• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Kapil Dev vs Ricky Ponting

Who is the better test cricketer?

  • Total voters
    28
F

Fuller Pilch

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
In the late 90s-early 2000s peak Cairns would have made the great Australian team. Did Kapil reach those heights though, or after a stunning start as a youngster was he more consistent rather than outstanding?
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Fuller Pilch said:
Australia in the 1950s had Lindwall, Miller, Davidson, Johnson - 4 seam* bowlers who were much better than Kapil, one of whom (Miller) was a quality bat and two of whom (Lindwall & Davidson) were very handy bats.

*Johnson could bowl spin as well
Click to expand...
*Johnston. Johnston was seamer and Johnson offie. Also, I am pretty confident Johnston and Davidson never played together. And, given their keeper was Tallon and the 50s Aussies didn't necessarily had the best batting, I don't think given their bowling difference, that Johnston would had played for Kapil.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Fuller Pilch said:
True though. Cairns was similar to Kapil in many ways but had a lot of injuries
Click to expand...
The Greatest thing about Kapil from a very practical standpoint was his availability really. In his 17 odd years career, for the majority of which he carried Indian bowling on his back without the talents of a Hadlee or Murali, he missed only a single Test compared to the 131 he played; and that too because he was dropped idiotically to send a "message". Gavaskar had a horribly big ego.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
capt_Luffy said:
*Johnston. Johnston was seamer and Johnson offie. Also, I am pretty confident Johnston and Davidson never played together. And, given their keeper was Tallon and the 50s Aussies didn't necessarily had the best batting, I don't think given their bowling difference, that Johnston would had played for Kapil.
Click to expand...
Oops - typo. My brain was telling me not to type the wrong J name, but I still did.

Johnston and Davidson played in the 1953 Ashes as did Benaud, so with Benaud's batting as well there is a very strong tail.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Fuller Pilch said:
Oops - typo. My brain was telling me not to type the wrong J name, but I still did.

Johnston and Davidson played in the 1953 Ashes as did Benaud, so with Benaud's batting as well there is a very strong tail.
Click to expand...
Ron Archer played a3 matches, Doug Ring 1 as did Jack Hill. Aussies went with 6 bowlers in every match, with 5 them being capable of holding bat to various degrees. Defo think there isn't a case for them to be better than Kapil in anything.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
He was, in fact better than Gillespie, that one.

Kapil over Walsh in WI, yes. You treating him as a bowler who can a bat a bit is again, disingenuous. Would you take Walsh ahead of Botham as well??

Just for the record, Ponting is ahead of Kapil, and I hardly think most people will rate Walsh higher. As a cricketer, I think a majority will in fact rate Flower higher. But hey, cheer up!!! This take of yours, in fact is neither close to Barry being top 10 nor Sobers being close to Bradman.
Click to expand...

I'm treating him as a bowler that wasn't "great", and at that point I don't care what else you do.

Again, no scenario where I'm taking him over Walsh, they aren't close as bowlers.

This idiocy that lower order, below world class or even test standard batting somehow makes up for huge bowling or batting gulfs is ridiculous.

Re Barry, in the 70's he was seen by the majority as being a better bat than Sunny, not counting the first half of the decade where he was seen as the best bat in the world, period.
He made the same Cricinfo 2nd team that Sunny did. There's a credible list of cricketers who believe he was the best batsman they ever saw. Hell, Lillee rates him alongside Viv and Garry as the best he bowled to, so yeah... But yeah, your opinion matters more.

And re Sir Garfield Sobers. The only test cricketer in the pantheon along with Sir Don, the only one who can be spoken of in the same breath, and when we start ranking cricketers we ask who after the Don and Garry. And even for persons here, easily the 2nd best cricketer ever. The one who retired cricket as the leading run scorer, 2nd highest west Indian wicket taker and 3rd leading catcher. The one of whom Miller said, Bradman was the best batsman, Sobers the best cricketer"

The one who's arguably the 2nd greatest batsman of all time, the most versatile bowler ever and was called the equal to Hammond and Simpson at slip... Isn't close?
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
I'm treating him as a bowler that wasn't "great", and at that point I don't care what else you do.

