Sachin 1997-1998 v/s Ponting 2005-2006
Manish
opposition, Test, ODI averages?
Who was the better of the two?
Manish
Hyderabadi
pollock, mcgrath, heath streak, vaas, warne, akram, saqlain in their
prime form... I still remember Sachin's innings during the SA tour when
he and azhar tore apart a great bowling attack and ofcourse his
demolition of warne and co is very well known....Also in ODI's sachin
had to contend with pretty good attack considering the fact that
atleast in the 90's bowler could expect something from the pitch early
on say for atleast 10-15 overs...
The quality of bowling nowadays is not even comparable considering that
except for warne and mcgrath no other bowler commands the same kind of
respect any more ofcousr there is murali and Kumble...Luckily for
ponting he does not have to face two of them so that leaves him to face
Murali and Kumble....
But one
shariq...@yahoo.com
Sachin played most matches on subcontinental tracks while Ricky has
played most of his on Australian wickets. Sachin was his team's only
world class batsman while Ricky has three to four. So to determine who
is/was better is difficult
btuli
V
If that were the case,you could never compare two players.
Mike Holmans
keyboard and brought forth:
Shariq is entirely right: comparing players is difficult, despite the
efforts of the statrats to claim otherwise.
Cheers,
Mike
asifn...@gmail.com
>> he and azhar tore apart a great bowling attack and ofcourse his
>> demolition of warne and co is very well known
Indeed a very memorable game for me not just for cricket -- I was
newly married (< 10 days) and when the game started I asked (politely)
my wife if she wouldn't mind that I went to see the cricket match.
Needless to say, my brother-in-law was surprised to see me :)
10yrs later, I am still reminded of it !!
Asif
Will_S
"Mike Holmans" <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eill22h095hagifjm...@4ax.com...
But we do it anyway. When comparing Ponting and SRT I use my memories of the
players and not figures. One example is that I found that when SRT started
the innings he looked in charge and his feet moved without problems to the
correct positions whereas Ricky looks very shaky at the start of his inning.
Most of the time SRT looked like he was doing it just so easy
For me SRT has the well earned tag of the "Little Master"
Yuk Tang
news:442b007e$0$21284$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au:
> But we do it anyway. When comparing Ponting and SRT I use my
> memories of the players and not figures. One example is that I
> found that when SRT started the innings he looked in charge and
> his feet moved without problems to the correct positions whereas
> Ricky looks very shaky at the start of his inning. Most of the
> time SRT looked like he was doing it just so easy
>
> For me SRT has the well earned tag of the "Little Master"
Ponting still has visible weaknesses, namely the too-decisive footwork
I described during (and before) the Ashes. Tendulkar at his peak had
no visible weaknesses, only over-exuberance. As an exemplar of how to
do what you've decided to do, I don't think I've seen any better than
SRT.
--
Cheers, ymt.
ColinKynoch
the world would be a better place for knowing the following:
>also sachin never used Graphite bats :)
And that is clearly the reason Ponting has done so well. I mean look
at his figures since he stopped using the Graphite backed bat.
2 Tests 294 @ 73.50 with 2 centuries and 1 50
Colin Kynoch
Sanjay
"ColinKynoch" <colin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0i9m221p6vkhitksg...@4ax.com...
TWO TESTS are NOT a BIG ENOUGH SAMPLE to conclude what you did.
shariq...@yahoo.com
Again you may point to all of Ponting's fallacies/weaknessnesses but
the fact of the matter is that he\s scored prolifically despite playng
the majority of his games on wickets where the ball does a whole lot
more than the wickets on subcontinent where Sachin did his best
batting. Hence comparing the two is difficult
Shariq
kathy...@yahoo.com
>>subcontinent where Sachin did his best batting.
wow, wow, wow.......Shariq, Sachin can be anything and everything
but he is NOT a flat tack bully!!!! ;-)
Sanjay
<shariq...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143686050.6...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Again you may point to all of Ponting's fallacies/weaknessnesses but
> the fact of the matter is that he\s scored prolifically despite playng
> the majority of his games on wickets where the ball does a whole lot
> more than the wickets on subcontinent where Sachin did his best
> batting. Hence comparing the two is difficult
>
> Shariq
Sachins record HOME and AWAY respectively
60 99 10 4917 217 201* 179 55.24 16 19 3
72 112 12 5552 248* 241* 194* 55.52 19 22 9
Which means he has 19 centuries AWAY and 16 centuries at HOME.
