Ponting better than Sachin : Ian Chappell

[aussie]

excuses... excuses.... it is still mcgrath/warne/gillespie/kasper right? it is not zaheer, agarkar, kumble and nehra FFS !!

being in or out of form is part and parcel of the game. if one were to rate a bowling unit only when all four bowlers are in prime form, then you wont have too many bowling attacks that would be called great.

This is madness. I really now have to question how much live cricket you have seen from AUS, especially that series.

It was quite evident in the 2005 Ashes AUS attack was basically a one man attack after the 1st test.

It was clear as day that Gillespie had declined considerably from the 90 mph bowler to a bowler bowling 80pmh with no zip. He wasn't even the same bowler that had destroyed IND 6 months earlier in 2004.

It was clear Kasprowicz had declined from the bowler who was in the form of his life in 2004.

It was clear Lee although he bowled excellently on ocassions. Was basically not a consistent test bowler & was probably just as frustrating as Nehra & Agarkar.

It was clear that young Tait was not test quality when he played.

All those factors made that bowling attack weak. Thus descediting your argument that AUS had its typical STRONG attack in that series. That is not my opinion that is a fact, so i dont what you where watching - if you did watch any part of the 2005 Ashes.

anyway, it is ok if you dont think ponting has failed his team. just dont blame everyone else to protect him (and your argument)

I dont need anyone to protect my argument. Any other person who knows AUS cricket will know clearly to equate AUS losing in IND 98 & 01, blaming the 4th test 04 lost - along with the last two Ashes series defeats with Ponting's batting, knows that is not cricket sense.

If you think so sir, unfortunately you will find that you will be in small minority

 

[aussie]

was caught at slip.. The ball went of the outside edge and hit DK's thigh and bounced up nicely for one of the slips to gobble it up, I think.. Or maybe that was Martyn. But Murali Kartik got both of them in an over...


EDIT: Now that I think about it, I think MK made Ponting look even more of a bunny than Harbhajan ever did. Distincly remember Ponting give at least 3 to 4 chances everytime he faced him, in the ODIs in 2003, in the Sydney test and then in 2004 too... Punter always had a funny thing when facing Murali Kartik... I did see the 2001 series and Bhaji always got him out real soon, so it was more like instant death. Against MK though, it was like torture... Watching him struggle so much against a guy who was never good enough to be in India's best XI, or at least considered to be so by the selectors..

Dear god. Well all i can say to this sir based on my memory of the 04 SCG Test & TVS Cup ODI series is i saw none of this.

Plus in the Mumbai test the entire AUS batting line-up had problems with Kartik given the pitch was so helpul to the spinners - it wasn't Ponting alone.

Kartik may not have been good enough to make INDs first XI for obvious fact that Kumble/Bhaji where the main cats at the helm. But he was a very good bowler. Up until Mishra arrived recently no other IND spinner other than the big two (Kumble/Bhaji) that i've seen from Sarandeep Singh, Chawla, Ojha, Kapoor, Bahutule, Joshi where better than Kartik.

 

[Richard]

Their clearly is a way to prove it once you watched HIM BAT vs SA 05/06 & IND 07/08. Hayden's biggest technical faults of being - vulnerable to full swining deliveries - and full outside off-stump bowling, where not exposed enough between IND 01 to NZ 05 because of amount of flat decks are average bowling attacks he faced.

If no improvements where made to his technique after the first 4 Ashes test he couldn't have saved his career with that Oval hundred nor scored runs vs SA 05/06 & IND 07/08. The first signs of helpul conditions for the bowlers (which they where many in these 3 series) he would have failed.

Not neccessarily. Every now and then someone may play an innings which outstrips anything they ever achieve elsewhere, and Hayden did that at The Oval 2005. And as I say, I don't consider there was much if anything in the way of seam-friendly conditions in the home or away series' against South Africa in 2005/06, and no, there is no way for you to prove there was.

No new faults that i saw. Hayden vs NZ & SA 08/09 just uncharacteristically went into his shell after the crazy media pressure was pushign him to be axed, after AUS lost in India. Hayden never looked technically exposed or as you claim - nor had new faults had crept in.

I never said he looked technically exposed - he just kept getting out to nothing-much deliveries, which is something he made a habit all career of not doing very often. It's why he was so good at bashing average-to-poor bowling. Most others would be nowhere near so effective when faced with the same bowling.

 

[bagapath]

It was quite evident in the 2005 Ashes AUS attack was basically a one man attack after the 1st test.

i know. but u probably didnt get my point. i am saying no bowling unit is going to be fully functional all the time. someone is going to be out of form or injured or will simply have a bad day on field. that is part and parcel of the game. if a team goes in with the bowling attack aus had in 2005 and still lost the series, give credit to the england batsmen for handling them. an out of form gillespie would have come back to form if he had got wickets early in any of his spells. english batters made sure that didnt happen.

