Best batsman today ?

[playkid12]

Best batsman? Has to Chanderpaul, wowed me when I saw him over here at Headingley. I don't think I've seen a one man team before, but the West Indies certainly were.

Haven't seen a one man team? What about when Lara and Tendulkar were one man teams for WI and Ind in the 90s?

As for best players right now, gotta be either Ponting, Hayden, or Sangakkara in the batting dept.

In bowling, I go with none other than Murali, even though Brett Lee looks like he's getting better and more mature by the day.

 

[Adarsh]

Imo, it's Yuvraj Singh. Every time he's batted this year he's got runs. And he's an awesome player to watch. He's not got too many chances this year, but when he got one, boy did he take it. So for me, it's Yuvraj.

 

[manee]

Suresh Raina (19) - Dropped
RP Singh (19) - Briefly dropped
Irfan Pathan (was 20, but only by 2 months) - Dropped earlier this year
Mohammed Kaif (19 when he debuted) - Dropped after long run with ODI team
Ashish Nehra (19) - Dropped after long run
Ishant Sharma (19) - Dropped, recalled
Piyush Chawla (16)- Test debut was in 2006, he's currently 18 - Dropped
Dinesh Karthik (19) - Dropped, recalled
Robin Uthappa (19) - In and out of the team, back in the team
Harbhajan Singh (18/19) - Had a long run with the team

Not a great record with young stars in recent years. If these people could have gone to a high level academy or A team (maybe they should have two A teams to accomadate for extra talent, with one team being exclusively under 21) rather than in and out of international level.

 

[Animator!]

It clearly can't be as hard as you have said though. Otherwise at least more than one of these teenagers who get thrown in would still be around or not have spent years out of the side falling apart.

Indian selectors pick on style amongst youth far too much. Ricky Ponting was considered to be a future Australian captain at 15. At 16 he was in Aussie nets pinging 90 mph off his nose, but he still didn't get into his state side for another year or so, because there is a certain amount of player protection that's needed that Indian just doesnt even think about.

 

[sohum]

Yes, but they do prematurely pick players very often. A lot of teenagers who show that they could be international cricketers get picked straight out of school in India. Whereas in Australia who have to play yourself up the systems.

It is a Tendulkar hangover. You don't want to miss out on someone's quality like Australia missed out on Hussey's quality for so many years.

 

[manee]

Indian selectors pick on style amongst youth far too much. Ricky Ponting was considered to be a future Australian captain at 15. At 16 he was in Aussie nets pinging 90 mph off his nose, but he still didn't get into his state side for another year or so, because there is a certain amount of player protection that's needed that Indian just doesnt even think about.

I could not agree more.

 

[sohum]

Suresh Raina (19) - Dropped

His was a premature selection. But he was named to Wisden's list of cricketers who will supposedly have an effect on the future.

RP Singh (19) - Briefly dropped

Irrelevant as he is one of our first picks in Tests now. His selection also had to do a lot with injury and such.

Irfan Pathan (was 20, but only by 2 months) - Dropped earlier this year

He began concentrating too much on his batting under Greg Chappell and his bowling went to the dogs. Wasim himself was impressed with Pathan when he burst on to the scene.

Mohammed Kaif (19 when he debuted) - Dropped after long run with ODI team

The selector's favorite scapegoat. He is supposed to be one of the greatest thinkers of the game and was touted to be a future captain as well.

Ashish Nehra (19) - Dropped after long run

Injury sent him back.

Ishant Sharma (19) - Dropped, recalled

He played one game against Bangladesh. He was only really called because of injuries.

Piyush Chawla (16)- Test debut was in 2006, he's currently 18 - Dropped

He is still an ODI pick, I think, and was not selected because of injury. He was picked simply because he was too good for the Under 19's.

Dinesh Karthik (19) - Dropped, recalled

India haven't really handled their keepers well at all, so there's not much to say about that.

Robin Uthappa (19) - In and out of the team, back in the team

Another Greg Chappell selection, right, along with Raina?

Not a great record with young stars in recent years. If these people could have gone to a high level academy or A team (maybe they should have two A teams to accomadate for extra talent, with one team being exclusively under 21) rather than in and out of international level.

There's two arguments here. The first is that domestic cricket is not really a useful place for these players since they are so much better than their opposition. This is currently the case with the likes of Badrinath and Tiwary who've spent tons of time in domestic cricket. Hence, they aren't gaining too much from the experience. The other argument is that they need to mature enough before they are exposed to international cricket.