And he AVERAGES the SAME both at home and away and BOTH HIS TWO HIGHEST
SCORES came on AWAY pitches.
While Pontings AVERAGE OUTSIDE Australia DROPS by 12 POINTS. And Pontings
TWO HIGHEST SCORES are at HOME.
57 94 16 4907 257 242 207 62.91 16 22 4
42 72 7 3298 206 156 144 50.73 12 11 4
kathy...@yahoo.com
.....only if you have read Shariq's comment a little carefully. He did
NOT say "HOME" wickets....he said, "SUBCONTINENT" wickets!
Here is what Shariq was refering too;
in Africa 13 23 2 876 169 41.71 3 3
2
in Americas 10 14 1 620 117 47.69 1 5 3
in Asia 79 123 14 6372 248* 58.45 22 23 3
in Europe 10 16 1 1074 193 71.60 4 4 0
in Oceania 20 35 4 1527 241* 49.25 5 6 4
In Asia his ave is 58.45 but Africa (including Zim) is 41.71, West
Indies 47.69
and Aus 49.25. Only ave better than Asia is England which is 71.60
vs Eng,
when Eng was the crapiest team and even Boycott's mom could have scored
vs Eng bowling attack!
HENCE....FLAT TRACK BULLY!!!!
Sanjay
<kathy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143688177....@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
PAKI TRANSVESTITE kathyb1240 aka JJ,
Then how come Ponting CRAPPED on FLAT WICKETS of Asia and in Europe where
even Boycotts Mum would have scored ?
in Africa 6 10 1 634 116 103 100* 70.44 3 2 0
in Americas 5 9 2 691 206 117 113 98.71 4 0 0
in Asia 18 30 2 1084 150 141 105* 38.71 3 5 3
in Europe 13 22 0 938 156 144 127 42.63 3 3 1
in Oceania 60 99 18 5200 257 242 207 64.19 17 23 4
Besides these stats are skewed because of Zimbabwe in Africa.
The BETTER way to analyse their performance is to evaluate them against EACH
COUNTRY instead of CONTINENTS.
shariq...@yahoo.com
Ponting has 14 100s in 43 away tests - that's a century every 3 away
tests
Ponting has 16 100s in 57 home tests - that's a century every 3.5 home
tests
Scoring runs in Australia is always harder than scoring centuries in
other countries
Excluding their records against each of their countries
Sachin has a better record against Bangladesh, England, and Sri Lanka.
Ponting has a better record against New Zealand, West Indies, Pakistan,
South Africa and Zimbabwe
Sachin and Ponting have a 64 average in tests won by their teams but in
contrast to Sachin's 71 in drawn games Ponting averages just 55. In
games lost Sachin averages 35 and Ponting 39.
You see how statistics can be used to show how Ponting is greater.
For players with as similar records trying to figure out who is greater
is an execise in futilty and truly an appples to oranges compaison IMHO
Shariq
Sanjay
<shariq...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143688636.8...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Sanjay
>
> Ponting has 14 100s in 43 away tests - that's a century every 3 away
> tests
>
> Ponting has 16 100s in 57 home tests - that's a century every 3.5 home
> tests
But Pointing's AWAY average is CONSIDERABLY LESS than his average AT HOME
which means the obvious ie he is a HOME TRACK BULLY in FAVORABLE, FAMILIAR
CONDITIONS and HOME UMPIRES.
While Sachin AVERAGES the SAME both HOME and AWAY.
> Scoring runs in Australia is always harder than scoring centuries in
> other countries
Well Sachin had 54 average against the No.1 team in the world ie Australia
for the last (about) 12 years.
And Sachin had to FACE WORLD CLASS BOWLING of Australia in Australia while
the REST of HIS TEAM MEMBERS SUCKED (except the last series) which means
TREMENDOUS PRESSURE compared to Ponting who batted with Warne, and McGrath
behind his back helping his team DEMOLISHING the opponents.
> Ponting has a better record against New Zealand, West Indies, Pakistan,
> South Africa and Zimbabwe
Sachin had a BETTER RECORD with 54 average against the WORLD No.1 team of
Australia while Ponting SUCKED in India with 12.28 average.
