are you saying chappell is not worthy of comparison with either of these players? don't agree at all, he would feature in most serious discussions for best after bradman...and would definitely belong in the 2nd tier of batsman below bradman....
i will give it a try:
No one says he isn't a great bloke mate. But if the pressure of 1 billon people on his shoulders hasn't been a factor in affecting his game, why didn't he handle the captaincy very well?
Obviously.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
It's really hard to tell...it would be a matter of exactly how dodgy 19th century wickets were.
Yes.
Contentious, IMO. No doubt that Lara exceeds Ponting at his best, but usually Ponting exceeds Lara.
In the 1990's, yes, by quite a long way. In the 2000's, injury has limited him, allowing Ponting to be more prolific. Still, I'll give you this one, given the conditions of the 2000's versus the 1990's.
Contentious when it comes to Test matches, if not ODI matches.
Yes.
Yes. He was dubbed 'the black Bradman'.
Contentious. Waugh>>>Ponting in the 1990's, Ponting>>Waugh in the 2000's, as Waugh seemed to lose his ability to score against any attack better than mediocre post-2001. Ponting>>Waugh as an ODI batsman, IMO.
Border>Waugh? Yes. Border>Ponting? Maybe, given the conditions in which Border was made to score runs.
Yes, I can just about give you this one.
Much as I am loathe to admit it, probably, given his scoring against the West Indies. His failure to feast on England (particularly during the 1980's) is a sore point, though. Ponting>>Gavaskar in ODI's, IMO.
His 337 is noteworthy, but his average seems a tad low for consideration. I shouldn't judge a player solely on averages, but his career finished before I was born, so what choice do I have?
Maybe in the ODI's, but examination of his Test record (abject failure against the West Indians, for one thing) makes me a little skeptical. Ponting has a >45 Test average against all nations, I believe.
Yes. EDIT: May have played too few Tests, now that I think about it.
Played too few Tests.
A touch higher, given those that you listed.all i can think of right now so maybe he sneaks in as the 20th...
Why didn't Ian Botham and Andrew Flintoff handle captaincy well? It is indeed possible to a great batsman and be found wanting tactically (Steve Waugh, for one, criticised some of his decisions during India's wretched 1999-2000 tour of Australia).
Certainly, but I'm saying that the "1 billion people" argument may not even be something he thinks about (which I suppose would say something about the simpplicity of his approach to his work, and good on him).
Even Bradman got out occasionally, which is directly correlating with what the above comparison actually says... which is nothing. I don't see your point Jono.
Hey dude have you heard of some1 called Jack Hobbs?...I heard he used to held a bat once upon a time in test cricket...
Very good point. Pollock played 23 Tests, BTW. At that time, Adams' average was near-identical to his (and would rise during his 24th Test, before falling away badly thereafter).Certainly, but I'm saying that the "1 billion people" argument may not even be something he thinks about (which I suppose would say something about the simpplicity of his approach to his work, and good on him).
He averaged a hardly disastrous 50 odd as captain in any event, just that his average when not skipper is stratospheric.
Edit: on the list of batsmen ahead of Ponting on the previous page, I'd have to place him on a par at least with Waugh, maybe Border but not Chappell (yet). It's a bias of mine, but runs in the top 3 and (to a lesser extent) at 4 earn b onus points vs runs at 5, 6 or 7. Similarly, Pollock was a great player, but I'd still argue he played too few tests to compare his record with some of the other guys who've played 70, 80, 100 tests or more and average only 5 or so runs per innings less. I mean, if Jimmy Adams test career had have been curtailed after 18-20 tests, he'd have had an average of 70 odd.
LOL, are you trying to suggest Shoaib Akhtar, Wasim Akram and Saqlain Mushtaq were not a formidable force? And yes, whilst Ponting didn't get to face Waqar and Wasim as much as (which is only one less than Tendulkar), Tendulkar averaged 9 against the same "easybeats" Ponting scored runs off.
Your quote (perhaps inadvertantly) shows how cricket has changed. If someone in the 70s or 80s, even 90s, averaged 46 for 8 years, they'd be considered in the very, very, very good class.
Whilst Dravid was a very good batsman back in 1999, you could say he didn't achieve greatness until that period in 2002 - 2004. Dravid's batting reached another level in those years and he was just in the best form of his life during those years.
Ask the likes of Noel David and MSK Prasad.
Granted, but he was still pretty good, so to say STW had no support is not correct
Maybe Tendulkar should wear insoles and swagger around in a blue India cap chewing gum, while averaging 36 now on
