RSC poll: TEST Batsman of the decade??
R Bharat Rao
Discussion related to Tests only. Pringle in http://tinyurl.com/ygw5gt7
picks Sehwag, as has been discussed in other threads, primarily for
the way in which he scored his runs.
Sehwag's # for the decade (his entire career) are
Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50
0
Sehwag 72 123 4 6248 319 309 293 52.50 17 19 10
These numbers are superb, but IMO the following also deserve
consideration for the award (all #s from 01/01/2000 to today -- so the
2 ongoing Tests won't be included).
Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0
Ponting 106 182 22 9389 257 242 207 58.68 32 39 8
Kallis 100 172 27 8552 189* 186 177 58.97 27 41 7
Yousuf 70 119 11 6356 223 204* 203 58.85 23 22 7
Tendulkar 89 150 16 7129 248* 241* 201* 53.20 21 31 7
Lara 66 120 2 6380 400* 226 221 54.06 21 19 13
(last Test Dec 2006)
Dravid 103 179 23 8558 270 233 222 54.85 22 42 7
Ul-Haq 62 103 11 5113 329 184 142 55.57 17 23 7 (last
Test Oct 2007)
Chanders 86 148 25 6435 203* 153* 147* 52.31 19 35 9
Apologies if I forgot anyone.. Please post your votes, for the top 3
batsmen of the decade (ordered list) in a follow-up to this post,
along with any reasoning -- again Tests and batting only for THIS
decade only.
If anyonne has strike rates for these worthies please add them --
thanks!
Bharat
Howzzat
> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
Notable omissions are Jayawardene, Sangakarra, Hayden, Smith, maybe
Pietersen
For me, in order:
1. Ponting
2. Kallis
3. Lara
Kallis is easily the cricketer of the decade (and arguably of all
time), but for batting alone, no one has been as majestic and prolific
as Ponting in this decade. Lara's purple patch from 2003-2006 was mind-
boggling, and gets my vote even though he played for only 6 years of
the decade. Yousuf, Jaya and Sanga have all put up incredible numbers
too, but I still don't consider them in the same class as the top 3 in
all conditions. Dravid misses out because of his horrible form from
2006-2008, and the fact that his "crawls" in Australia (2007/08) and
the Oval test of 2007 was really really painful - IMO coming to the
verge of erasing his status as a great of the game. Tendulkar, as much
as it pains me to admit it, has been relatively pedestrian (both in
style and productivity) since 2003 - injuries etc. I know, but still.
Honorable mentions to Sehwag, Smith, Inzi and Chanders - some purple
patches, but nothing earth shattering.
Howzzat
Didn't mean to put Sehwag in the last sentence - he would probably be
my #4 of the decade, consistent with Pringle's reasoning. He was,
along with Gilly, probably the biggest game changer of the decade. If
only he was a bit more consistent (got dropped in 2007 !!!) and had
done better in the second innings...
And Gilly probably deserves a mention too. His average did come down
in his last couple of years, but he clearly re-defined the role of
keeper-batsman.
R Bharat Rao
> Sehwag 72 123 4 6248 319 309 293 52.50 17 19 10
> Kallis 100 172 27 8552 189* 186 177 58.97 27 41 7
> Yousuf 70 119 11 6356 223 204* 203 58.85 23 22 7
> Tendulkar 89 150 16 7129 248* 241* 201* 53.20 21 31 7
> Lara 66 120 2 6380 400* 226 221 54.06 21 19 13 (last Test Dec 2006)
> Dravid 103 179 23 8558 270 233 222 54.85 22 42 7
> Ul-Haq 62 103 11 5113 329 184 142 55.57 17 23 7 (last Test Oct 2007)
> Chanders 86 148 25 6435 203* 153* 147* 52.31 19 35 9
Adding some omissions as per Howzzat's posts
Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0
Sanga 88 147 10 7549 287 270 232 55.10 21 32 4
Jayawardene 95 160 12 8187 374 275 240 55.31 25 30 10
Hayden 96 172 14 8364 380 203 197 52.93 29 29 10 (last
Test Jan 2009)
Smith 78 137 9 6354 277 259 232 49.64 18 25 10
(starting Feb 2002)
Pietersen 55 99 4 4768 226 158 158 50.18 16 16 4
(starting July 2005)
Bharat
jzfredricks
Kallis
No batsman on that list averaged more, and only Ponting and Dravid
SCORED more (and Dravid only 6 more runs).
Add in his bowling, and he's my #1
Will S
"R Bharat Rao" <rao.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d1461c2e-5fa9-4431...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
No real standout.
R Bharat Rao
Sanga with his keeping also deserves consideration if you are looking
at all=around skills. Certainly one could argue that Sanga's keeping
is more valuable that Kallis' bowling by a fair bit...
Bharat
Will S
"R Bharat Rao" <rao.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1239c013-64bb-4bec...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
well throw in Gilly as well and his devastating strike rate
Bob Dubery
> Apologies if I forgot anyone.. Please post your votes, for the top 3
> batsmen of the decade (ordered list) in a follow-up to this post,
> along with any reasoning -- again Tests and batting only for THIS
> decade only.
For me it's Ponting. Kallis has never really take an attack on, and
still lacks the big scores. He's Mr Consistent. Ponting, with a
weakening Australian team that has placed more weight on his own
performanches, has been the stand out player of the decade.
2) Kallis
3) Yousuf
tendulkar.com
I don't care who you pick, but if you use garbage reasons for your
pick, I have to point them out.
Australia got weakened after the 2006-07 Ashes.
Ponting's performance since then
filtered 2007-2009 30 2182 158 42.78 5
i.e an average of 43. Considering the class of batsmen around him,
that's just pedestrian.
Ponting is a fine batsman, but not for the reasons that you mentioned
>
> 2) Kallis
> 3) Yousuf
Mango
"R Bharat Rao" <rao.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d1461c2e-5fa9-4431...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
> Discussion related to Tests only. Pringle in http://tinyurl.com/ygw5gt7
> picks Sehwag, as has been discussed in other threads, primarily for
> the way in which he scored his runs.