With India it is also a little different because we've got 4 players who've been playing for almost 2 decades. When these players leave, it will be difficult to choose someone based on inflated domestic averages (which are a side effect of a poorly organized first class competition up until 3 years or so back), which is why we are gaging their performance at international level.

And the effects haven't been that bad--we got to the World Cup final just 4 years back, we build the world record number of chases in a row and we've also played some really good test cricket overseas (though that is more or less dependent on our senior players). More than anything, choosing youngsters gives us athleticism in the field which is clearly not visible from the senior players.

 

[manee]

His was a premature selection. But he was named to Wisden's list of cricketers who will supposedly have an effect on the future.

Still picked too early though.

Irrelevant as he is one of our first picks in Tests now. His selection also had to do a lot with injury and such.

He would not be in the team were it not for his time at Leicestershire.

He began concentrating too much on his batting under Greg Chappell and his bowling went to the dogs. Wasim himself was impressed with Pathan when he burst on to the scene.

No doubt that he was a prospect but certainly was not consistent enough in Tests and was too expensive in ODIs. You need to nurture talents, not pick them instantly.

The selector's favorite scapegoat. He is supposed to be one of the greatest thinkers of the game and was touted to be a future captain as well.

Didn't really perform well enough for India as a batsman though.

Injury sent him back.

Injury may have been prevented if he had spent more time on fitness prior to being chucked into the hectic international schedule.

He played one game against Bangladesh. He was only really called because of injuries.

He'd only played 4 FC games though, did India not have anyone who had played the whole last season?

He is still an ODI pick, I think, and was not selected because of injury. He was picked simply because he was too good for the Under 19's

Why pick him if he cannot even boss Indian domestic cricket? It was another premature selection based on U19 form.

There's two arguments here. The first is that domestic cricket is not really a useful place for these players since they are so much better than their opposition. This is currently the case with the likes of Badrinath and Tiwary who've spent tons of time in domestic cricket. Hence, they aren't gaining too much from the experience. The other argument is that they need to mature enough before they are exposed to international cricket.

With India it is also a little different because we've got 4 players who've been playing for almost 2 decades. When these players leave, it will be difficult to choose someone based on inflated domestic averages (which are a side effect of a poorly organized first class competition up until 3 years or so back), which is why we are gaging their performance at international level.

And the effects haven't been that bad--we got to the World Cup final just 4 years back, we build the world record number of chases in a row and we've also played some really good test cricket overseas (though that is more or less dependent on our senior players). More than anything, choosing youngsters gives us athleticism in the field which is clearly not visible from the senior players.

I know the arguement is an overused one, but with the population of cricket lovers that India have, along with the talent of U19 teams, the grooming system is evidently poor if India are not winning most of their games. India have been relying on Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman to get them through, without them, their domestic inefficiencies may be revealed more abundantly.

Back on topic please

 

[zreh]

You know nothing about cricket and you seem to be puzzled as how to respond when someones stat's the truth and proves that someone's actually allot better then Chanderpaul. 7 centuries in the last couple of years doesn't set the world alight.

An average of over 57 in a career is amazing but over a short period of time isn't when guys have acchieved much better.

Don't worry, as you'll see in many threads that I post in. I have the last laugh and I am often right.


LMAO!

Didn't you once say Matthew Hayden would almost certainly NOT maintain an average of 40 in ODI cricket? And yet over the last year of your disappearence his average has risen to 44? The same as Tendulkars? His also hit 5 centuries over the last year?

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/showthread.php?t=22802&highlight=Opening+Batsman

What happened there?

...

But you think the fact that Tendulkar had pressure on his shoulders makes him a better batsman?

It's not like Ponting's not ever had pressure on his shoulders, because he has, everytime Australia's in trouble he'll come and play a vital innings that will win us the match. He was predicted to go on and captain Australia at the age of 14, debuted at First-Class cricket at 17 (Which is incredible because you'll probably never find anyone in the future debuting in Australia FC cricket at a younger age, most debut in their early 20's), and he has overcome personal problems early on in his career to go on and become probably the 2nd best batsman to ever live.

Ponting isn't great because he played with great players that helped him become great, his one of the main reason why Australian Cricket has had so much success. Watch Australia when Ponting isn't playing, the don't look anything like the same team and often lose.

And to say Ponting wouldn't of acchieved anything if he had the same pressure as Tendulkar just because YOU think so is ridiculous because as I shown with the Greatest Opening Batsman thread, you're not very intelligent when it comes to predicting these sort of things, are you?

