By the end of their careers who do you think will be the better batsman? Cook or AB?

[smash84]

yeah agree with himannv there.....very nicely put indeed

 

[Howe_zat]

If you think Cook's run in 2010 was enough to get him from established Test batsman to droppable, I don't see why his more recent form can't have the opposite effect.

Why emphasise a low run of scores but belittle an awesome run of similar length?

 

[Spark]

I think his awesome run has been more awesome than his poor run was poor, on the basis that his recent run has been absurdly awesome.

 

[Prince EWS]

If you think Cook's run in 2010 was enough to get him from established Test batsman to droppable, I don't see why his more recent form can't have the opposite effect.

But I didn't though. That's precisely my point. If you think those who wanted Cook dropped after his 2010 run were trigger happy, I don't see why now thinking he's one of the best five batsmen in the world can't be seen the same way. The attitudes at both points are equivalent IMO.

I haven't held either opinion. Before his ton against Pakistan I thought he was good Test batsman in some poor form that was on the cusp of becoming concerning if it continued, and right now I think he's a good Test batsman in some good form that's on the cusp of becoming more than that if it continues. My dismissive nature towards short-term form has been consistent.

 

[Howe_zat]

But I didn't though. That's precisely my point. If you think those who wanted Cook dropped after his 2010 run were trigger happy, I don't see why now thinking he's one of the best five batsmen in the world can't be seen the same way. The attitudes at both points are equivalent IMO.

I haven't held either opinion. Before his ton against Pakistan I thought he was good Test batsman in some poor form that was on the cusp of becoming concerning if it continued, and right now I think he's a good Test batsman in some good form that's on the cusp of becoming more than that if it continues. My dismissive nature towards short-term form has been consistent.

I agree with you, for the record. Wasn't trying to claim he'd suddenly become among the best in the world. (Though, there's probably no batsman in better form right now.)

Uppercut, if you think that AB is a class act on a par with Kallis, Tendulkar and the others right now, that's fine, but I disagree. I think both Cook and AB have been established international batsmen for a long time, both have come good at different times, but neither has yet lifted themselves to that bracket.

 

[Blaze 18]

I think Cook's already better. Ab De Villiers tends to get overrated around here IMO.

EDIT : I thought the question was only for tests. AB is miles ahead in ODIs.

 

[Uppercut]

Meh, he's spent four years averaging 60 with a series of the arse-saving knocks normally used to defend batsmen rated higher than their averages suggest. It's hard to see what else he can do. Besides finding a new nationality.

 

[Top_Cat]

Duh, average 80.

 

[Spark]

Score ten trillion runs in an Ashes series.

/cue standard english saffer joke

 

[Howe_zat]

De Villiers also averaged 35 for the first half of his career. Considering that Cook's copped criticism in this thread for averaging 35 for a selected period in 2009-10, I don't think it's unreasonable to say their careers have had similar peaks and troughs, albeit of different lengths.

 

[Uppercut]

Gah, stop being deliberately obtuse. Cook averaged 35 last year. De Villiers averaged 35 between 2004 and 2007. When he was a wicket keeper. It's clearly not the same thing.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah but how often was he the regular keeper? Don't recall it being that often at all.

EDIT: In Tests, obvs.

EDIT2: As I recall, the biggest impediment to his career was being shoehorned into the opening spot.

 

[Howe_zat]

When he was a wicketkeeper? I don't know how often he kept in domestic cricket, but he was playing Tests as a specialist bat in all but two Tests in that time, at the very start. He's still only kept in three.

My point is that both players have had periods of disappointment, both have been stuck with and both come good.

 

[vcs]

gah, stop being deliberately obtuse. Cook averaged 35 last year. De villiers averaged 35 between 2004 and 2007. When he was a wicket keeper. It's clearly not the same thing.

58 tbh.

 

[vcs]

I personally think those claiming Cook in the top five batsmen in the world are being just as trigger-happy as those who wanted him dropped before that ton against Pakistan just prior to the Ashes. Personally I'm in neither camp. I see him as a batsman in the upper echelon of Test cricket who would probably even make my world XI due to a lack of competition from other non-Sehwag openers bar Smith (who is IMO an extremely similar player in worse form) but I wouldn't have him in my top five and he might even struggle to make my top ten.