> Sachin and Ponting have a 64 average in tests won by their teams but in
> contrast to Sachin's 71 in drawn games Ponting averages just 55.
This is NOT a valid comparison because YOU, ME and the WHOLE WORLD knows
that Indian team is WEAK compared to Australia and India ends up DRAWING
more tests while Australia WINS more tests.
>In
> games lost Sachin averages 35 and Ponting 39.
Not much difference and hence we cant deduce much.
> You see how statistics can be used to show how Ponting is greater.
But I showed statistics to prove Sachin is better too.......
> For players with as similar records trying to figure out who is greater
> is an execise in futilty and truly an appples to oranges compaison IMHO
>
> Shariq
At this point of time, I think Sachin and Ponting are ALMOST EQUAL.
But it would be better if we compare them once they BOTH RETIRE.
kathy...@yahoo.com
Did you get it Shariq....? Sachin with stiches in his shoulder in
hospital
bed after last three wonderful series vs SL/PAK/ENG, is EQUAL to
Ponting flaying Saf. ;-) ;-)
"Kiyoun Bhains kay aagay been baja rahay ho?"
Sanjay
<kathy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143689984.3...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
PAKI TRANSVESTITE kathyb1240 aka JJ CONFIRMED and PROVED with "its" comment
above "it" has a MOLECULE BRAIN and NOT a MOLE BRAIN.
Mr kathy, did your Maulana tell you to use Attar when he rear ended you last
friday ?
kathy...@yahoo.com
>>above "it" has a MOLECULE BRAIN and NOT a MOLE BRAIN.
>>Mr kathy, did your Maulana tell you to use Attar when he rear ended you last
>>friday ?
True Indian spokesman....living up to its spirit, values and
culture......!!!!
Sanjay
<kathy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143690772.8...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
PAKI TRANSVESTITE kathyb1240 aka JJ,
So should I EMULATE your GREAT native pukistani culture and start TRAINING
TERRORISTS to sneak into pukistan and kill your fellow nationals ?
Should I EMULATE your GREAT native pukistani culture and start FUNDING
Mohammad Sheikhs, the Abu Hamzas and hide OBLs and Zawahiris in India ?
But none of these will CHANGE the FACT that you have a MOLECULE BRAIN and
NOT even a mole brain.
LoL.......
kathy...@yahoo.com
above filth!
Sanjay
<kathy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143692587.8...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I am sure you are reciting your national anthem when you are writing
> above filth!
>
PAKI TRANSVESTITE kathyb1240 aka JJ,
So should I EMULATE your GREAT native pukistani culture and start TRAINING
TERRORISTS to sneak into pukistan and kill your fellow nationals ?
Should I EMULATE your GREAT native pukistani culture and start FUNDING
Mohammad Sheikhs, the Abu Hamzas and hide OBLs and Zawahiris in India ?
But none of these will CHANGE the FACT that you have a MOLECULE BRAIN and
NOT even a mole brain.
Do you KNOW the difference between the sizes of a MOLECULE and a MOLE ?
LoL........
shariq...@yahoo.com
he has yet to play a test match at home that was officiated by 2 home
umpires. In contrast Sachin has played 8 such tests with a home umpire
on each end
Sure the fact that Ponting averages 12 something in 5/6 tests against
India certainly causes some eyebrows to be raised but failure in about
5% of the tests pale in comparison to the devastating displays with the
bat in several games
Again we are veering away from the subject in the sense that the
original poster asked if the Ponting of 2005-2006 was superior to the
Sachin of 1997-98 and I said that this contrast would be one of apples
in oranges as there were so many different factors in play
Sanjay
<shariq...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143694987.7...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Sanjay the home umpires helping Ponting argument does not really fly as
> he has yet to play a test match at home that was officiated by 2 home
> umpires. In contrast Sachin has played 8 such tests with a home umpire
> on each end
But his AVERAGE of 55 BOTH at home and away proves he didnt get any benefit
from home umpires.
Also you know Sachin got lot of bad decisions from Bucknor and a couple of
others in Australia.
Anyway, I take back the word "home umpires" from the following statement. I
shouldnt have used it.