>
> Sehwag's # for the decade (his entire career) are
>
> Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50
> 0
> Sehwag 72 123 4 6248 319 309 293 52.50 17 19 10
>
> These numbers are superb, but IMO the following also deserve
> consideration for the award (all #s from 01/01/2000 to today -- so the
> 2 ongoing Tests won't be included).
>
> Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0
> Ponting 106 182 22 9389 257 242 207 58.68 32 39 8
> Kallis 100 172 27 8552 189* 186 177 58.97 27 41 7
> Yousuf 70 119 11 6356 223 204* 203 58.85 23 22 7
> Tendulkar 89 150 16 7129 248* 241* 201* 53.20 21 31 7
> Lara 66 120 2 6380 400* 226 221 54.06 21 19 13
> (last Test Dec 2006)
> Dravid 103 179 23 8558 270 233 222 54.85 22 42 7
> Ul-Haq 62 103 11 5113 329 184 142 55.57 17 23 7 (last
> Test Oct 2007)
> Chanders 86 148 25 6435 203* 153* 147* 52.31 19 35 9
>
1. Lara. Great bat who was capable of winning or saving a game on his own.
If you got him cheaply it was as good as getting the other 5 in the top
order. Probably a good candidate for batsman of the 90's as well.
2. Tendulkar. Another great batsman who could play all types of bowling on
all types of pitches. A wicket to celebrate, but if you didn't get him
cheap he provided great entertainment for the crowd.
3. Ponting. Capable of big scores in quick time that gave the bowlers time
to take wickets.
Matt Hayden is another to consider in the above long list. A great opener
who could take the game away from the opposition in the first couple of
sessions.
Mohan
> Apologies if I forgot anyone.. Please post your votes, for the top 3
> batsmen of the decade (ordered list) in a follow-up to this post,
> along with any reasoning -- again Tests and batting only for THIS
> decade only.
>
> If anyonne has strike rates for these worthies please add them --
> thanks!
>
> Bharat
Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist. Tendulkar didn't do much in this decade,
Lara wasn't consistent and I don't like Kallis.
Mohan
Haydos
--
Matt the Ba
"Mohan" <dpus...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:357f88d0-6f89-49dc...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
Bob Dubery
>
> Australia got weakened after the 2006-07 Ashes.
> Ponting's performance since then
> filtered 2007-2009 30 2182 158 42.78 5
>
> i.e an average of 43. Considering the class of batsmen around him,
> that's just pedestrian.
>
> Ponting is a fine batsman, but not for the reasons that you mentioned
>
Ah well. Bang goes that argument :-)
Don speaks the truth
7129 runs is probably not much for you. Couple with the fact that he
has
contributed in almost all the overseas test wins of India.
Don
Mohan
wrote:
Somehow, when I think of Tendulkar, it is his achievements in 90s that
come to mind. Capetown 100 in '96, taking Warne apart at home in '98,
136 vs Pak in '99, etc. He was overshadowed by Dravid and Laxman in
2001 series vs Aus, in South Africa later that year he did score a
century, but Sehwag's debut hundred stole the limelight and on his
last two tours of Australia he has scored runs, but not as Tendulkar.
Mohan
Don speaks the truth
>
> - Show quoted text -
That is because he was at the peak of his career as far as flamboyance
and invincibility was concerned in the late 90s...but in 2000s he has
worked harder
than any other batsman to maintain a consistency and learnt to value
his wicket much better...he has played a winning contribution in all
the famous overseas wins
like West Indies 2002, Zimbabwe 2001, Pakistan 2004, England 2007,
Australia 2008 etc. What happened to Sachin in the late 90s is
happening to other batsmen now thats why you notice them more. But the
value of Tendulkar's wicket, more to himself than anyone else, has
what made him a solid and key batsman of the world.
Don [you must have surely not seen his hundred against aus in the 2001
series in chennai...the dream partnership between dravid and laxman in
kolkata made u blind perhaps]
Don speaks the truth
>
> - Show quoted text -
just to add my point was how could you say tendulkar has not done
much?
he may not have been the peak of flamboyance and chivalry but 7129
runs
at an avg of 54 and the wins that i mentioned above(which are just
overseas btw)
surely amounts to more than "not much".
Don
Mohan
ok, I should have said not much by the standards he set in the
previous decade. I don't know if even that stands up statistically,
but that's the impression I have.
Mohan
Nirvanam
Impressions can often be misleading. Don't get me wrong, I think
subjectivity is as important as numbers but given that Sachin attained
heights of invincibility in the 90s that no other batsman other than
Don and Lara did in their lives, no matter of infinitesimally lesser
his achievements from the heights of invincibility one will be
compelled to say 'something is missing' this decade.
What I experienced though, was a game of the virtuoso master that was
absent in his previous decade. He has aged now and he may not be as
consistently invincible as the 90s but he does give us rather regular
glimpses of his 90s play. And his legacy is in leaving behind his
apprentice. Now, if only the apprentice could also learn to play like
Sachin did this decade, in the next decade then this would probably be
the first ever master-apprentice batting relationship carried forward
in cricket. 2 others i.e. Dunno about Don but Lara didn't even have a
chance to leave behind an apprentice. Was Harvey some kinda apprentice
to the Don? I doubt if Viru will match up to the virtuoso levels of
Sachin. He definitely does in strokeplay and was doing it in the
cunning delicate strokes as well till a few years ago (the paddles,
the delicate touches) but these days he doesn't do those more often.
What saddens me is the fact that the master had to forcibly curb his
natural play because his team mates periodically betrayed his
invincibility. The 136 against Pak was one of those legendary lessons
that a mafia don teaches his young son (asking him to jump and when
the boy says he will fall, the don says I'll catch u, the boy jumps
dad doesn't catch and looks at the boy and says 'never trust anyone').