Again, no scenario where I'm taking him over Walsh, they aren't close as bowlers.

This idiocy that lower order, below world class or even test standard batting somehow makes up for huge bowling or batting gulfs is ridiculous.

Re Barry, in the 70's he was seen by the majority as being a better bat than Sunny, not counting the first half of the decade where he was seen as the best bat in the world, period.
He made the same Cricinfo 2nd team that Sunny did. There's a credible list of cricketers who believe he was the best batsman they ever saw. Hell, Lillee rates him alongside Viv and Garry as the best he bowled to, so yeah... But yeah, your opinion matters more.

And re Sir Garfield Sobers. The only test cricketer in the pantheon along with Sir Don, the only one who can be spoken of in the same breath, and when we start ranking cricketers we ask who after the Don and Garry. And even for persons here, easily the 2nd best cricketer ever. The one who retired cricket as the leading run scorer, 2nd highest west Indian wicket taker and 3rd leading catcher. The one of whom Miller said, Bradman was the best batsman, Sobers the best cricketer"

The one who's arguably the 2nd greatest batsman of all time, the most versatile bowler ever and was called the equal to Hammond and Simpson at slip... Isn't close?
Click to expand...
Just that treating him as pure bowler is kinda really wrong. If you can't get how much value and flexibility a solid 30 averaging bat who is an automatic choice as a bowler brings...... I genuinely think you are too much taken in, in hypothetical ATG scenarios.
And like, you spewing these defences of Barry and Garry haven't convinced a single person in the previous thousand times you have used them. Don't know why you thought something may change repeating the same shot once more. I will accept your Barry assessment once you start to rate Lillee higher than Marshall and your Garry assessment once you start to rate Stokes' higher than Hutton.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
Just that treating him as pure bowler is kinda really wrong. If you can't get how much value and flexibility a solid 30 averaging bat who is an automatic choice as a bowler brings...... I genuinely think you are too much taken in, in hypothetical ATG scenarios.
And like, you spewing these defences of Barry and Garry haven't convinced a single person in the previous thousand times you have used them. Don't know why you thought something may change repeating the same shot once more. I will accept your Barry assessment once you start to rate Lillee higher than Marshall and your Garry assessment once you start to rate Stokes' higher than Hutton.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with ATG scenarios. You believe that lower order runs makes up for everything, it doesn't. Walsh is a notably superior bowler, it's not remotely close. Why would I choose Kapil over him?

That's not how great teams are built.

Do you think India would swap Bumrah for Dev?
Actually, exactly that, would India swap Bumrah for Dev, it's 30 runs with the bat after all.

Re your takes on Garry, I didn't state anything that wasn't fact. And I'm not trying to convince you, your takes are horrible. He was and is an undisputed top 2 player of all time.

But unless you actually believe that Bradman was twice the batsman that all the others are, and would have averaged the same in the 80's or 90's or when the pitches changed in the 50's, and in which case, cheers to you. Then yes, they are close.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
This has nothing to do with ATG scenarios. You believe that lower order runs makes up for everything, it doesn't. Walsh is a notably superior bowler, it's not remotely close. Why would I choose Kapil over him?

That's not how great teams are built.

Do you think India would swap Bumrah for Dev?
Actually, exactly that, would India swap Bumrah for Dev, it's 30 runs with the bat after all.

Re your takes on Garry, I didn't state anything that wasn't fact. And I'm not trying to convince you, your takes are horrible. He was and is an undisputed top 2 player of all time.

But unless you actually believe that Bradman was twice the batsman that all the others are, and would have averaged the same in the 80's or 90's or when the pitches changed in the 50's, and in which case, cheers to you. Then yes, they are close.
Click to expand...
You mean the 50s WI which were quite batting friendly??? No one (atleast not I) ever said Sobers isn't no 2; but it takes wide leaps of logic to consider Garry Sobers and Don Bradman close but Kapil Dev and Ricky Ponting not. Egregious actually.

