After the Don, who is Australia's best cricketer...

[Mr. P]

I think Ponting deserves a mention on that list he is allready 5th on the alltime International Hundreds list with 31 thats only 7 Behind Mark Waugh on 38 who Is Second to Tendulkar who is on some crazy figure

In 4-5 years time there will be Tendulkar, Ponting then daylight as far 100's go.

can't say i disagree there

 

[Bazza]

That's because so much ODI cricket is played. ODIs weren't around when half these players played. Having 14 ODI hundreds doesn't make Ponting better than Ponsford for example.

 

[Mr. P]

you and i never saw ponsford play.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

you and i never saw ponsford play.

That's not his point. He's saying that you can't use that stat of All-time international hundreds in the context of the argument.

 

[Mr. P]

alright, don't use all-time stats, use averages. now see how punter slots in.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

That still isn't an accurate comparison. The fact is that you can't compare batsmen or bowlers of different eras. The conditions were different, the opposition and even the rules were different. In the modern game, almost everything is very much batsman oriented.

BTW averages are stats.

 

[Anil]

I think Ponting deserves a mention on that list he is allready 5th on the alltime International Hundreds list with 31 thats only 7 Behind Mark Waugh on 38 who Is Second to Tendulkar who is on some crazy figure

In 4-5 years time there will be Tendulkar, Ponting then daylight as far 100's go.

Lara is also on 38 hundreds, joint second with M. Waugh. If he(Lara) plays for the next 3-4 years atleast and in the form he is in now, Ponting might have a tough time catching up with him. Tendulkar at 65 hundreds is probably way beyond anyones' reach.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Lara is also on 38 hundreds, joint second with M. Waugh. If he(Lara) plays for the next 3-4 years atleast and in the form he is in now, Ponting might have a tough time catching up with him. Tendulkar at 65 hundreds is probably way beyond anyones' reach.

I considered mentioning this possibility, but I gather that a few people don't rate the world-record holder.

 

[Mr. P]

That still isn't an accurate comparison. The fact is that you can't compare batsmen or bowlers of different eras. The conditions were different, the opposition and even the rules were different. In the modern game, almost everything is very much batsman oriented.

BTW averages are stats.

i know averages are stats. if by your thinking, all conditions are different, which they probably are, we cannot compare any batsman. each match is different, so nobody can be compared.

 

[Anil]

I considered mentioning this possibility, but I gather that a few people don't rate the world-record holder.

Well....no matter what people think, Lara is already a bonafide all-time great, while Ponting, although well on his way, hasn't actually reached there yet.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

i know averages are stats. if by your thinking, all conditions are different, which they probably are, we cannot compare any batsman. each match is different, so nobody can be compared.

That's true to an extent. However most of the seasoned players (Lara, Tendulkar, Waugh, Stewart) would have played under similar conditions at points in their careers. The test of a batsman is how he copes with these conditions in scoring runs or unluckily being dismissed.

The conditions I was referring to, however were those such as exposed pitches, under-prepared pitches and the rules or lack thereof which tended to favour bowlers. For instance, we now have strict bouncer rules. I am not saying that Ponting would not have scored the runs he has if he played in an earlier era, neither am I implying that Ponting is not a great player, but I am saying that something such as this just cannot be compared accurately.

Only God knows...

 

[marc71178]

I think Ponting deserves a mention on that list he is allready 5th on the alltime International Hundreds list with 31 thats only 7 Behind Mark Waugh on 38 who Is Second to Tendulkar who is on some crazy figure

And that speaks volumes about the volume of International Cricket played now.

A better way to look at it would be percentage of innings to have scored a century in.

 

[marc71178]

I considered mentioning this possibility, but I gather that a few people don't rate the world-record holder.

If this is aimed at me, I've never said I don't rate him, just pointed out that his runs against SL should've been taken in context of the pile of rubbish that is the SL bowling attack.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

If this is aimed at me, I've never said I don't rate him, just pointed out that his runs against SL should've been taken in context of the pile of rubbish that is the SL bowling attack.

SL have two World Class bowlers. That's as many as South Africa have and more than England have. That's as many as India have and more than Pakistan have. It's arguably as many as New Zealand have too (despite Vettori's inability to take wickets at times).

So what you're trying to say is that the only runs that Lara scores that actually count are against Australia?

 

[Bazza]

I seem to remember him doing alirght against them once or twice. Or three times. Or four times.

Anyway, I also think you're under-rating most of those bowling attacks. SL do have one of the worst.

 

[Eclipse]

A better way to look at it would be percentage of innings to have scored a century in.

Well ether way Ponting is doing very well he avrages a test 100 every 6.3 innings and there are only 3-4 Australian's better than that ever and One of them Is Bradman.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I seem to remember him doing alirght against them once or twice. Or three times. Or four times.

Anyway, I also think you're under-rating most of those bowling attacks. SL do have one of the worst.

But you can't deny that Murali and Vaas are world-class bowlers (please don't start the whole chucking convo. again). That's more than England and West Indies have...

 

[marc71178]

Apart from Vaas they both are yes.

 

[Warriorzcc0]

Gilchrist definetly...

 

[Mr. P]

*snort* gilchrist. what a laugh.