Until then Sachin would single handedly win India games, and then his
mind played games with him and its then that he realized that no
matter how much he tries he needs at least 2 more guys to contribute
for a victory. He had Jumbo with him in the bowling department but
batting no one.
For what its worth, my batsman of the decade is a tie between Ponting
and Viru the Apprentice
Don speaks the truth
i don't know what do you mean by "standards he set in the previous
decade".
these are his stats for (Jan1)1990-1999(Dec31) versus (Jan1)2000 to
Dec 31(2009)
tests:
Mat Runs HS Bat Av 100s
90s 69 5626 217 58.00 22
(in matches won) 18 1362 165 59.21 4
2000s 89 7129 248* 53.20 21
(in matches won) 35 3163 248* 67.29 12
Clearly, you can see he has been more effective in test cricket in the
present decade rather than the previous one. I think what confuses
people like you over
his performance decade-wise is the magnificent series against
Australia he had
in 1998 which overshadows his other achievements later a lot. Of
course, the only
skew above is that the team started winning as a whole in 2000s more
but still the
difference in his contributions is more than apparent from the stats
above.
In a nutshell, people liked Sachin of the 90s who was raw and young
and all over the top bowlers of that era like Donald, Ambrose, Mcgrath
etc and just manhandling
the lesser bowlers. He may have hit brilliant centuries against them
but they did not
go in any way to contribute to the team's wins. But in the 2000s, a
more mature Sachin arrived who understood what was required of him in
the team and he responded accordingly. It may not have been too
exciting as compared to Sachin of the 90s but as Nirvanam pointed out
he still has most of the shots of the 90s but he phases these shots
beautifully in the coarse of his entire inning and that is what has
made him a more effective player in the latter half of his career than
in the first 10 years. Of course, what also helped a lot is that we
had a better opening combination in the 2000s which helped Sachin and
Dravid phase their innings especially overseas in a better manner. And
i am not even talking about ODIs which may present a whole different
picture of Sachin of the 2000s.
Don
R Bharat Rao
> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
To me, the batsman of this decade is Ponting as a clear winnier in a
two-horse race.
Ricky averages 59, and has 32 tons in 106 Tests -- 32 tons in a
decade, that is nothing short of amazing! And the manner in which he
scores his runs -- the speed and the destructiveness of his batting,
sets him apart from Kallis, the only other contender.
Kallis has also been very good, but his ton rate is substantially less
(one every 3.7 Tests compared to Ponting's 3.3 Tests/ton), and unlike
Ponting, he rarely dominates. While I'm the first to argue that it is
the runs that you make which count, with all things being close, then
the manner in which you make does come into play.
Not to the extent that Pringle does (who overlooks the 6 run
difference in average between Sehwag & Ponting) to crown Sehwag #1 --
but Sehwag's blitzkreig's completely demolish & demoralize the
opposition. Ponting is no slouch on the destructive front either, but
he is more a broadsword to Sehwag's land mine. (Whereas, continuing
with the weapon's analogy, Kallis would be a club to Ponting's
broadsword -- it gets the job done, but it takes time.)
My #3 choice is Yousuf, for my money, the most beautiful batsman to
watch among those playing Tests today.
Incidentally, the reason Sehwag doesn't make my list is because the
batsman of the decade ought not to be dropped for almost 2 years due
to a horrible time with the bat... So in summary
1) Ponting
<some daylight>
2) Kallis
3) Yousuf
Bharat
jzfredricks
> <some daylight>
> 2) Kallis
> 3) Yousuf
When I first read this, I missed the (clearly stated) BATSMAN
criteria. I was still livid over some crap jurno in Aus saying Smith
was *player* of the decade.
If I was asked to "pick a team, starting with a player would bat but
not bowl, based on their 2000-2009 stats only"....
I'd probably also pick Ponting. The probably is due to the fact I'd,
in my imagination, have to play with him.
R Bharat Rao
<speaking of Tendulkar>
> ok, I should have said not much by the standards he set in the
> previous decade. I don't know if even that stands up statistically,
> but that's the impression I have.
Precisely Mohan. The reason I rate SRT as the best of *this*
generation is because of this 10 year patch.
From 1993 to 2002 inclusive, SRT in Tests
Tendulkar 85 138 14 7726 217 201* 193 62.30 27 31 7
Thats a 10 year period, averaging 62, with a ton every 3.1 innings.
Of course, as point out, 80% of that happened in the last decade...
To be fair, only one other batsman deserves consideration for best
batsman of our generation:
From 1999 to 2008 inclusive, Ponting in Tests
Ponting 105 178 24 9488 257 242 207 61.61 35 36 9
Not much to choose really, 3.1 Tests / ton versus 3.0 Tests / ton.
What for me makes it Tendulkar, is 2 things:
a) In the 8 years that followed his incredible 10-year run, SRT has
played 57 more Tests, 4000+ runs, 12 tons @ 49.5. Thats Eight more
years of very good batting. However, in those 8 years, there's no
question who the better bat has been between Ponting & SRT.
b) If you compare the two eras when they were great (SRT mostly in the
90s and Ponting in the 80s), both were pretty identical (Tendulkar
about a run better, but Ponting with a marginally superior ton rate),
but IMO, the bowling was a lot better in the 90s than the oughts -- a
simple comparison of the # of batsmen who averaged above 50 in that 10
year span should be instructive, but taking the 90s and oughts as a
fairly simple barometer, I seem to recall a post that said that very
few (3-5?) batsmen averaged over 50 in the 90s, and many more (>10?)
averaged over 50 in the oughts...
But, both are incredible incredible batsmen, one the clear standout of
the 90s and still quite good in the oughts, and the other just as good
in the oughts as the little master was in the 90s...
Bharat
(Incidentally, Lara's best 10-year patch is pretty close to his
average of 52.xx.)