No, I won't take Kapil over Bumrah. The players I will trade with Bumrah: Don, Sobers, Marshall, Hadlee, Imran, Ambrose, Steyn, Akram. That's it. That's the list. So, as you can see probably, Walsh isn't really among the bowlers I would trade Bumrah for. Now, don't get confused here, Walsh is the greater player than Bumrah; as is Dev, due to longevity and such reasons. Now say, would you take Botham over Walsh? Didn't answer me before.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
You mean the 50s WI which were quite batting friendly??? No one (atleast not I) ever said Sobers isn't no 2; but it takes wide leaps of logic to consider Garry Sobers and Don Bradman close but Kapil Dev and Ricky Ponting not. Egregious actually.

No, I won't take Kapil over Bumrah. The players I will trade with Bumrah: Don, Sobers, Marshall, Hadlee, Imran, Ambrose, Steyn, Akram. That's it. That's the list. So, as you can see probably, Walsh isn't really among the bowlers I would trade Bumrah for. Now, don't get confused here, Walsh is the greater player than Bumrah; as is Dev, due to longevity and such reasons. Now say, would you take Botham over Walsh? Didn't answer me before.
Click to expand...
Re Botham, no.

Kapil, no.

And my point is, at some point bowling quality trump's what ever runs are being offered.

This bat deep nonsense has gone way too far.

And I wasn't comparing Walsh to Bumrah, I'm saying there's no way I'm replacing a Walsh quality bowler with a Kapil one, just to get batting.

Re Sobers, the difference is that I don't use his home record to say he's the best. That's what you are doing. You're saying being the best at home propels him. I have never used that argument for Sobers.

And no it doesn't.

Kapil is a very good bowler and a sub test standard bat. Ponting is an ATG batsman, not to add possibly the best fielder of his era and and AT slip. How is heavens name is that close?

The pantheon of cricket isn't and has never been singular. It's always two or 3 names depending on where one falls on the Grace debate.

It's Bradman and Sobers, period. For you to say now that one is leagues ahead of the other is egregious.
One is literally the best all round cricketer to have played the game.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
kyear2 said:
You think he was better than Gillespie?

And you're really saying that if I were in charge of that Aussie team if I would trade away Rickey Ponting for a chance to upgrade the no. 8 batting slot and their 4th bowler?

Not a chance in hell.

And for the record, not every problem, sorry, not any problem is solved by lower order batting.

Dude I wouldn't trade Walsh for Kapil.
Click to expand...
I'm suggesting that if forced to pick between the two, Kapil's team would have taken Kapil. I doubt you find this contentious?

Pontings team may have picked Kapil too. He's a notably better bowler than Lee. And a much better bat.
 
Pap Finn Keighl

Pap Finn Keighl

International Regular
kyear2 said:
Kapil is a very good bowler and a sub test standard bat. Ponting is an ATG batsman, not to add possibly the best fielder of his era and and AT slip. How is heavens name is that close?
Click to expand...
Its not close.

Kapil easily better.

Ponting is a 50 avg quality batsman + ATG fielder

Kapil is very good bowler equivalent of 45 avg batsman + an actual 30+ avg batsman + ATG fielder.


Btw
Wisden 5 cricketers of century votes
Botham 9
Kapil 5
Walsh 0

There goes your reputation theory.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Bolo. said:
I'm suggesting that if forced to pick between the two, Kapil's team would have taken Kapil. I doubt you find this contentious?

Pontings team may have picked Kapil too. He's a notably better bowler than Lee. And a much better bat.
Click to expand...
The argument was to pick Kapil at the expense of Ponting, and that's what would be a non starter.

Also not sure which you meant, but if we're talking Kapil vs Walsh, I would go Walsh. Yeah you lose out on the batting, but one was a legitimate great of the game as bowler, I don't believe Kapil was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top