More proof of why Ricky Ponting is easily the greatest batsman of the modern era.

[Insomniac]

Its definitely not 1-1.

Test cricket is undeniably the ultimate form of the game. Please show me something that states otherwise. Yes, ODI cricket is nice and all, I enjoy a one day game just as much as anyone, but if you're gonna start an ODI vs Test debate, and rave about ODI cricket being better than tests, then I'm afraid thats just a bit sad.

And also, regarding the CB Series, its not that its not being counted - he is just saying that other than the CB Series Finals, Tendulkar got out for low scores - they were good innings, very good in fact, but those are the only notable ones he's performed in (as compared to other great batsmen) when his team needed him.

 

[metallics2006]

Nothing except the CB series finals? How about this?

Sharjah 1998 - 143 runs against Australia

WC 2003- 98 runs against Pakistan

I will post more innings soon.

 

[Insomniac]

If you can list them all, then thats sad. Either way please explain how it is 1-1 between them just became of a better ODI career for Tendulkar. Do you not accept Test cricket is the ultimate form of the game?

 

[manee]

Test cricket is 10 times harder then ODI cricket. Compare Ponting & Tendulkar on them.

I understand someone wanting to compare them merely in Test cricket; but suggesting that a comparison in ODI cricket is moot because it is 'easier' (what does that even mean?) is ludicrous.

 

[King Pietersen]

If you can list them all, then thats sad. Either way please explain how it is 1-1 between them just became of a better ODI career for Tendulkar. Do you not accept Test cricket is the ultimate form of the game?

What exactly do you have against Tendulkar ? I've not seen you once admit that Tendulkar is a fine player, and one of the greats of the era. Test Cricket IS the pinnacle of the game, but ODi cricket is AS difficult in terms of technical ability, possibly harder as you have to be aggressive and have shots, but the mental side makes Test Cricket the more difficult challenge. Tendulkar is a better ODi player than anyone else who's ever lived, in terms of what he's achieved anyway. The sheer amount of hundreds alone is testament to his quality.

Ponting's not even too far ahead of Tendulkar in terms of his Test record anyway. His average is only 4 ahead of Sachin, and Sachin's career has been far longer, and therefore his average has had more time to fall, but he still has a fantastic record. Ponting's got the better Test/Hundred ratio, but apart from that he's not leaps and bounds ahead of Tendulkar.

I'd agree that Ponting has been the far better player in the past 4-5 years, but in terms of their overall career there are arguments that exist for both players. If we're going by an overall judgement, I'd possibly say that Tendulkar is the better player, due to his superior ODi record. Just because the Test format is the primary format, it doesn't mean that ODi's should just be ignored. You also have to remember that Ponting never had to take on Lee, Warne and McGrath, the former being 2 of the greatest bowlers of all-time, and with India never really being graced with a real standout bowler, who can run through batting Line-ups, Sachin's had to face all the top bowlers in the world. I don't think you can hold being born in Australia against Ponting though.

Overall, I'd probably side with Tendulkar tbh, if we were looking at their overall careers. But in terms of this current decade, Ponting has been the stand out batsman, but Mario, you need to give Tendulkar more credit than you're giving him. Your factuous argument in the famous Tendulkar-Inzy thread proved only 1 thing against Sachin, and that's the average in wins, apart from that, Sachin's career stats are far better than Inzamam's, but we won't go there in here. I just feel you need to give Sachin Tendulkar the credit he deserves.

 

[metallics2006]

If you can list them all, then thats sad. Either way please explain how it is 1-1 between them just became of a better ODI career for Tendulkar. Do you not accept Test cricket is the ultimate form of the game?

You are fighting a losing battle. Why is it sad if I can list them?

I will give this straight to your face since you asked how it makes them 1-1.

Ponting is Excellent in Tests.
Sachin is completely in another league in ODIs.
SO, it makes them 1-1.
If you cannot understand this simple language, I should come up with another message to make you understand. I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand it.:

I gave you video proof. Your points will be accepted if you can do the same.