Howzzat
Agree mostly, except about SRT being "very good" in the last eight
years (since 2003). Although he averaged 49.5 during this period, that
falls by 5 points to 44.x if you exclude Bangles. That is just
miserable, judging not only by SRT's own high standards in the
previous 10 years, but also the benchmarks others have set in this
period. Every Tom, Dick and Hussey has averaged 55+ since 2003,
arguably the best time for batting ever. Consider this: Since 2003,
Tendulkar averages 40 in India, 16 in Sri Lanka (although only 3
tests), and apart from the 194* in Multan, has scored a grand total of
74 runs in 5 further tests in Pakistan - on the flattest wickets of
all time. And has continued to underachieve vs. South Africa. All this
with a very modest strike rate.
Only reason SRT continues to figure in debates on batsman of this
decade is because we are still subconsciously influenced by how
awesome he was in the 90s (indeed until 2002). Then a combination of
things happened - age, injuries, bad luck - whatever, but based on the
output of these last 8 years alone he'd be lucky to be picked in a 3rd
World XI, let alone the first.
Nirvanam
virtuosos don't: quality spin on spinning tracks. That's why Ponting,
in my opinion, can only be as good as say Viv definitely not a
virtuoso like Sachin, Lara, and Don. These 3 had no effing
weakness...I mean try finding it out...think think think and we'll end
up finding no weakness whereas for Ponting it is rather obvious, so
obvious that he loses his place as a virtuoso. But he definitely is an
ATG.
A few threads back our great man posted a statistic of Sachin and
Ponting's average...the diff between the two hardly around a run and
based on that claimed Ponting was better. Its not even 2 months since
then, and the difference has fallen down to around 0.5. I'll stick my
neck out on this one, Sachin will end up with a better average than
Ponting and Ponting will not be able to end up a virtuoso...he will
not improve his record on spinning wickets against quality spinners
significantly i.e. by an average of 10+ runs.
Another aspect that separates the virtuosos Sachin, Bradman, and Lara
from the ability of Ponting is that none of them were bunnies. Yep
McGrath and Murali got Lara and Sachin but both of them have
demolished McGrath and Warne enough to not be counted as bunnies.
Whereas Ponting has been an out and out bunny of Bhajji, Gough, and
Ishant of all the bowlers, and of late Roach...Roach will make him his
own.
But credit where its due: Ponting is the batsman of the decade. He
played majestically...especially his 2003 world cup finals
knock...fuck it reminded me of Richards....the guy went on to score
140 odd leaving Martyn in the 80s...both of them got together around
the same time for their partnership. I think that one day innings and
the one at Edgbaston 2005 were the best jewels in his crown.
By the way, what does one mean when they say "day light". I have seen
people use it to mean a huge gap and a very thing gap. What do you
mean by daylight? I guess Warne when he said Sachin then daylight then
Lara he meant a very small gap?
Nirvanam
Some perspective here: Sachin's average is less because he was forced
to play with injuries for 3 yrs continuously starting from the Aussie
tour of India in 2004 till about the world cup. For 3 yrs Sachin
suffered all kinds of injuries...one of them threatened his career
itself...he said in an interview that he cried so bad that this injury
would end his cricket that he worked doubly hard. The BCCI did not
help by pushing him in as soon as he showed even small signs of
improvement. Cut out Sachin's record from the start of 2004-05 season
to the end of the 2007 world cup and look at his numbers. They are
marvelous! And when you remove those numbers out you will also be
removing his 248 v/s Bangladesh, some knocks against Zim.
T-66 Runs-5734 Avg-56.77 with 18 tons at 3.67 tons per match. Remove
Zim and Bang from that and his record is,
T-61 Runs-5263 Avg-56 (55.98) with 16 tons at 3.8 tons per match.
skp
>
> - Show quoted text -
Without checking, my impression is that SRT had a pretty good average
from about 2000 to 2003 and then again from 2007 to date. That 3 or 4
year period in the middle is where he slipped when all the other great
batsmen were making merry.
Could have been due to injuries and, in particular, the tennis elbow.
Could have just been an all timed slump that affects almost every
sportsman who has had a long career. Ponting may be in a slump now
(relatively speaking) given his 43 average since the last down under
Ashes as per Tend.com's post.
Lenin Maran
news:d1461c2e-5fa9-4431...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
Hayden, Younis Khan, Vaughan
Batsmen I love to watch:
Laxman, Lara, Tendulkar
Batsmen I could depend upon:
Kallis, Dravid, Yousuf
Batsmen that are really fun to watch:
Sehwag, Pietersen, Gilchrist
very good "ugly batsmen"
Ponting, Graeme Smith, Chanderpaul
Howzzat
Sure, I know (and understand) the injury aspect. I truly believe that
if SRT had not got injured at inopportune times, he'd be so far ahead
of his competitors that we'd not be having this debate. But two points
re. your post above:
1. It's not the fault of other players that Sachin got injured and
therefore could not score all those runs. They deserve to be put ahead
of Sachin (post 2003) because they have the numbers on the board -
period.
2. Who "forced" Sachin to play when he was injured or not fully
recovered from injury? It is childish to suggest that the board or
anyone else "forced" him to play. If anyone is to be be blamed, it
should be Sachin himself for rushing back, particularly in those last
two tests of the series vs. Australia. He could have taken an
additional 6 months off and come out far ahead of where he is today.
Howzzat
> For all his greatness Ponting lacks in one area that the other 2
> virtuosos don't: quality spin on spinning tracks. That's why Ponting,
> in my opinion, can only be as good as say Viv definitely not a
> virtuoso like Sachin, Lara, and Don. These 3 had no effing
> weakness...I mean try finding it out...think think think and we'll end
> up finding no weakness whereas for Ponting it is rather obvious, so
> obvious that he loses his place as a virtuoso. But he definitely is an
> ATG.
