Ricky Ponting...

[Scallywag]

Sri Lanka's batsmen, convinced they could not win the game, batted so ultra-defensively it was as if there had never been an attacking revolution, as if the game had never known Waugh.

 

[Scallywag]

Ponting would never allow one batsman to score 400 runs, it would be a very poor captain to allow that to happen.

 

[age_master]

? yeah he would, depending on the situation in the game.

 

[Scallywag]

? yeah he would, depending on the situation in the game.

Opposition batsman Age master.

 

[Jnr.]

What facts are they Jnr.

That Vaughan is tactically imaginative.

Vaughan earns his stripes with winning strategy in field
Mike Brearley at The Oval
Sunday August 22, 2004
The Observer

Michael Vaughan belongs thank goodness, to the creative brand of captains, one of those who see each ball as a new event that may call for some new ploy or strategy in the field. There are no restrictions or rules about where the nine fielders are to stand and Vaughan has no compunction about putting them, on occasion, in unorthodox places.

On Friday, for example, his entire leg-side field for Chris Gayle against Steve Harmison was deep fine leg, long leg and deep midwicket. Yesterday he modified this at the start, bringing one of the deep fielders in to short square-leg. For the second over, he added a mid-on and moved the short leg behind square. On Friday, he had two gullys for Gayle, one orthodox, the other deeper and almost over the ordinary gully's left shoulder.

One may not always agree with each move. For instance, I felt during the series that by keeping the leg-side field back, too much scope was given to Shivnarine Chanderpaul to take easy singles and twos; Chanderpaul is a great worker of the ball, content to keep rotating the strike, not needing the adrenaline kick of regular boundaries. But with Vaughan, I can always see his point. There is always a logic to it.

...

 

[Jnr.]

Ahaaa so the batting capabilities of a captain do reflect in his abilities as a captain.

What was it you were saying a few pages earlier about Michael Vaughan?

 

[age_master]

Opposition batsman Age master.

well it doesn't really have anything to do with him than does it, depends on the batsmen.

pretty silly thing to say...

 

[marc71178]

b) he didn't have that many runs to play with, a draw would have won the series, a loss would have drawn it

Can't remember the last Australian captain to take that view - Waugh would never have done that.

 

[marc71178]

well it doesn't really have anything to do with him than does it, depends on the batsmen.

And also the flatness of the pitch - that was just about the flattest ever seen - or does Ponting also prepare all the pitches in Australia as now though to ensure they're not so flat, so that opposition players can't get loads of runs?

 

[Scallywag]

That Vaughan is tactically imaginative.

Vaughan earns his stripes with winning strategy in field
Mike Brearley at The Oval
Sunday August 22, 2004
The Observer

Michael Vaughan belongs thank goodness, to the creative brand of captains, one of those who see each ball as a new event that may call for some new ploy or strategy in the field. There are no restrictions or rules about where the nine fielders are to stand and Vaughan has no compunction about putting them, on occasion, in unorthodox places.

On Friday, for example, his entire leg-side field for Chris Gayle against Steve Harmison was deep fine leg, long leg and deep midwicket. Yesterday he modified this at the start, bringing one of the deep fielders in to short square-leg. For the second over, he added a mid-on and moved the short leg behind square. On Friday, he had two gullys for Gayle, one orthodox, the other deeper and almost over the ordinary gully's left shoulder.

One may not always agree with each move. For instance, I felt during the series that by keeping the leg-side field back, too much scope was given to Shivnarine Chanderpaul to take easy singles and twos; Chanderpaul is a great worker of the ball, content to keep rotating the strike, not needing the adrenaline kick of regular boundaries. But with Vaughan, I can always see his point. There is always a logic to it.

...

Originally Posted by marc71178
Quoting 2 extremely biased journalists from Australia will do nothing to say anything about Ponting's abilities


I dont see how you can quote one biased journalist from England and expect me to accept that it actually refers to his abilities.

 

[luckyeddie]

a) whats wrong with it??

b) he didn't have that many runs to play with, a draw would have won the series, a loss would have drawn it

c) Sri Lanka wern't batting that agressivley and could have fairly easiily just played Boof out. Kaspa only bowled 11 overs in the 2nd innings and hes much more a front line bowler than Lehmann.