I'm not very intelligent? my friend, look at the garbage post you just made....You make me laugh....You said that I thought that Tendulkar was a better batsman than Ponting because he had more pressure on him? I also explained in detail what that pressure comprised of, and trust me, as an athlete, i know what pressure can do, you see it everyday in all kinds of sports....Please dont make a personal attack on me again when thats all you can do to try and debate me on this certain topic.....Even your great Don Bradman said that Tendulkar was the closest thing to him he had ever seen....Secondly, we'll see if ponting can finish his carrer with as many games as tendulkar has played, with his current numners....he's got a long way to go...

And again I never claimed tendulkar was better, its just my opinion that he is.

And please dont ever go about saying how Hayden is better than Sachin, its not even close...

 

[aussie_ben91]

I'm not very intelligent? my friend, look at the garbage post you just made....You make me laugh....You said that I thought that Tendulkar was a better batsman than Ponting because he had more pressure on him? I also explained in detail what that pressure comprised of, and trust me, as an athlete, i know what pressure can do, you see it everyday in all kinds of sports....Please dont make a personal attack on me again when thats all you can do to try and debate me on this certain topic.....Even your great Don Bradman said that Tendulkar was the closest thing to him he had ever seen....Secondly, we'll see if ponting can finish his carrer with as many games as tendulkar has played, with his current numners....he's got a long way to go...

And again I never claimed tendulkar was better, its just my opinion that he is.

And please dont ever go about saying how Hayden is better than Sachin, its not even close...

Garbage? Obviously not as you failed to argue hardly any of it.

What Don Bradman says in this comparison is completely irrevelant because he passed away just as Ponting was coming into his prime.

And you still haven't explain this...?

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/showpost.php?p=472647&postcount=10

IF Hayden would have mainted that 40.10 average and had played as many games as Tendulkar...And I very very highly doubt he would have mainted that average....He would still be around 1500 runs short of Tendulkar's total....And this is...If he had mainted that average, and realisticly speaking he most certainly would not have. If Hayden had played as many games, he would probably have a lower average, and hense would then be around 4-5 thousand runs short of Tendulkar...Maybe more.

Mat I NO Runs HS1 HS2 HS3 Ave 100 50 0
overall 153 147 15 5835 181* 158 146 44.20 10 33 9

Sachin is a great batsman but to say a comparison with Hayden isn't even close is an incrediably ridiculous statement and by your theory of comparing statistics; comparing Hayden's stats to Tendulkar's would be closer then if you compared Tendulkar's stats to Ponting.

I'm not trying to personal attack you because in a debate I don't need to. Basically most arguements I get into on this forum I win and you've made some shocking statements in the past about Hayden not being good enough in ODI and his performances over the last year have made you look like a complete bathoon.

You make me laugh.

It's not easier to get into the Indian team. You've really got to be kidding if you say so. The people who play cricket in India is probably 5 times the Australian population. Statistically, it's a minute chance of getting in. 11/1,100,000.

Of course that's not exactly how it works. In India the mindset is that the youngsters are given a look in as they may be the next best thing in the world. In Australia they're given a lot of time in domestic cricket to prove their worth.

And how many domestic teams does India have? Australia have 6.

 

[SciD]

What Don Bradman says in this comparison is completely irrevelant because he passed away just as Ponting was coming into his prime.

Don Bradman is considered to be best and he said that Sachin is someone who bats like he did. Now Ponting no where near bats like Sachin therefore after Bradman it has to be Sachin and then Ponting.

 

[playkid12]

grr grr I like Tendulkar arrogance arrogance I like Hayden grr grr I like Ponting grr grr You are wrong anger anger

...I think I made my point with that.

Think your Hayden-loving opinion will actually change a Tendulkar or Ponting supporter's views? Or the Tendulkar-loving opinion shaking a Ponting supporter who suddenly realizes that he's been wrong all this time. Or a Ponting supporter convincing a fanatic Indian Tendulkar supporter? Do you even see that as a possibility? There's no point in this. There's always going to be arguments about these guys, they're all brilliant. Stats will say one thing, pressure on the player will say another, captaining a side while staying in form will say another guy, and a fourth thing will say another. You can't really choose based on logic, as logical as you can try to sound b/c you'll find evidence that points to another guy and someone might weigh that evidence's importance more than you do. And even if you somehow find convincing, factual evidence that one guy is more superior, do you actually think stubborn fans that've followed their hero constantly succeed will change their views?