But Pointing's AWAY average is CONSIDERABLY LESS than his average AT HOME
which means the obvious ie he is a HOME TRACK BULLY in FAVORABLE and
FAMILIAR
CONDITIONS.
> Sure the fact that Ponting averages 12 something in 5/6 tests against
> India certainly causes some eyebrows to be raised but failure in about
> 5% of the tests pale in comparison to the devastating displays with the
> bat in several games
Thats actually 8 tests (8%) in THREE DIFFERENT SERIES and a world class
batsman when being compared to Sachin or Lara is expected to have BETTER
than 12.28 average.
> Again we are veering away from the subject in the sense that the
> original poster asked if the Ponting of 2005-2006 was superior to the
> Sachin of 1997-98 and I said that this contrast would be one of apples
> in oranges as there were so many different factors in play
I agree, but CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTORS I think they are almost equal at
this moment.
The next few years until they retire will be very interesting though.
Dave
news:1143651192.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> How would the two compare in terms of batting prowess, quality of
> opposition, Test, ODI averages?
> Who was the better of the two?
>
> Manish
>
Well LG ICC ratings is a measure that adjusts the quantitative factors, and
it provides:
Ponting highest ever PWC/LG rating 937 (equal 5th highest of
all time)
Tendulkar's highest ever PWC/LG rating 898 (911 was 18th highest
so presumably 898 is someway off the pace)
den...@hotmail.com
career figures. Can somebody post Tendulkar's figures for 97-98 and
Ponting's for 05-06? Although I have a pretty good idea what Ponting
has done this season, I can't recall Sachin's performances from 8 years
ago...
JohnD
Gafoor
<shariq...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143688636.8...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Sanjay
>
> Ponting has 14 100s in 43 away tests - that's a century every 3 away
> tests
How many of those away centuries came in the sub-continent?
> Ponting has 16 100s in 57 home tests - that's a century every 3.5 home
> tests
>
> Scoring runs in Australia is always harder than scoring centuries in
> other countries
That's a POV. IMHO, scoring runs on your home grounds is always
easier than scoring it in other countries.
There are are many players from Aus who do far better at home than
away - how do you explain that?
There are Australian players who do worse in the sub-continent than
in Australia - how do you explain that?
>
> Excluding their records against each of their countries
>
> Sachin has a better record against Bangladesh, England, and Sri Lanka.
> Ponting has a better record against New Zealand, West Indies, Pakistan,
> South Africa and Zimbabwe
It would be a good idea to also check the attacks faced by either of them
other than only looking at the countries. The Pak attack of this decade
isn't
as good as the one in the 90's. Likewise for RSA & WI.
>
> Sachin and Ponting have a 64 average in tests won by their teams but in
> contrast to Sachin's 71 in drawn games Ponting averages just 55.
What does this stat show really? How many tests were drawn because of
their performances?
> In
> games lost Sachin averages 35 and Ponting 39.
>
> You see how statistics can be used to show how Ponting is greater.
>
> For players with as similar records trying to figure out who is greater
> is an execise in futilty and truly an appples to oranges compaison IMHO
You still seem to be doing a rather good job of it while claiming to
maintain
neutrality.
Mad Hamish
Tendulkar between 1-1-1997 and 1-1-1999
25 41 5 2506 217 177 169 69.61 11 6 2
Ponting from 1-1-2005 until now
18 34 6 2101 207 156 149 75.03 10 7
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au
binac...@gmail.com
rkusenet wrote:
>
> His career avg till 2000 was 46. From 2001 it is 64. He has
> scored 23 out of his 30 100s after 2000. Don't you think it
> tells something.
Ponting averaged ~50 vs RSA and 63 vs Pakistan by the end of 2000. At
that same stage, Sachin had medicore 33 vs Pakistan and another
mediocre 35 vs RSA. Those numbers are not in the same class I am
afraid. Now Sachin was supposedly at his peak then and Ponting was not
that experienced. Take a look at those scores which amounted to mid 30s
avg for Sachin. You will find 1 great knock surrounded by bunch of
atrocious knocks by Sachin.
