwar,and Bouncers for Ganguly,though Anwar had as good a chance of murdering you when you gave him width as he did of getting caught behind.
Both have almost identically poor records against the best teams of their time - SouthAfrica and Australia.Anwar's overall record in matches won by Pakistan is brilliant.16 of his 20 ODI centuries saw Pakistan winning the match.Ganguly on other hand,as an equally good if not better record than Anwar in matches won by India,and his record against Australia and SouthAfrica is marginally poorer than Anwar's.
Nothing to choose between the two.Match winners on their day,but poor against the 2 best sides of their time.Ganguly was obviously a better overall cricketer because of his bowling and captaincy,but there is nothing between him and Anwar as far as batting is concerned.