I dislike Ponting as much as the next guy, but this so-called weakness
against spin is a myth. IMO there are other, more valid reasons to bag
Ponting (such as his inflated average due to the disproportionately
high number of favorable umpiring decisions he gets), but weakness
against spin on spinning tracks is bollocks. He has an awesome record
against Murali in Sri Lanka (a far more difficult proposition than
facing Harbhajan in India) plus several others big knocks with quality
spinners in the opposition. It is true that he has failed in India,
but he did get a hundred last time in Bangalore. He hardly played in
the 2004 series (injury), was just starting out when he visited in
1998 - the only real failure was in 2001. You put that together with
his success against spinners otherwise and it's not a shabby record.
Bagging Ponting for his record in India is not too dissimilar to
criticizing SRT for his mediocre record against SA, both home and away
- but funny how we never bring that up.
<snip>
Nirvanam
Oh dear! Where were you when we had a recent discussion with all kinds
of stats of why Ponting is literally useless against quality spin on
spinning tracks?
If you believe it is a myth, why not present the stats to bust the
myth? I challenge you to bust the myth. And here are the spinning
tracks for you to consider: Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Dambulla, Kandy,
Galle, Delhi, Kanpur, Mohali, Bangalore. And the bowlers are Kumble,
Bhajji, Murali, Saqlain, Mushtaq, Mendis, Murali Kartik, Danish
Kaneria. That list has some amazing spinners and some not so great
spinners...dunno if Ponting has faced all of them (lucky for you). And
don't know if Ponting got to play on all those dust bowls (lucky again
for you).
Now, prove it! Else accept that Ponting is useless when it comes to
playing top class spin on spinning wickets. He is not even as good as
say someone like Waugh or Pietereson, or Kallis, or AB De Villiers
even. Hell he is no better than Nayan Mongia while facing quality
spinners on spinning tracks. Now that's a huge claim...prove me wrong
on that.
When you dig the data out you'll see for yourself how useless Ponting
is for an ATG on spinning wickets against quality spinners. We've
already done this exercise on a thread hardly a month or so back,
maybe you missed that one. But the data gathering will open your eyes
once and for all.
And as far as the comparison of Sachin in RSA and Ponting in India is
concerned...there is none. Sachin averages around 40...39.6x to be
closer with 3 centuries on fast pacy wickets against the best that RSA
threw at him. When he hit his first century in RSA Sachin was not even
3 yrs into international cricket and this was his first tour
there...compare that with Ponting's useless record in 2001 (close to 5
yrs of Test career, second tour to India if u do not consider the one-
off in 95 else it is 3rd tour). Ponting averages something like 22 in
India. Sachin averages close to 40 in RSA. Where is the comparison,
mate? Ponting has 1 century that too on the very first day of a spin
track (u know when a spin track is supposed to start turning though),
does not have a single 50+ score in second innings in India. Except
for a highest of 51 in one of the second innings (in SL) he has not
crossed 30 in any of the second innings. And that when he hasn't even
played in the 4th innings of a Test on these dust bowls at all.
jzfredricks
> If you believe it is a myth, why not present the stats to bust the
> myth? I challenge you to bust the myth. And here are the spinning
> tracks for you to consider: Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Dambulla, Kandy,
> Galle
Mumbai: 23 runs @ 7.6
Kolkata: 75 runs @ 18.75
Chennai: 31 runs @ 7.75
Dambulla: wtf is that?
Kandy: 184 @ 46
Galle: 50 runs @ 16.66
Pretty shit, really.
R Bharat Rao
> Agree mostly, except about SRT being "very good" in the last eight
> years (since 2003). Although he averaged 49.5 during this period, that
> falls by 5 points to 44.x if you exclude Bangles. That is just
> miserable, judging not only by SRT's own high standards in the
> previous 10 years, but also the benchmarks others have set in this
> period.
Fair enough, but if we are going to slice his career up selectively to
avoid Bangladesh, lets look a bit deeper.
2003 was his annus horribilis, but if you leave out that ONE year
(which seems reasonable in a glittering 20 year career), and drop the
Bangles as you suggest, we get
Tests from 2003 to 2009 (inclusive) against all countries EXCEPT
Bangladesh
Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50
0
Tendulkar 48 82 10 3468 241* 194* 160 48.16 9 18 2
Thats 7 more years or "pretty good" (if you object to "very good")
batting -- lets put it this way, it is close to the career average of
a Laxman.
And in the last 3 years, he has further revived his incredible career
Tests from 2007 to 2009 (inclusive) against all countries EXCEPT
Bangladesh
Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50
0
Tendulkar 26 47 5 2126 160 154* 153 50.61 6 12 1
So to summarize, while he hasn't been the transcendent batsmen he was
from 1992-2002 (and I didn''t think it was possible to be that good
for that long -- but now we have 2 examples), with the exception of
the one off year in 2003 when he was horrible, Tendulkar has had 7
more years of very good Test batting, and if anything, like a good
wine, seems to be improving with age the last few years. He hasn't
been Ponting or Kallis or Yousuf these past 7 years certainly, but by
no means are those years a blot on his career...
Bharat
Nirvanam
Dambulla is the spinner friendly ground in Colombo
Nirvanam
LOL LOL LOL! this is the best part now.... Howzatt, fwiw below are
Nayan Mongia's numbers in Chennai, Mumbai, and SL (he played in 2
other grounds in Colombo but not at Dambulla, Kandy, Galle)
Mumbai: Ponting 23 @ 7.6 Mongia 163 @ 32.6
Chennai: Ponting 31 @ 7.75 Mongia 133 @ 33.25
SL: Mongia 57 @ 19
India: Ponting xxx @ 22 Mongia 959 @ 28.2
Howzzat
You are right - I probably did miss the thread where you dissected
Ponting's record against spin. Agree when you look at individual
venues he looks pretty crappy.