Mike Holmans
tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>shariq...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Again you may point to all of Ponting's fallacies/weaknessnesses but
>> the fact of the matter is that he\s scored prolifically despite playng
>> the majority of his games on wickets where the ball does a whole lot
>> more than the wickets on subcontinent where Sachin did his best
>> batting. Hence comparing the two is difficult
>
>It is well known that the quality of bowling attack all over
>the world has dipped alarmingly except Aus (which Pointing
>does not play against).
I'm sure that the attack against which Ponting batted last summer,
comprising Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff, Jones and Giles, will be
overjoyed to hear that they represent an alarming dip since the
halcyon days of Peter Martin, Mark Ealham, MinPatel and Alan Mullally.
>His career avg till 2000 was 46. From 2001 it is 64. He has
>scored 23 out of his 30 100s after 2000. Don't you think it
>tells something.
Yes, he averaged less than 40 against England last year, which
certainly backs up your figures.
Cheers,
Mike
shariq...@yahoo.com
rkusenet wrote:
> shariq...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Again you may point to all of Ponting's fallacies/weaknessnesses but
> > the fact of the matter is that he\s scored prolifically despite playng
> > the majority of his games on wickets where the ball does a whole lot
> > more than the wickets on subcontinent where Sachin did his best
> > batting. Hence comparing the two is difficult
>
> the world has dipped alarmingly except Aus (which Pointing
> does not play against).
>
> scored 23 out of his 30 100s after 2000. Don't you think it
> tells something.
>
>
As I said you can use statistics to show how someone is better than
someone else. For the record Ponting had been in test cricket for about
5 years by 2000. In Sachin's first 5 years in international cricket he
too had a 50.something average and, get this, 7 of his 35 test
centuries. Does that tell something about Sachin?
While I agree that bowling standards have taken a dip it's also a fact
that Sachin, other than Allan Donald, hardly faced any great fast
bowler at their peak through in test cricket through 1998. Furthermore,
Sachin's most prolific series in Australia came when McGrath and Warne
were unavailable. And then there was the case of Shane Warne bowling to
Sachin in India for the first time less than 6 months removed from the
shoulder operation
The point is that we will never run out of excuses trying to prove a
point, especially if it is something we believe in. For example I know
a couple of guys who are convinced that Kapil Dev is one of the top 3
greatest fast bowlers of all times. What do you tell a person like
that?
The OP wondered/iqnquired who was better during the perceived peaks of
their careers and I said that you could realistically not compare
because their were a whole lot of different factors in play that made
this an apples to oranges comparison. I stand by that. As far as their
overall greatness goes I think that when their careers are over we can
delve into that discussion/argument. I reckon though that even then we
will not get a definitive answer as their statistics are likely to be
similar
Shariq
Sanjay
"rkusenet" <rkus...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1143719245.8...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> shariq...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Again you may point to all of Ponting's fallacies/weaknessnesses but
>> the fact of the matter is that he\s scored prolifically despite playng
>> the majority of his games on wickets where the ball does a whole lot
>> more than the wickets on subcontinent where Sachin did his best
>> batting. Hence comparing the two is difficult
>
> the world has dipped alarmingly except Aus (which Pointing
> does not play against).
>
> His career avg till 2000 was 46. From 2001 it is 64. He has
> scored 23 out of his 30 100s after 2000. Don't you think it
> tells something.
>
>
> rk-
Well done. I missed that part.
binac...@gmail.com
rkusenet wrote:
> <binac...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1143721349.4...@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> This is the score of Ponting before 2001
>
> RSA 106,32,62,26,23
If you drop the big knock of Ponting, you will find he still averages
35 which was about Sachin's average against RSA in that era. If you
drop 169 in RSA 1997 Sachin will be left with an average of 15 in both
the series. That is what I called attrocious knocks.
> Pak 76,43,0,0,0,197
Sachin's score against Pak in 1999 were 0, 136, 6, 29, 0 , 9. While
Ponting had low scores, he also had decent ones like 76 and 43. If you
think 43 is bad, that what is Sachin's grand total of 44 runs for the
series barring that 136? Sachin was apparently at his best in that era.
While his average of 81 vs 1990s English attack and 111 in Sri Lankan
wickets of 1990s, 75 odd against Zimbabwe were only boosting his career
avg by a big margin, the avg of 35 and 33 vs RSA and Pak were pulling
down his career avg.