With that said, I like Tendulkar. Whatever you present me with will not change my opinion because I know my decision is based on more than just that he's a great player. It's also affected by emotion. Emotion that has blossomed by watching him on TV commercials. Of him giving me an autograph on my bat. Of his inspiring success story when all of Indian cricket was falling apart. Of him being one of the heroes from my country in Time magazine. Of him being the only Indian sportsman that has any credible fame in the world. Of the joy of watching him play and giving India victory almost single handedly.

You get the point.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Don Bradman is considered to be best and he said that Sachin is someone who bats like he did. Now Ponting no where near bats like Sachin therefore after Bradman it has to be Sachin and then Ponting.

He never saw Ponting in his prime.

 

[zreh]

Garbage? Obviously not as you failed to argue hardly any of it.

What Don Bradman says in this comparison is completely irrevelant because he passed away just as Ponting was coming into his prime.

And you still haven't explain this...?

http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/showpost.php?p=472647&postcount=10





Sachin is a great batsman but to say a comparison with Hayden isn't even close is an incrediably ridiculous statement and by your theory of comparing statistics; comparing Hayden's stats to Tendulkar's would be closer then if you compared Tendulkar's stats to Ponting.

I'm not trying to personal attack you because in a debate I don't need to. Basically most arguements I get into on this forum I win and you've made some shocking statements in the past about Hayden not being good enough in ODI and his performances over the last year have made you look like a complete bathoon.

You make me laugh.


And how many domestic teams does India have? Australia have 6.

Good, you just proved my point that you cant read.....
Just like you quoted, i said that i doubt Hayden will be able to maintain his career average, if he had played as many games as tendulkar...sure this has been an outstanding year for Hayden, and he's been one of the best One day batsman this year, if not the best....but he is 36 and do you really think that he will be able to match tendulkars tally of games play and still maintain that outstanding average? This year was great for him, next year he'll be 37, the year after, 38, and I still doubt that he will be averaging around 42.....if he does continue to average that much until he retires then i will be proved wrong, but that hasnt happened.....Now the reason i say that Tendulkar is easily a better batsman than Hayden is because he has played more games, has scored so many more hundreds and fifties, has more runs than anybody in ODI cricket by quite a margin (3000 runs i think it is) and still averages 44. This past year he got dismissed 6 times in the 90's, hes played very well this year and at 34, he's still got some cricket left in him. When Sachin's on his game he's one of the best. As is Hayden....but to maintain what sachin has over so many games, is a tough task, especially when you consider that he scored his first century after 17 matches.....plus The added pressure on being India's saviour....there have been unfair and ridiculous expectations put on him from an early age, (nothing hayden can even compare to) and for the most part, Tendulkar has risen to them.

let me tell you something......Firstly I respect you as a poster on this forum, you're well educated with the game, as am I, and I enjoy reading alot of your posts.......now then, I want to tell you about what pressure can do to a person......I've always played a high level of american football, i was good at all sports, but at football (without sounding like an arrogant jerk) I was quite good....I played for my provinces under 21, under 19, and under 17 teams, but i rarely performed in important matches...infact tryouts for the under 19 games i played horribly, the only reason i got selected was because of my dominant statistics in regular season play.....I averaged over 140 yards per game, and you probably dont understand what that is, but in comparisson, in our national quater final, semi final, and final game, i had 32, 51, and 55 because i was under pressure to perform....i am ashamed to say that i could never reach the next level of play to go professional because i could not be counted on in important games, after that year the scholarships i had been promised were taken away from me, because not to many good universities wanted someone who would not perform in important games.....this still haunts me, but my carrer came to an end when i tore my acl very badly....now football is history.

You might not want to believe it, but as an Athlete i can tell you from experience what pressure can do to someone, it finished me and finished alot of people i know....its tough, and my point was I admired Tendulkar and respected his game so much because the pressure on him was ten million times greated than what it was on me and most other sportspeople around the world. You are not indian and you cannot even begin to understand how people regard him in India....if he performs, he's second only to God in their eyes, if he doest perform, they want his head on a platter.....and the ammount he has done for indian cricket and cricket in general is extremely insperational and almost impossible to believe....thats why i hold him in such high regard.....

 

[SciD]

He never saw Ponting in his prime.

When you are in prime you score more runs than average but your batting style always remain same. I have not noticed Ponting changing anything in his game except using feet to spinners since the time i have been seeing him bat for Australia after 1996 world cup.