However, at the end of the day, Ponting's lowest average against any
test nation is 47 (India), while Tendulkar averages 35 against RSA and
42 against Pak - the two countries with the best fast bowling attacks
in the last 20 years. I am afraid that when both Ponting and Tendulkar
have retired, these kinds of numbers (plus overall average, centuries
etc.) will be used to determine degrees of greatness - nobody will
remember what Ponting did in the one test he played in Timbaktu.
I concede the point about Ponting sucking against spin on true
spinning tracks, however he has done more than enough elsewhere. So
much so that despite that handicap, his overall average is better than
Tendulkar's (although by only 1 point, but still).
Howzzat
I think we disagree only on what "very good" really is. The numbers
you show above are undoubtedly very good by themselves, but when you
consider that this was the golden phase for batting...
Among players who played at least 20 tests after 2003, the following
average more than Tendulkar:
Lara, Ponting, Yousuf, Jayawardene, Kallis, Sangakkara, Younis,
Gambhir, Thorpe, Sehwag, Dravid, Chanders, Hussey, Inzi, Prince,
Pietersen Smith, Clarke, Hayden
I have not excluded Bangladesh (too much work), but you will agree
that doing so would probably make this list even longer. That is
pretty much every top order batsman in the world during this time.
Plus 9 hundreds in 48 test is pretty disappointing really.
Agree about his "relative" revival in the last 2 years, but I am sure
you feel my pain at Tendulkar throwing away the starts and not making
big scores. The last two tests in New Zealand, the recent series vs
Sri Lanka and even the Mendis series last year are all examples where
he looked good but didn't carry on. I was hoping he'd step up another
gear but it's looking increasingly unlikely. His highest score in the
last 5 years is 160.
Again - my beef is only with people automatically and blindly putting
him in their top 2-3 as the batsman of the decade, just because his
name is Sachin Tendulkar. For me he is the best batsman of the last 20
years, but would barely make the top 10 of the last decade.
R Bharat Rao
> Again - my beef is only with people automatically and blindly putting
> him in their top 2-3 as the batsman of the decade, just because his
> name is Sachin Tendulkar. For me he is the best batsman of the last 20
> years, but would barely make the top 10 of the last decade.
We are in complete agreement there. My only point was that in naming
Sachin over Ponting as the best batsman of this generation, I took 2
factors into account given that their 10-year golden period are pretty
much identical, statistically speaking.
a) SRT had 7 more years of "very good" (or "good" or decent)
performance after his golden peak -- quite possibly Ponting may have
another 5 years and then one could compare them -- but right now SRT's
following 7 years have to count for something -- it is not as though
his performance was negative, so thats one plus point. I was not
saying anything about him being the best bat of this decade (as you
can see, I didn't even include him in my discussion of best 3 bats of
the decade).
b) The second point was that SRT's peak may be better than Ponting's
peak given that run scoring seemed a lot harder during Sachin's peak.
You are suggesting that my statement (a) is somehow equating him as a
great bat this decade -- it is not. I'm not sure he'd make my top 10
this decade, though it would be close. I'm simply pointing it out as
additional value to differentiate Ponting & SRT as batsmen.
Bharat
Howzzat
Yep - agreed. My comment was not directed at you Bharat. Currently
these "batsman of the decade" discussions are going on pretty much
everywhere - blogs, newspaper sites, forms etc. and I find it funny
how Tendulkar seems to get about 80% of the votes :-)
Sachin's peak over those 10 years was indeed incredible, considering
the quality of bowling and relatively more juicy wickets. Considering
that, it is quite inexplicable that he never broke 900 ICC rating
points. A plausible explanation could be the lack of 2-3 really big
back to back series. IIRC, Tendulkar still doesn't have a 500 run
series in his kitty (or twin hundreds in a test) - amazing really
considering the extended purple patch he had.
Howzzat
Oh come on. I have already conceded the point re.Ponting against spin,
but it is ridiculous to compare him against one mediocre player in
select venues. FWIW, Azhar Mahmood averages 75 against South Africa
(including 2 hundreds in 3 tests in SA), vs Tendulkar's 35. What does
that prove? Agarkar has a hundred at Lords - I believe Sachin has not
even got past 50 in many more attempts - so?
Nirvanam
No mate, a virtuoso batsman is one who has done exceptionally well in
all conditions - any pitch-any country-any condition-any inning-any
opposition. That is where Ponting loses out to the other 3 virtuoso
batsmen Test cricket has known: Sachin, Don, and Lara.
Immaterial of how many extra runs Ponting has over these 3 in one
particular condition it does not change the fact that Ponting is not a
virtuoso. He is an ATG no doubt. Look, a year back Hussey looked
Bradmanesque...where is he now?
Oh and do go on about the overall average...give it a few more Tests
and Sachin will be back to better than Ponting. Six months back Sachin
was 54.2 something Ponting was 56.xx. Two months back Sachin was 54.5x
and Ponting was 55.8x. Today Sachin is 54.72 and Ponting is 55.26.
Now if you think those numbers are significantly different then I
cannot argue. But to me a difference of up to 7,8 runs when both
batsmen are averaging in the 50s is not much. There is hardly any
difference in overall averages of both Sachin and Ponting. Here's
another difference in home-away. Sachin has 55.28 at home and 54.28
away...a difference of 1 run. Whereas Ponting is 59.45 and 49.23 i.e.
a difference of 10 runs. You can clearly say that Ponting scores much
more at home than away whereas you cannot make the same argument for
Sachin.
Look, all these numbers are meaningless to show them apart...Sachin
and Ponting are practically the same almost everywhere and against
everyone except for one major major major humongous difference in
ability in one very testing condition. There are 3 very difficult
conditions in cricket: fast bowlers on pacy pitches, amazing swing
bowlers on swinging wickets, and amazing spinners on dust bowls. In
the first two ordeals you can't differentiate Sachin, Ponting, and
Lara...all of them perform brilliantly. Once the third ordeal is
given, Ponting unfortunately loses it and becomes mortal. He cannot be
spoken in the same breath of Sachin, Lara, and Don. FWIW, no other
batsmen in the history of Tests can be. So Ponting is not really
bad...he is an ATG no doubt. Just not a virtuoso.