Gilly's Danda
rkusenet wrote:
> I didn't know that our man did not even avg 40 in last Ashes until
> I read Mike's post.
Dravid's average against England in India six months later: 61.80.
Warm regards.
binac...@gmail.com
> > If you drop the big knock of Ponting, you will find he still averages
> > 35 which was about Sachin's average against RSA in that era. If you
> > drop 169 in RSA 1997 Sachin will be left with an average of 15 in both
> > the series. That is what I called attrocious knocks.
>
He made scores like 11, 111, 1, 6, 0, 73 that series. He followed it up
with 42, 7, 18, 2 , 61, 36 in 1996. Some batting in prime that.
Sanjay
<binac...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1143769456.8...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Thats a very weird way of evaluating somebodys batting.
If you remove this, if you remove that...........are meaningless.
shariq...@yahoo.com
rkusenet wrote:
> shariq...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > While I agree that bowling standards have taken a dip it's also a fact
> > that Sachin, other than Allan Donald, hardly faced any great fast
> > bowler at their peak through in test cricket through 1998.
>
> scored 2 100s, 4 50s and a 45 against him.
I did say till 1998 - plus the OP was talking about Sachin's streak
from 1997-98
sko...@yahoo.com
First the benefit. When comparing SMG against Turner, Richards, Majid
and Chappell (G), a huge plus in SMG's column is that Viv did not have
to face Holding, Garner, Croft, Roberts and Marshall. Majid did not
have to play Imra and Akram. And Chappell G did not have to play Lillee
and Thommo.
The deduction is that SMG mostly played about half his games on flat
tracks in India and before Indian umpires (yes Paki umpires are worse
but Indian umpires were bad). So what if we were to isolate their games
against quality sides?
SMG against WI + Austrlia + Pak average vs. Viv's similar average
against Aussies and Chappell G agains WI and so on.
My gut feel, mostly remembered - anecdotal - snippets of reading -based
ranking would be as follows:
Viv richards > Greag Chappell > SMG > Glen Turner > Majid (perhaps
Majid ahead of Turner).
And SRT?
Again I suspect that my ranking would be: Waugh > Lara > SRT = Ponting.
If only Dravid had a better record against McGrath I would have rated
Waugh > RFD > Lara > SRT = Ponting.
Not that it matters much. SRT is all but done and has earned his rest.
I am waiting for him to walk off into the sunset after a 100 -
preferably in my hometown (chadigarh) - and live happily afterwards as
the god of Bombay. A nicer, more likeable version of SMG.
And then of course there is the dood Raina. Dare we see an SRT in the
wings?
-SB
It's been a long time since England has had a contender for the best
batsman or bowler in the world spot. Goes back to what Dexter and
Truman? (and another really fast bowler Tyson or Stathman or somebody).
They probably have the world's best all rounder though - Flintoff and
before that they had Botham and perhaps even Grieg.
shariq...@yahoo.com
1990-92. You should have seen some of the innings he played and the
quality of runs he made against superior opposition. His 147 not out
against the West Indies attack on a dicey wicket in 1991 is declared by
many as the greatest innings ever played. As a person who watched that
innings as well I am inclined to agree
Shariq
Mike Holmans
keyboard and brought forth:
>skoo I think Graham Gooch was the best batsman in the world from
It was 154*. It was also bitterly cold. And I've not seen a better
innings.
Cheers,
Mike
maiet
"Mike Holmans" <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bafr2250l556qokqj...@4ax.com...
yes it was a GREAT innings. some other innings of greatness i've seen are
Gilly's 149* to win the 2nd test 99/00 v pak, Lara's 153* in 99, Blewett's
214 v SA in 97 ( yeah yeah i know its blewett but he couldnt have played
better, flayed a very good SA attack)
Dipak Basu
news:1143842528.3...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> And then of course there is the dood Raina. Dare we see an SRT in the
> wings?
Dare we forget a SRT-lookalike who stood rooted and delivered? Where is
Veeru bound?
> It's been a long time since England has had a contender for the best
> batsman or bowler in the world spot. Goes back to what Dexter and
> Truman?
Boycs, Gower and Gooch come to mind...
(and another really fast bowler Tyson or Stathman or somebody).
Willis and Botham (though you have him down as an allrounder...)
