Tests: Chappell vs. Ponting

[Maximus0723]

Which includes one summer where he made 7 ducks pretty much in a row, in all forms of the game at international level. Was in horrible form that summer.

I recall being at the SCG when he came out to bat and Colin Croft getting him first ball caught behind to an unbelievable ball that came in before seaming massively away.

Form is part of the game. It defines how great a batsman is. If he was in bad stretch and couldn't get out then that devalues Chappell's greatness in my eyes.

 

[social]

I'm by no means trying to put Chappell down in anyway, shape or form. I'm just stating the facts, that he shouldn't be rated ahead of Ponting merely on the basis that he succeeded against the great Windies attack (which if you look closer, he didn't do much better then any other batsman from that era against the stronger Windies sides).

Given that the only real difference to the bowling standards that Chappell had to face compared to Ponting is the great Windies attack (which Chappell only faced at the latter end of his career); Ponting has a higher overall batting average, averages 47+ against all Test playing nations and will most likely end his career with double the amount of Tests then Chappell with a higher overall average. That should be enough to give Punter the slight edge.

Tbf, Chappell had one bad series against WI in 81/82 which was the year before his retirement

Other than that, he averaged 45 (probably the equivalent of 75 against lesser attacks) in 79/80

People also forget that he knocked up the small matter of 1400 runs at nearly 57 in WSC (which virtually everybody recognises as amongst the highest standard cricket ever played)
including nearly 600 @ 85 in the WI against every one of their greats

 

[social]

Lol, awesome way to draw a bow to have a shot at the indian cricket team.

Chappell couldn't handle the cultural and political differences in India. John Wright and Kirsten could. Doesn't make Chappell any less a batsman.

I apologise as it was poorly expressed

I simply could not believe that many members of the Indian team had apparently decided that Chappell had nothing worth listening to almost before he arrived

As for Chappell not being able to handle the cultural and political differences in India, I think it was more a case of:

a. he lost a power struggle with Ganguly; and

b. the media had to blame somebody for the 2007 WC disaster

 

[JBH001]

In that series, Holding was making his debut and Robert had played less then 10 tests.

Dont know about Holding's early career, but Roberts, from recollection, was better in the first half of his career than in his second. One of the fastest to 100 wickets IIRC, something like 19 tests.

 

[JBH001]

I'm by no means trying to put Chappell down in anyway, shape or form. I'm just stating the facts, that he shouldn't be rated ahead of Ponting merely on the basis that he succeeded against the great Windies attack (which if you look closer, he didn't do much better then any other batsman from that era against the stronger Windies sides).

Given that the only real difference to the bowling standards that Chappell had to face compared to Ponting is the great Windies attack (which Chappell only faced at the latter end of his career); Ponting has a higher overall batting average, averages 47+ against all Test playing nations and will most likely end his career with double the amount of Tests then Chappell with a higher overall average. That should be enough to give Punter the slight edge.

I see. Good points, and fair enough. Although, its difficult for you, or I, to judge seeing as neither of us saw him bat. I'd like, if possible, those of CW who did to weigh in with their thoughts and judgements. I see Burgey already has; a few more comments would not go amiss.

 

[pasag]

Mike Brearley wrote a fantastic short piece on Chappell's "hip shot" republished in The Joy of Cricket, not sure if it's on the net.

 

[gwo]

Not really.

I don't intentionally mean to shoot Ponting down, but he's scored the majority of his runs in an era that has been easy for batting against weak attacks. Chappell scored hard runs against great attacks - see the WSC SuperSeries vs West Indies.

I take your point, but can you really say, if he sustained this form (below) for the rest of his career, he wouldn't have been on track to become second best Australian of all time? Clearly it hasn't happened but those numbers are like WOW.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

 

[Jono]

I apologise as it was poorly expressed

I simply could not believe that many members of the Indian team had apparently decided that Chappell had nothing worth listening to almost before he arrived

As for Chappell not being able to handle the cultural and political differences in India, I think it was more a case of:

a. he lost a power struggle with Ganguly; and

b. the media had to blame somebody for the 2007 WC disaster

Definitely agree regarding Ganguly, but Chappell was struggling before the World Cup started to be fair.

I thought he would have been a great coach as well.

Didn't help Australia when they toured India either tbf

 

[social]

Definitely agree regarding Ganguly, but Chappell was struggling before the World Cup started to be fair.

I thought he would have been a great coach as well.

Didn't help Australia when they toured India either tbf

I think the general opinion is that he is NOT a great coach (however, someone like Top Cat is probably more qualified to speak on this due to his links with South Australia)

Apparently, he is a hard disciplinarian and certain Indian players decided that this was not for them right from the outset

If it was me and I had someone of his stature trying to help, I'd have shown a bit more respect and at least tried some of the ideas before making a decision

 

[Sir Alex]

Social, Chappell tried to impose his wishes on the senior core of players like Tendulkar, Ganguly, etc. He made Tendulkar bat at No.4 when Tendulkar clearly wasn't happy. Also, he literally screwed up Irfan Pathan by "trying to convert" him to a allrounder by pushing him up. The leaked mails, the public spats, and above all the "middle finger" that he gave publicly to the media were all nails in his coffin. Chappell for all the player he was and all, was never a good coach or a man manager. And just because you are the coach doesn't mean you can impose your will on players like Tendulkar who have more experience, knowledge and skill than yourself.