Some more perspective on averages: first time Ponting had a better
average than Sachin was on 29 Jan 2006, Ponting was going upwards and
was at 56.26 and Sachin was going down and was at 56.14. And this in
spite of Sachin having the worst time in his career between 2004 and
2006. For 6 yrs in the new decade Sachin was ahead of Ponting as far
as average was concerned.
Sachin hit 55 first time on 28 Jan 1999 and stayed in the high 50s
i.e. 55+ till 15 Dec 2006, falling down to 54.87. Then from 26 Dec
2006 till 23 July 2008 Sachin's lowest was 54.7 and he was in the 55's
in 9 of those 14 Tests. On 9 Oct 2008 he reached his lowest of 54.02.
Since then he has been steadily climbing up and now is at 54.72
Ponting hit 55 first time on 2 Jan 2005. On 29 Oct 2008 Ponting was at
58.05. This is around 45 months to Sachin's 95 months! Since then for
18 Tests Ponting has not been able to reverse the trend and now is at
55.26. In just 18 Tests he has lost 3 runs on a career average.
Compare that to Sachin's continuous decline from 55.57 to 54.02 for
only 5 tests...he is on an upward trend for the last 11 Tests since
54.02. Sachin has reversed his trend for good. Ponting is declining
for good.
Do you need more arguments with numbers and/or subjectivity to prove
that Ponting cannot be spoken of in the same breath of Sachin, Lara,
and Don? Ponting is not a virtuoso. Period. He is an ATG no doubt.
Nirvanam
Well it doesn't prove that either Azhar Mehmood or Agarkar are better
than Tendulkar or for that matter Ponting. But the fact that Nayan
Mongia can handle quality spin better than Ponting on spinning wickets
is hard to refute...lol!
Howzzat
Look - I agree with (almost) everything you are saying, but I don't
think you are getting my point. 20 years from now, when our children
and grandchildren look back at the career stats of Ponting, SRT etc.
there will be no asterisk next to Ponting suggesting that he couldn't
play quality spin on select venues. To most casual observers, he would
be considered on par with the best of all time (or even better
depending on where he ends up). You don't have to convince me about
Tendulkar's class against all-comers. In fact, I believe that but for
unfortunate injuries and general bad luck with umpiring, Tendulkar
should have been significantly ahead of his contemporaries - a clear
second only to Don by any criteria. But it's a shame that we are
having to debate his status not only against Ponting, but real mortals
like Yousuf, Jayawardene, Sangakkara etc. who all have similar (or
better) numbers than Tendulkar at this time.
Nirvanam
> think you are getting my point. 20 years from now, when our children
> and grandchildren look back at the career stats of Ponting, SRT etc.
> there will be no asterisk next to Ponting suggesting that he couldn't
> play quality spin on select venues. To most casual observers, he would
> be considered on par with the best of all time (or even better
> depending on where he ends up). You don't have to convince me about
> Tendulkar's class against all-comers. In fact, I believe that but for
> unfortunate injuries and general bad luck with umpiring, Tendulkar
> should have been significantly ahead of his contemporaries - a clear
> second only to Don by any criteria. But it's a shame that we are
> having to debate his status not only against Ponting, but real mortals
> like Yousuf, Jayawardene, Sangakkara etc. who all have similar (or
> better) numbers than Tendulkar at this time.
I saw your message only after posting this one hence did not know that
you agreed about Ponting's failures.
You are right about the fact that 30 yrs down the line people will
look at the averages and say both Sachin and Ponting (and for that
matter Sanga, Yousuf, Dravid, who knows even Yuvraj, Clarke,
Samaraweera, and Dislhan) are equal. But that's the observer who is
new to cricket. Even 40-50 yrs down the line, the regular cricket fan
will know about Sachin's virtuoso status and Ponting as just an ATG.
Because all fans are brought up with stories and archives. Why don't
we treat Neil Harvey at the same level as Sobers? Or for that matter
the Mushtaq Mohd in the same class of Hutton / Hobbs, or Greg Chappell
at the same level as Viv.
Anyway, I guess its really more out of hope and a wish for future
generations to be able to see the difference between the virtuoso
master and the mere mortal ATG that I am arguing...lol! awww man!
skp
Would Sydney be considered a turning track? How about some of the
grounds in the West Windies?
Nirvanam
We're talking about dust bowls here. Sydney is not really in that
category. It assists spinners but it is more of a batting track than
the typical dust bowl like Chennai. WI does not have dust bowls
either. You do find one like in the Test that Dravid won for India in
2006 but that was more of an exception than rule. Even Pakistan does
not produce dust bowls like India or SL. Karachi is their only true
shot at a dust bowl.
Andrew Dunford
"R Bharat Rao" <rao.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d1461c2e-5fa9-4431...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
> Discussion related to Tests only. Pringle in http://tinyurl.com/ygw5gt7
> picks Sehwag, as has been discussed in other threads, primarily for
> the way in which he scored his runs.
He's not on your shortlist, but I vote for Charles Bannerman.
<snip>
Andrew
Lawrence�Logic
"Nirvanam" <viz.s...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:544e7c85-de39-437e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> By the way, what does one mean when they say "day light". I have seen
> people use it to mean a huge gap and a very thing gap. What do you
> mean by daylight? I guess Warne when he said Sachin then daylight then
> Lara he meant a very small gap?
>
When used like that, it means a very large gap. If Lara was close, he'd be
second.
--
Lawrence
"In the outside world I am a simple geologist, but in here I am Falcor,
Defender of the Alliance." - Randy Marsh - 4 October 2006
Nirvanam
p.com> wrote:
> "Nirvanam" <viz.sha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Wow, that's a new learning for me. I thought Warne meant Sachin and
Lara were almost indistinguishable and if anything only some little
pinhole of daylight could separate their levels.