Mike Holmans
keyboard and brought forth:
>
>"Mike Holmans" <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:bafr2250l556qokqj...@4ax.com...
>> On 31 Mar 2006 15:08:20 -0800, shariq...@yahoo.com tapped the
>> keyboard and brought forth:
>>
>> >skoo I think Graham Gooch was the best batsman in the world from
>> >1990-92. You should have seen some of the innings he played and the
>> >quality of runs he made against superior opposition. His 147 not out
>> >against the West Indies attack on a dicey wicket in 1991 is declared by
>> >many as the greatest innings ever played. As a person who watched that
>> >innings as well I am inclined to agree
>>
>> It was 154*. It was also bitterly cold. And I've not seen a better
>> innings.
>
>yes it was a GREAT innings.
Gooch is one of the best examples of captaincy bringing out the best
in a player. If he'd played throughout his career the way he did while
captain, he would now be spoken of with awe. Much the same can be said
of Inzamam, of course. Both he and Gooch as captain have batted with a
kind of monumental seriousness, as though the fate of nations depend
on them; they stand at the crease huge and immovable, directing
events, their strokes the blows of sledgehammers, their defence a
stone rampart, the only ways to deny them being a nuclear explosion or
treachery. Watching them, we are back in the Middle Ages when monarchs
still donned suits of armour and rode out at the head of their armies
to defend their home or conquer someone else's.
Cheers,
Mike
dp
> Gooch is one of the best examples of captaincy bringing out the best
> in a player. If he'd played throughout his career the way he did while
> captain, he would now be spoken of with awe. Much the same can be said
> of Inzamam, of course. Both he and Gooch as captain have batted with a
> kind of monumental seriousness, as though the fate of nations depend
> on them; they stand at the crease huge and immovable, directing
> events, their strokes the blows of sledgehammers, their defence a
> stone rampart, the only ways to deny them being a nuclear explosion or
> treachery. Watching them, we are back in the Middle Ages when monarchs
> still donned suits of armour and rode out at the head of their armies
> to defend their home or conquer someone else's.
Nice description.
dp
Mad Hamish
wrote:
><sko...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1143842528.3...@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> And then of course there is the dood Raina. Dare we see an SRT in the
>> wings?
>
>Dare we forget a SRT-lookalike who stood rooted and delivered? Where is
>Veeru bound?
>
>> It's been a long time since England has had a contender for the best
>> batsman or bowler in the world spot. Goes back to what Dexter and
>> Truman?
>
>Boycs, Gower and Gooch come to mind...
Boycott maybe, Gooch maybe in the early 90s.
>
>(and another really fast bowler Tyson or Stathman or somebody).
>
>Willis and Botham (though you have him down as an allrounder...)
>
Possibly I'm underrating Willis because I only saw him in 82-83, but I
wouldn't have thought that either Willis or Botham were really all
that high compared to other bowlers around at the time.
Snow might have a claim.
sko...@yahoo.com
Was Viv in business then or had he yeilded to Richie Richardson? Also
wasn't Border at the peak of his abilities in 1990-92?
I am sure Gooch was a terrific batsman but best in the world?
> His 147 not out against the West Indies attack on a dicey wicket in 1991
And what was that attack like? IIRC WI were in a serious decline by
1990. The fast bowling greats were gone (perhaps an ageing Walsh and an
erratic Ambrose were left).
I should look up Cricinfo on Gooch. Never realized that he was in that
class of greatness.
-SB
maiet
<sko...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143864404.4...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > I think Graham Gooch was the best batsman in the world from 1990-92.
>
> Was Viv in business then or had he yeilded to Richie Richardson?
viv retired in 91.
Also
> wasn't Border at the peak of his abilities in 1990-92?
border was in the worst form of his career then, no tons from 88 to 92.
sko...@yahoo.com
Fun car to race while its wound up. But seriously a pretty lmited
batsman. I wouldn't put him in the 11 best batsmen at anytime in his
career. In spite of all the triple hundereds that he took off the
Pakis. Having great hand and eye coordination may let you hit Akthar
over the gully for a six but sooner or later you will get out. More to
the point, a professional side and a smart coach will figure how to
bowl to you. Don't give him too much width keep it just short in length
and bring it in (or bowl from wide off the crease) which is what the
Poms have been doing and which the Aussies worked out. It is onething
to hit raw pace on flat wickets out of the ground and it is quite
another to go up against thinking bowlers like Mcgrath and Flintoff.