This is going to sound like an odd observation, but Cook to me has always seemed like the Test equivalent of an awesome First Class cricketer who would struggle to make the step up to Tests. That is - if Test cricket was a domestic competition and there was a level of competition an entire level above it, I think Cook would fail if selected for Team Earth while someone like De Villiers would fare a bit better, even if the latter isn't as good in Tests as the former. Really though that's a completely irrelevant hypothetical that I'd prefer not to judge a cricketer on - after all, his job is to adapt his game to what he's presented with and a theoretical level above Tests is not that - but it is something that often crosses my mind when I think of him.

I voted for De Villiers, but it was just a punt really. I see as being very equal right now and I see them as having pretty equal chance of succeeding in Test cricket into the future; it's a toss-up.

That's a very un-PEWS like post.

FTR, I agree with Spark that his run of form has reached proportions where it is impossible to ignore. He'd absolutely make my top 5 batsmen currently.. Tendulkar, Kallis, Sanga, Cook and Amla/Trott.

 

[Prince EWS]

That's a very un-PEWS like post.

FTR, I agree with Spark that his run of form has reached proportions where it is impossible to ignore. He'd absolutely make my top 5 batsmen currently.. Tendulkar, Kallis, Sanga, Cook and Amla/Trott.

Haha, FTR, my observation about Cook theoretically failing at the imaginary next level above Tests has absolutely no impact on how I rate him as a Test batsman; I just thought this was as good a thread as any to make it in. If I was a less PEWS-like person I'd mark him down as a Test batsman for that, but I'm pretty PEWS-like as it turns out.

As for your top five bats, I'll take the first three you mentioned (which are indisputable IMO) plus Sehwag and Laxman. Odd that I'm rating Indians higher than you in a way, but there you go. I think it's because I tend to look a little more long-term than most.. I'd have the likes of Jaywardene pretty comfortably ahead of Cook as well.

 

[Spark]

I'm a big subscriber to class > form as well, but there is a point at which form becomes simply impossible to ignore. Cook passed that point some time ago.

 

[vcs]

Haha, FTR, my observation about Cook theoretically failing at the imaginary next level above Tests has absolutely no impact on how I rate him as a Test batsman; I just thought this was as good a thread as any to make it in. If I was a less PEWS-like person I'd mark him down as a Test batsman for that, but I'm pretty PEWS-like as it turns out.

As for your top five bats, I'll take the first three you mentioned (which are indisputable IMO) plus Sehwag and Laxman. Odd that I'm rating Indians higher than you in a way, but there you go. I think it's because I tend to look a little more long-term than most.. I'd have the likes of Jaywardene pretty comfortably ahead of Cook as well.

Yeah, I was absolutely torn leaving Laxman out because of the value of the runs he scores. In fact, I'd suggest he's easily the best at his role and position in the world right now. But mainly went with the others for sheer weight of runs.

Would love to have Sehwag as well, but he had a poor tour of SA, didn't do well against Australia before that and has missed the three recent Tests in WI, so he gets marked down a bit for that. He'd make the top 10 though, like De Villiers, Jayawardene, Bell, Chanderpaul, Watson etc.

 

[MW1304]

How do we measure who's the better batsmen? Is it purely based on weight of runs? Average? Number of centuries? Or is it something that can't be backed up by the stats, that feeling that, despite having slightly inferior numbers, the other guy was better?

If its based on a), I'd be backing Cook. b) Cook again. c) Still Cook. d) de Villiers.

So before someone was arguing that, because of stats, AB is way better than Cook, and now someone is arguing that, despite stats, AB is better than Cook (which is a fair enough argument btw). But surely this suggests that, on balance, using stats and centuries and recent form and slightly more recent form and technique and everything, they are on a fairly similar standing at least. I simply can't see how AB is significantly better.

 

[wpdavid]

My one fear with Cook is that it might turn out to be a Vaughanesque annus mirabilus, especially if he's burdened with the captaincy in the near future. No particular reason for that assessment - just natural pessimism from watching England fail to produce a genuinely world class batsman for about 20 years.