Seriously did Warne rate Sachin so highly ahead of Lara? Lara was
anyway second on Warne's list
skp
>
> - Show quoted text -
No. Warne rated SRT and BCL to be very close with SRT getting the
edge (i.e. in his top 100 in the Times newspaper or whatever). That
"Sachin then daylight then Lara commennt" was made somewhat jestingly
in a press conference in India to appease the Indian media.
Nirvanam
huh? But I do hear people using that "daylight" thing to signify very
less difference. Is there any thesarus kinda reference for how it is
'supposed' to be used
skp
>
> - Show quoted text -
Daylight means a large gap. I was just saying that Warne actually
ranked SRT and BCL very closely i.e. with no daylight. This is
evident when one reads his Times top 100 players article(s).
At a press conefrence in India (before the Times article) came out, he
said "Tendulkar, daylight, Lara" jestingly.
Howzzat
Nope. The "daylight" comment was made several years ago, when
Tendulkar was at the top of his game. By the time the Times column was
written, Lara (and several others I might add) had narrowed the gap
considerably, largely in the period from 2003-2006.
jzfredricks
> less difference. Is there any thesarus kinda reference for how it is
> 'supposed' to be used
If Warne said "SRT then daylight then Lara then everyone else" he
meant;
1) SRT is the best
2) there is a VAST gap between SRT and Lara
3) SRT and Lara were clearly the best two - everyone else ranked
beneath them
4) Where's my pizza
Andrew Dunford
"R Bharat Rao" <rao.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5ed58375-783a-4926...@f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 28, 7:12 pm, R Bharat Rao <rao.bha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
> To me, the batsman of this decade is Ponting as a clear winnier in a
> two-horse race.
>
> Ricky averages 59, and has 32 tons in 106 Tests -- 32 tons in a
> decade, that is nothing short of amazing! And the manner in which he
> scores his runs -- the speed and the destructiveness of his batting,
> sets him apart from Kallis, the only other contender.
>
> Kallis has also been very good, but his ton rate is substantially less
> (one every 3.7 Tests compared to Ponting's 3.3 Tests/ton), and unlike
> Ponting, he rarely dominates. While I'm the first to argue that it is
> the runs that you make which count, with all things being close, then
> the manner in which you make does come into play.
>
> Not to the extent that Pringle does (who overlooks the 6 run
> difference in average between Sehwag & Ponting) to crown Sehwag #1 --
Pringle discounted Ponting because he made his debut in the previous decade
(90s) which in my opinion makes his method worthless.
<snip>
Andrew
Fran
> "R Bharat Rao" <rao.bha...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:d1461c2e-5fa9-4431...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
> Opposing batsmen I want to see out:
> Hayden, Younis Khan, Vaughan
>
> Batsmen I love to watch:
> Laxman, Lara, Tendulkar
>
> Batsmen I could depend upon:
> Kallis, Dravid, Yousuf
>
> Batsmen that are really fun to watch:
> Sehwag, Pietersen, Gilchrist
>
> very good "ugly batsmen"
> Ponting, Graeme Smith, Chanderpaul
Hard to disagree with any of that.
Chanders does have one listing in the top 5 fastest test centuries ...
Fran
R Bharat Rao
> huh? But I do hear people using that "daylight" thing to signify very
> less difference. Is there any thesarus kinda reference for how it is
> 'supposed' to be used
Nope, at least in the US, "A <daylight> B" means a substantial gap
between A & B, not a small chink as you suggested.
However, in his article Warne said (speaking of SRT as #1 after naming
Lara #2)
#2 Lara...
#1 Tendulkar ... I place him very slightly ahead of Lara because I
found him slightly tougher mentally. It is such a close call,
So here he clearly sees the 2 as very close.
Bharat
Jeff Urs
> less difference. Is there any thesarus kinda reference for how it is
> 'supposed' to be used
It's a racing metaphor. If there is daylight showing between the first
two finishers in a horse race, the winner has beaten the runner-up
convincingly.
--
Jeff
R Bharat Rao
Thanks Jeff -- makes sense. Never knew where the phrase came from --
guess it completes the "perfecta" of "by a nose", "neck and neck,"
"down to the wire", and now "daylight"...
Bharat
skp
I heard him make that "daylight" comment when OZ toured India in
2004. It seeed to be made jestingly
Perhaps, he also said it earlier as a more genuine assessment.
chris....@gmail.com
> <Please post your votes -- see below -- as a follow-up to this thread>
>
> picks Sehwag, as has been discussed in other threads, primarily for
> the way in which he scored his runs.
>
>
> Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50
> 0
>
> These numbers are superb, but IMO the following also deserve
> consideration for the award (all #s from 01/01/2000 to today -- so the
> 2 ongoing Tests won't be included).
>
> Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0
> Kallis 100 172 27 8552 189* 186 177 58.97 27 41 7
> Yousuf 70 119 11 6356 223 204* 203 58.85 23 22 7
> Tendulkar 89 150 16 7129 248* 241* 201* 53.20 21 31 7
> Lara 66 120 2 6380 400* 226 221 54.06 21 19 13
> (last Test Dec 2006)
> Dravid 103 179 23 8558 270 233 222 54.85 22 42 7
> Ul-Haq 62 103 11 5113 329 184 142 55.57 17 23 7 (last
> Test Oct 2007)
> Chanders 86 148 25 6435 203* 153* 147* 52.31 19 35 9
>
> Apologies if I forgot anyone.. Please post your votes, for the top 3
> batsmen of the decade (ordered list) in a follow-up to this post,
> along with any reasoning -- again Tests and batting only for THIS
> decade only.
>
> If anyonne has strike rates for these worthies please add them --
> thanks!
>
> Bharat
Sehwag. Highly subjective but of all the batsmen this decade he's the
one I'd pay the most to watch. To score at the strike rate he does,
and average what he does, at the top of the innings, is phenomenal.
Chris