Is Saurav Ganguly one of the greatest ODI batsmen ever ?

[Sanz]

Didn't you hear what Sanz said? He's from way too many places to be able to answer that question. People these days and their ridiculously offensive questions ...

Adharcric, still carrying your grudge from the other thread, eh ?

 

[Anil]

and thats exactly why he was such a great player in that format of the game....believe it or not running between the wicket is a very big facet of the game.

that's one of the reasons why he was such a good player...true...that's not what i was trying to talk about here, anyway the context is lost, never mind...

 

[silentstriker]

Forget an all time #2, his position as a no. 1 batsman of his era is very much debatable.

Sure, some may class Lara as ahead. That still keeps him (and Lara) in contention as #2 all time. What's your point?

 

[tooextracool]

Giving newbie a chance to cement his spot in the team and judging a player of nearly 18 year careers are two totally different ballgames..

When a player is scoring bucketloads of runs in one position, you'd have to be an idiot to deprive him of that by giving him 50 games at another position and have your team struggle as a result of it. At the end of the day if hes batting at a different position hes not much more different than a newbie IMO because hes not proven at that position.

Everyone has matches where they lost out on chances to score big due to curtailed overs.
Tendy has had his fair share of it too.
If you look at the actual instances where Bevan has been denied a chance to score a 50 and same with Tendy, there is very little difference..

Right clearly someone who is batting at the top of the order has been denied the chance of getting to 50 as much as someone batting at no 6.

No, scoring in boundaries is very important too - for one, it is the best way to score in the opener's slot in ODIs- a boundary-scorer can play in the middle and succeed but a poker like Bevan would be far less likely to succeed up top if he cant score boundaries at will.

Why not?
Again your logic makes no sense whatsoever. You dont have to hit boundaries in the first 15 to succeed in international cricket...Nick Knight is a perfect example of that. Further there is no reason to claim that Bevan was incapable of hitting over the infield when he never really got the opportunity to do so.

Also, players who score mostly in boundaries gives the team an extra edge because they can simply go nuts and 'explode' in a game or two- pokers do that much rarely.
As a result, you cannot be talking up the 'turning strike over' aspect and in the same breath not acknowledge that scoring boundaries are equally important..

They are, but thats the point. They are equally important. you seem to be putting it down as though a boundary player is a better one than someone who scores his runs in singles.

THROUGHOUT the 90s, OZ's batting was better - after the mid 90s, India's batting had more stars but still the lone alsoran which OZ had much rarely.

Clearly what a well backed up argument that is. As pointed out before the Indian batting lineup provided just as much support to Tendulkar as the Australia one did to Bevan. Unfortunately one was filled with chokers while the other was not.

Except that he hasnt played 367 games chasing.

No but hes still played more than anybody else.

Whatever. It means that performance against OZ has to be weighed higher than performance against various other lesser teams.

Oh wow lets ignore his failures against SA who were the best team of that decade, lets ignore his failures in the 2nd innings of the important games. Lets simply look at Kenya, Bangladesh and zimbabwe along with a few exceptions of Australia games which clearly proves that hes better than someone who performed batting 2nd against almost everyone.

 

[adharcric]

Adharcric, still carrying your grudge from the other thread, eh ?

nah, just having a little fun messin around with you

 

[Sanz]

Sure, some may class Lara as ahead. That still keeps him (and Lara) in contention as #2 all time. What's your point?

Did you forget (SR)Waugh, Dravid ? There are people who will take both over Tendulkar.

Also, for an all time #2, ever heard the names likes Sunil Gavaskar, Viv Richards, Greg Chappell etc.

There is a good chance that Tendulkar wont win the battle for #1 Indian batsman of all time, forget being the world no. 2 all time.

 

[silentstriker]

Did you forget (SR)Waugh, Dravid ? There are people who will take both over Tendulkar.

I don't think Dravid is in the same class as the others. And there might be some who rate him as high or higher, but not many, and most people I talk to wouldn't. Unless you have a very short memory span, I don't see how you could.

Also, for an all time #2, ever heard the names likes Sunil Gavaskar, Viv Richards, Greg Chappell etc.

They are all up there, but none of the three are as good. And its not extremely close either. I rate Chappell highly, so he might be close, but its no cigar.

There is a good chance that Tendulkar wont win the battle for #1 Indian batsman of all time, forget being the world no. 2 all time.

Yes, good chance only if people who for some reason have an anti-Tendulkar bias vote. Otherwise, he'd win pretty handily.

 

[Sanz]

I don't think Dravid is in the same class as the others. And there might be some who rate him as high or higher, but not many, and most people I talk to wouldn't. Unless you have a very short memory span, I don't see how you could.

Unfortunately for you the polls taken on this forum tell a different story, there are infact quite a few people who think of Dravid as the better.

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?p=853265#post853265
http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?p=225847#post225847

And no it's not because of very short memory unless you call a period of 1996-2006 a short span and 9000+ runs not enough to be compared to someone who has 10400 runs..

They are all up there, but none of the three are as good. And its not extremely close either. I rate Chappell highly, so he might be close, but its no cigar.

Tells a lot about how much cricket you watched. I will take all three gentleman ahead of Tendulkar.

Yes, good chance only if people who for some reason have an anti-Tendulkar bias vote. Otherwise, he'd win pretty handily.

Spoken like a true fanatic. So If anyone picks gavaskar/dravid ahead of Tendulkar, it must be because of the bias, isn't it ? I am sure it has nothing to do with Sunny and Rahul being pretty good.

 

[R_D]

What theory ? Didn't you were doing research on any particular theory. Why not post the details of that theory.

Well I've been hearign that people from a certain regions of india don't appreciate Tendulkar and was wondering whether you came from that region as well as you seem so anti-tendulkar.

No disrespect to Dravid but imho he's got nothing on Tendulkar.
The fact that neither Steve Waugh or Dravid made the recent voted team that was done in this forum probaly shows why Tendulkar and Lara are way ahead of any other players in 90's.

 

[Sanz]

Well I've been hearign that people from a certain regions of india don't appreciate Tendulkar and was wondering whether you came from that region as well as you seem so anti-tendulkar.

And what region would that be ?

No disrespect to Dravid but imho he's got nothing on Tendulkar.

Is that the reason why you voted for Dravid as the best subcontinent batsman ever ?

http://forum.cricketweb.net/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=601

The fact that neither Steve Waugh or Dravid made the recent voted team that was done in this forum probaly shows why Tendulkar and Lara are way ahead of any other players in 90's.

Yeah right !!!

 

[silentstriker]

I am sure it has nothing to do with Sunny and Rahul being pretty good.

Yes, because I've said repeatedly that both Sunny and Rahul aren't pretty good.

 

[silentstriker]

Well, this is going no where. I think Ganguly was the best captain in Indian history, Tendulkar is best batsman in indian history (2nd Sunny, 3rd Dravid). I also think Tendulkar is #2 all time, though its close (but not because Dravid and Sunny), I think Chappell/Sobers especially run him close.

If you disagree, good for you, but we're rehashing the same points over and over.

 

[R_D]

And what region would that be ?




Is that the reason why you voted for Dravid as the best subcontinent batsman ever ?

http://forum.cricketweb.net/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=601



Yeah right !!!

hahaha did i... well i certainly don't think he's the best batsman out of sub-continent.. must have been one those thigns where you click the wrong button... done than quite a few times.

 

[Sanz]

Yeah and I trust you.

 

[R_D]

Yeah and I trust you.

hehehe
well i don't know why i would've voted for him tho... strange

How did this turn into a Sachin Tendulkar thread when it was meant to be about The best indian captain ever