Look at his aggregate figures against them - not just that century in
Melbourne.
Entertaining dood to watch while on a song. The songs are getting
shorter and less frequent though.
-SB
V
sko...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > I think Graham Gooch was the best batsman in the world from 1990-92.
>
> Was Viv in business then or had he yeilded to Richie Richardson? Also
> wasn't Border at the peak of his abilities in 1990-92?
>
> I am sure Gooch was a terrific batsman but best in the world?
>
> > His 147 not out against the West Indies attack on a dicey wicket in 1991
>
> And what was that attack like? IIRC WI were in a serious decline by
> 1990. The fast bowling greats were gone (perhaps an ageing Walsh and an
> erratic Ambrose were left).
Aging Walsh and erratic Ambrose in 1990?
Mike Holmans
and brought forth:
>> I think Graham Gooch was the best batsman in the world from 1990-92.
>
>Was Viv in business then or had he yeilded to Richie Richardson? Also
>wasn't Border at the peak of his abilities in 1990-92?
>
>I am sure Gooch was a terrific batsman but best in the world?
That Headingley innings pushed him to no.1 in the PWC ratings. He
stopped being rated number one in the world during the New Zealand
series three years later.
>
>> His 147 not out against the West Indies attack on a dicey wicket in 1991
>
>And what was that attack like? IIRC WI were in a serious decline by
>1990. The fast bowling greats were gone (perhaps an ageing Walsh and an
>erratic Ambrose were left).
You R anything but C.
Walsh and Ambrose were so old and tired that both were to play for
another ten years and take another 350 wickets each. Admittedly
Malcolm Marshall wasn't quite at his peak any more, but Patrick
Patterson was quite a handful too.
Would you care to find a nice hole in which to curl up and die, or do
you just feel a twat right now?
Cheers,
Mike
Mike Holmans
<newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> tapped the keyboard and
brought forth:
>>
>Possibly I'm underrating Willis because I only saw him in 82-83, but I
>wouldn't have thought that either Willis or Botham were really all
>that high compared to other bowlers around at the time.
>Snow might have a claim.
You are seriously underrating Willis. Viv Richards thought him the
best non-West Indian fast bowler of the period.
I can quite understand how you would have a different view if your
only evidence was that series in 82-83, though: as captain he did not
do for himself what Jardine had done for Larwood in terms of reserving
his best fast bowler for Test matches only, and age was beginning to
catch up with him. He had been much better while getting his first 250
wickets (300 in those days being a HUGE amount).
Cheers,
Mike
shariq...@yahoo.com
Marshall was the oldest of the pack and he was 33. Anbrose was 27,
Walsh 28 and Patterson 29. Marshall finished that series with 20
wickets in 5 tests and while in the twilight of his career, was still
good for 4-5 wickets a test match at that point. Ambrose was at the
peak of his powers and finished with 28 wickets in that series and had
torn it up in all but 2 of all the test series he had played upto that
point.Walsh finished that England series with 15 wickets at an average
of 32. Not bad for a guy who was always brought on as second change.
And then the burly Patterson who took 13 wickets at a sub 30 average.
That hardly constitutes a over the hill attack - infact this very
attack had torn the Australian batting apart a couple of months
earlier. So what Gooch accomplsihed against them in that innings on
that wicket was truly remarkable
Shariq
sko...@yahoo.com
> only evidence was that series in 82-83,
There was also a match in which England had to follow on against the
Aussies. And yet ended up winning (I mean England ended up winning).
IIRC Willis had a good game then? Could be wrong I was too young to
follow anything other than Indian Cricket those days but I recall
reading after the Laxman test (Calcutta) that England had done it
before India. Follow on and beat the team that the made them follow on.
And I think it mentioned that Willis had a nice-ish spell. Of coure the
redoubtable Greig and Underwood plus Knott must have done the Aussies
in. But Willis was mentioned in that report too.
-SB
Or was it Old and Snow? Snow did get under the Aussies skin but he was
before my time.
Mad Hamish
Well every day Walsh was getting a day older, and Ambrose's batting
was inconsistant.