 

[social]

Social, Chappell tried to impose his wishes on the senior core of players like Tendulkar, Ganguly, etc. He made Tendulkar bat at No.4 when Tendulkar clearly wasn't happy. Also, he literally screwed up Irfan Pathan by "trying to convert" him to a allrounder by pushing him up. The leaked mails, the public spats, and above all the "middle finger" that he gave publicly to the media were all nails in his coffin. Chappell for all the player he was and all, was never a good coach or a man manager. And just because you are the coach doesn't mean you can impose your will on players like Tendulkar who have more experience, knowledge and skill than yourself.

I think you forget that:

a. Tendy wasnt exactly scoring bucket loads of runs at the time;

b. Ganguly should've been dropped due to bad form;

c. India were in desperate need of an all-rounder; and

d. India are STILL a relatively unfit and poor fielding team

Chappell obviously misjudged the power that he would have (and whatever he did was quickly eroded by Ganguly etc) but if a coach is simply going to be ignored, why hire him in the first place?

 

[Sir Alex]

I think you forget that:

a. Tendy wasnt exactly scoring bucket loads of runs at the time;

b. Ganguly should've been dropped due to bad form;

c. India were in desperate need of an all-rounder; and

d. India are STILL a relatively unfit and poor fielding team

Chappell obviously misjudged the power that he would have (and whatever he did was quickly eroded by Ganguly etc) but if a coach is simply going to be ignored, why hire him in the first place?

Oh I am not saying Chappell had a hidden agenda to alleviate India of it's best players and bring about his doom. There is no doubt he felt what he was doing was in the best interests of the team. But the measures that he took were not the right ones in retrospect.

1. Tendulkar not making bucketloads of runs is NOT a factor in this, because every one goes through bad patches of form, he was injured and above all his form was not that pathetic in ODIs to warrant him being dropped to the middle order.

2. I agree with Ganguly's drop.

3. India always have been in dire need of an allrounder since Kapil Dev but the fact is it doesn't look likely to happen anytime soon. Sometimes you just need to accept ground facts and try to work around them rather than insisting that peolpe should come your way. Pathan was a young kid then and just getting into perfect his main skill that is bowling but got his mind all cluttered and unfocussed as he was made to develop his batting also which took a toll on his main skill.

The need for an allrounder is a bit overrated imho as India is now No.1 in test cricket without having the services of one in the last few years.

4. As I said before, such changes are fundamentally built into the system. Unless grass root approach to fielding does not change, it is impossible to bring about a revolutionary change in the approach to fielding just by pumping in the team with young blood. Whatever positives accruing due to the increased reflexes are rendered meaningless by the huge gap in skill and experience. That is exactly where Chappell failed, he tried to plug fundamental gaps with short term measures which did not hold good.

A parallel would be Australia's search for a world class leg spinner since Warne. Australia does not have a natural climate to produce leggies but their insistence of getting in anyone who could give it a rotation resulted in some utterly dreary selections like McGain.

Also to say he was "ignored" is a bit of disservice to the Indian players and management. Tendulkar indeed batted at No.4, Ganguly was dropped, and Pathan was pushed upto No.3. The reuslts were there to see.

 

[Cevno]

Chappell played only 17 tests away from England and Australia.And in the 15 tests he played in England he averaged 40.

 

[Burgey]

Form is part of the game. It defines how great a batsman is. If he was in bad stretch and couldn't get out then that devalues Chappell's greatness in my eyes.

That run of poor form lasted about 6-8 weeks ftr. Form is like injury I suppose, part of the game and how one deals with it, be it in the early 80s, or indeed in the early part of the 2000s or in the 2010s would be a factor in assessing one's record, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Richard]

Chappell's greatest test series was arguably against the West Indian attack of 1975/76.

Just how good was that attack, is the question?

Roberts was a fine bowler who was never dominated all series until his last appearance; Holding in his debut series and Gibbs in his last weren't at that point in their careers much of a force; Holder as a replacement player did not bowl well at all that series; but Boyce and Julien were decent backup merchants.

Make no mistake, that attack was miles behind the one of '79/80 and '81/82, but it certainly wasn't a shabby one.

 

[Ikki]

This is a very hard one. Chappell is not only arguably #2 Aussie batsman if all time, but of the whole world too. It's a credit to Ponting that it's still so close and he isn't done. I vote
Chappell now but would love to see Ponting finish his career well.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Ponting.

 

[Sir Alex]

Ponting.

 

[Ikki]

For those who watched Chappeli: how was he against spin? How do you think he'd have done against Warne/Murali calibre spinner?

 

[social]

For those who watched Chappeli: how was he against spin? How do you think he'd have done against Warne/Murali calibre spinner?

I think that you could assume he'd do well as he was a fantastic player (think a more aggressive version of Kallis) who dominated virtually everyone that he came across

Technically correct with great footwork and very aggressive against spin (most top players didnt rate spin and saw it as easy runs when compared to facing the quicks of the time)

That being said, Murali in particular was/is different to any other bowler from the past so ....

Basically, it's like asking how any player of a bygone era would've performed against them