You see, Scallywag?

THAT (^^^) is how an intelligent person replies. I may not agree with the points that age_master has made, but they are most certainly valid to the discussion.

However...
a) and b) The hour either side of tea on the fourth day, he seemed to go totally into his shell. That was the time I felt to open up the game, 9 wickets in hand, 100-150 ahead. I will grant you that Ponting and Hayden seemed to be batting in uncustomary manner and did give the rest of the side a sound platform, but frankly it was an approach I was just unused to from an Australian side.

c) Totally agree as far as Kaspa is concerned, yet until the light went, Lehmann had not been an option at all - he was brought on in order to speed up the overs, to give Warne one extra at the death before the pubs opened (never a bad option, this last part) but it was the hour and a half which led up to that where the proactive approach was lacking.

Just saying there SEEMED to be an opportunity which was let slip for the want of a little thought, that's all. Not trolling.

 

[Scallywag]

You see, Scallywag?

THAT (^^^) is how an intelligent person replies. .

So we can expect an improvement in your replies then can we.

 

[Scallywag]

You either accept both or none.


Peter Roebuck on Ponting

Ricky Ponting has been the captain of this tournament. If he maintains this form, he will be the man lifting the trophy on March 23. Tactically, he has been superior to any rival


Mike Brearley at The Oval
Sunday August 22, 2004
The Observer

Michael Vaughan belongs thank goodness, to the creative brand of captains, one of those who see each ball as a new event that may call for some new ploy or strategy in the field

 

[luckyeddie]

Originally Posted by marc71178
Quoting 2 extremely biased journalists from Australia will do nothing to say anything about Ponting's abilities


I dont see how you can quote one biased journalist from England and expect me to accept that it actually refers to his abilities.

Mike Brearley is widely regarded as the finest international captain this country has ever produced. You yourself (in one of your more blunderbuss-like, shoot-anything, totally thoughtless moments - you know, how you normally act) mention the fact that he (Brearley) had a test match average of 22 when skipper, yet he retained his place as captain and beat Australia in an Ashes series, picking a side up off the floor.

How do you think THAT happened, eh?

Brearley spoke from experience - he was pontificating (pun intended, but I thought I'd make it obvious for you) on a subject he knew off by heart.

It just might be the fact that he knew what he was on about - both then and now.

Still, for you, a bit of Pom bashing never went amiss did it?

 

[luckyeddie]

You either accept both or none.


Peter Roebuck on Ponting

Ricky Ponting has been the captain of this tournament. If he maintains this form, he will be the man lifting the trophy on March 23. Tactically, he has been superior to any rival


Mike Brearley at The Oval
Sunday August 22, 2004
The Observer

Michael Vaughan belongs thank goodness, to the creative brand of captains, one of those who see each ball as a new event that may call for some new ploy or strategy in the field

Don't be silly. Show me Perer Roebuck's international credentials and you might have a point.

 

[Jnr.]

To be fair, the Cairns Test would've been won by the Aussies had they held onto their catches. I think about 4 catches were dropped.

With retrospect, the declaration did come a bit late, but perhaps Ponting thought that SL were at their worst when defending? SL nearly chased down 352 going at about 4.4 an over in SL 3 Tests before that and the Cairns pitch was still very good for batting...

Mind you, if I was captain, I would've been more conservative (with the series on the line), but that is just me.

 

[Jnr.]

You either accept both or none.

Do you accept both or none?

 

[Deja moo]

You guys still at it ?

Ganguly is number 1.
Ponting and Vaughan are fighting it out for scraps .

 

[luckyeddie]

Mind you, if I was captain, I would've been more conservative (with the series on the line), but that is just me.

So would I if truth be told.

 

[age_master]

Just saying there SEEMED to be an opportunity which was let slip for the want of a little thought, that's all. Not trolling.

yeah there may have been another oportunity there, i think ponting wanted to make sure the series was secure, particularly with players liek Jayasuria and Kalu in the oposing side, cant critisise him too much, he was quite possibly only out by 1 or 2 overs.