I dont need anyone to protect my argument. Any other person who knows AUS cricket will know clearly to equate AUS losing in IND 98 & 01, blaming the 4th test 04 lost - along with the last two Ashes series defeats with Ponting's batting, knows that is not cricket sense.

knowing "AUS cricket"? if you are going to accuse me of not knowing australian cricket and lacking in "cricket sense" i may have to accuse you of being tunnel visioned in knowing only australian cricket and nothing else. lets not go in there mate.

in 01 series for example, had ponting scored 20 odd runs in the third test or batted for half an hour more australia could have won the series 2-0. everyone else chipped in with the bat except ricky, why cant you accept this?

 

[honestbharani]

Dear god. Well all i can say to this sir based on my memory of the 04 SCG Test & TVS Cup ODI series is i saw none of this.

Plus in the Mumbai test the entire AUS batting line-up had problems with Kartik given the pitch was so helpul to the spinners - it wasn't Ponting alone.

Kartik may not have been good enough to make INDs first XI for obvious fact that Kumble/Bhaji where the main cats at the helm. But he was a very good bowler. Up until Mishra arrived recently no other IND spinner other than the big two (Kumble/Bhaji) that i've seen from Sarandeep Singh, Chawla, Ojha, Kapoor, Bahutule, Joshi where better than Kartik.

I distinctly remember Patel costing MK Punter's wicket at least 6 to 8 times during the SCG test and the TVS Cup before that........

 

[aussie]

i know. but u probably didnt get my point. i am saying no bowling unit is going to be fully functional all the time. someone is going to be out of form or injured or will simply have a bad day on field. that is part and parcel of the game. if a team goes in with the bowling attack aus had in 2005 and still lost the series, give credit to the england batsmen for handling them. an out of form gillespie would have come back to form if he had got wickets early in any of his spells. english batters made sure that didnt happen.

Nope that wasn't the case.

Gillespie just was out of form - he hit rock bottom. As soon as he landed in ENG for the ODI series before hand he was looking poor - AUS backed after his struggles to come good in the test & it never happened. Same thing applies to Kasprowicz.

So as it said before AUS did not have its typical strong attack for the 05 Ashes. It was basically Warne alone.

knowing "AUS cricket"? if you are going to accuse me of not knowing australian cricket and lacking in "cricket sense" i may have to accuse you of being tunnel visioned in knowing only australian cricket and nothing else. lets not go in there mate.

Well technically you can't even if you could since we have not debate on cricket matters, not relating to Australian cricket.

in 01 series for example, had ponting scored 20 odd runs in the third test or batted for half an hour more australia could have won the series 2-0. everyone else chipped in with the bat except ricky, why cant you accept this?

No need to go into useless hypoteticals.

Fact is IND dominated that 3rd test after the 1st day - given that they again exposed the ENTIRE AUS batting weakness againts spin - not Ponting alone (who was the worst). Aus fought very hard to make things difficult for IND chasing 155, because that what AUS do - but they where always coming from behind.

So again no sensible logic in solely equating Ponting's form with that series defeat or 98 or the only test lost in 2004.

 

[Ikki]

Bagapath, you did watch the Ashes in 05, I hope. Gillespie's career pretty much ended there, fast.

 

[bagapath]

Fact is IND dominated that 3rd test after the 1st day - given that they again exposed the ENTIRE AUS batting weakness againts spin - not Ponting alone (who was the worst). Aus fought very hard to make things difficult for IND chasing 155, because that what AUS do - but they where always coming from behind.

india would have folded chasing a 200 + score. ponting should have come up with the additional 40+ runs. why? because everyone else was chipping in and law of averages was bound to catch up with them at some point. ponting was the only one consistent. consistently crap.

 

[Ikki]

Gilchrist scored even less runs in that match.

 

[bagapath]

Gilchrist scored even less runs in that match.

he had scored a match winning hundred in india already.

 

[Ikki]

he had scored a match winning hundred in india already.

And? How did that affect the match in question?

 

[aussie]

And? How did that affect the match in question?

Exactly. Bagapath you trying to hard to find something out of nothing..

 

[bagapath]

Exactly. Bagapath you trying to hard to find something out of nothing..

i have already said everyone else had chipped in at some point and they were bound to fail at some other point. gilly had done his bit already. and australia won the first test. gilly was the man of the match. dont expect the same player to win every game for you. ricky was the one who never contributed anything to his team in the series. law of averages never caught up with him. he always failed. had he done resonably well in the second or third tests the series would have gone the other way.

 

[bagapath]

ikki and aussie. please note that my ponting bashing is not based on any nationalistic jingoism. not that either of you have accused me of that but just wanted to clarify just in case u were wondering deep down.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2061230-post18.html

and i do believe your opinions are clouded by the love you have for your national cricket team coz i never hear either of you say anything negative, even when necessary, about australian cricketers like i have said about sachin

 

[aussie]

i have already said everyone else had chipped in at some point and they were bound to fail at some other point. gilly had done his bit already. and australia won the first test. gilly was the man of the match. dont expect the same player to win every game for you. ricky was the one who never contributed anything to his team in the series. law of averages never caught up with him. he always failed. had he done resonably well in the second or third tests the series would have gone the other way.

By saying this your are basically discrediting India's greatest ever test performance in Kolkatta & ignoring that FACT - that although Ponting was by far the worst batsman on tour - the entire batting line-up was exposed technically by the spinners - except for Hayden.

Ponting possibly scoring extra runs in Kolkatta wouldn't have changed the course of the match - it was one of the great test match fightbacks.

In the 3rd test yes it is very possible if Ponting scored a little 30-40 & AUS had gotten a score a lead of 200, IND could have folded. But thats just cherry picking - you basically discrediting how well IND played & how much they where dominant in that test.

Look at the catch Khan took to dismiss Hayden on the boundary when he & Slater where off to a blazing start. You could argue that Hayden after hitting a 6 the ball before was a bit too ambitons going for that shot knowing that his team needed a BIG seconding innings batting performance from him - given that he was the MAIN man in form.

You could argue also that Warne if he didn't get himself verbally worked up with Harbhajan on the last over of the day - he wouldn't have played the dumb leave to get out off the last ball of the day. Thus If he & S Waugh had come out on the 5th day to bat, AUS could have scored an extra 30 runs or so. So generally that argument stinks..

But going way back to beginning of this little argument. As i said then Ponting the great batsman he is today - his legacy did not begin until 4th test of the 2001 Ashes. As a great batsman Ponting had vanquished his demons of IND 01 & 98 long before he did it statistically in 2008. This is why when looking at Ponting "the great batsman" it is useless to blame losing in IND 01 & 98 on him, since back then he had not fullfilled his full potential.

 

[bagapath]

australia needed half an hour more to save the second test. and may be 30/40 runs more to win the third. it is india's greatest series win alright. but it still was bloody close. what is wrong in blaming the one guy who did nothing of use in that series?


btw, ricky did not slay the indian demons in 08 either. scored a hundred in a drawn game (proves once again how a good performance from him matters so much for australia) and then flopped as usual resulting in a 0-2 series loss

 

[aussie]

australia needed half an hour more to save the second test. and may be 30/40 runs more to win the third. it is india's greatest series win alright. but it still was bloody close. what is wrong in blaming the one guy who did nothing of use in that series?

Sure you can blame him. But trying to make a a connection with Ponting's form & losing in IND 01 is totally incorrect for reasons i have already stated

btw, ricky did not slay the indian demons in 08 either. scored a hundred in a drawn game (proves once again how a good performance from him matters so much for australia) and then flopped as usual resulting in a 0-2 series loss

Dear God. What did you want Ponting to score 4 hundreds in 4 test to be satisfied he could play spin???? geez. Before that series all the talk for years was "Ponting never scored a hundred in IND so unless he does that he will never be a great" blah blah blah.

Now he scored runs & look competent againts the spin in that series (not great since my position on Ponting is that he good againts spin at his best - he is no Lara againts spin), you want to to take the bar higher. Give me a break.

Plus AUS lost last year for the simple reason that they didn't have a proper bowling attack. AUS where never expected to win that series.

 

[bagapath]

Dear God.

please stop this name calling!!!

Give me a break.

i will. if ponting saves or wins a test in india with a decent contribution from his bat. dont want something to match his scorching double hundred in melbourne. even something similar to sachin's 71 in perth would do.

 

[aussie]

please stop this name calling!!!



i will. if ponting saves or wins a test in india with a decent contribution from his bat. dont want something to match his scorching double hundred in melbourne. even something similar to sachin's 71 in perth would do.

Where where you when he scored that Bangalore Hundred & throughout the 2008 series?. What about his batting in that series still gives you doubts about his ability to play spin?

 

[aussie]

Not neccessarily. Every now and then someone may play an innings which outstrips anything they ever achieve elsewhere, and Hayden did that at The Oval 2005. And as I say,.

Yes it was the best innings of his career in testing conditions at the time. If it was a fluke as i said before he couldn't have scored runs in the testing conditions that WHERE present vs SA 05/06 & IND 07/08. You can dodge this fact unless you give your detailed recollection of those 6 test vs SA & IND 07/08.

I don't consider there was much if anything in the way of seam-friendly conditions in the home or away series' against South Africa in 2005/06, and no, there is no way for you to prove there was..

As i said, I have go through my recollection of every test of that series. You do the same now...

I never said he looked technically exposed - he just kept getting out to nothing-much deliveries, which is something he made a habit all career of not doing very often..

Good, the fact that he kept getting out to "nothing deliveries" pretty much proves he was not out of form in any way. Just as i said the media pressure going into that series affected him.

Secondly i dont know anything about Hayden in his career having a "habit" of getting out of nothing deliveries. You making up stuff now or what...

It's why he was so good at bashing average-to-poor bowling. Most others would be nowhere near so effective when faced with the same bowling.

He was good a smashing poor attacks between IND 01 to NZ 05 because none of the pace attacks (except for Akhtar & Mills 04/05) where able to test him technically. Not that wildness you stated.