 

[sohum]

Tendulkar's has been playing cricket for 20 years. If anyone thinks that the recent CB series were his only notable achievements in cricket, then they need to start watching fishing or something because cricket is too complicated for them.

 

[Insomniac]

What exactly do you have against Tendulkar ? I've not seen you once admit that Tendulkar is a fine player, and one of the greats of the era. Test Cricket IS the pinnacle of the game, but ODi cricket is AS difficult in terms of technical ability, possibly harder as you have to be aggressive and have shots, but the mental side makes Test Cricket the more difficult challenge. Tendulkar is a better ODi player than anyone else who's ever lived, in terms of what he's achieved anyway. The sheer amount of hundreds alone is testament to his quality.

No, Test cricket is the biggest test of all. ODI Cricket is a test, but not as much as playing for 5 days. We all know Tendulkar's mental capabilities are not at the highest when compared to others (Ponting, Inzamam, Sangakkara, Dravid) but the mental capacity is part of cricket, no?

Tendulkar is definitely a better ODI player, but once again falters quite a bit under pressure as compared to Ponting or Dravid, which leads me to be to ask why? It's definitely no coincidence.

Also, the ODI averages between Tendulkar and Ponting - only 1.09 runs per innings - its not as big of a difference as you think. And KP, I have nothing against Tendulkar except his attitude on the field, and his tendency to collapse under pressure.

Oh, and the win match averages in ODIs:

Ricky Ponting - 50.39
Sachin Tendulkar - 57.43

So yes, Sachin is the better player in ODIs.

But test match cricket?

Ricky Ponting - 63.75
Sachin Tendulkar - 62.11.

Interesting.

Ponting's not even too far ahead of Tendulkar in terms of his Test record anyway. His average is only 4 ahead of Sachin, and Sachin's career has been far longer, and therefore his average has had more time to fall, but he still has a fantastic record. Ponting's got the better Test/Hundred ratio, but apart from that he's not leaps and bounds ahead of Tendulkar.

I'd agree that Ponting has been the far better player in the past 4-5 years, but in terms of their overall career there are arguments that exist for both players. If we're going by an overall judgement, I'd possibly say that Tendulkar is the better player, due to his superior ODi record. Just because the Test format is the primary format, it doesn't mean that ODi's should just be ignored. You also have to remember that Ponting never had to take on Lee, Warne and McGrath, the former being 2 of the greatest bowlers of all-time, and with India never really being graced with a real standout bowler, who can run through batting Line-ups, Sachin's had to face all the top bowlers in the world. I don't think you can hold being born in Australia against Ponting though.

As shown above, yes, arguments do exist for both. ODIs can't be ignored, but they can't be put as equal to test match cricket. Feel free to start another thread if you disagree. And I'm sick of these excuses that India don't have bowlers, honestly. Kumble averaged 24 from 1990-1996. And many said in that thread that Kumble's average was 30.


Overall, I'd probably side with Tendulkar tbh, if we were looking at their overall careers. But in terms of this current decade, Ponting has been the stand out batsman, but Mario, you need to give Tendulkar more credit than you're giving him. Your factuous argument in the famous Tendulkar-Inzy thread proved only 1 thing against Sachin, and that's the average in wins, apart from that, Sachin's career stats are far better than Inzamam's, but we won't go there in here. I just feel you need to give Sachin Tendulkar the credit he deserves.

You are fighting a losing battle. Why is it sad if I can list them?

I will give this straight to your face since you asked how it makes them 1-1.

Ponting is Excellent in Tests.
Sachin is completely in another league in ODIs.
SO, it makes them 1-1.
If you cannot understand this simple language, I should come up with another message to make you understand. I am sure you are intelligent enough to understand it.:

I gave you video proof. Your points will be accepted if you can do the same.

How does it make them 1-1? I fail to see the logic, because test cricket is more difficult and takes more energy out of a character than ODIs. It just seems to me you are a "modern day Indian fan" who is interested in T20s and ODIs only, which is the basis of your logic.

Tendulkar's has been playing cricket for 20 years. If anyone thinks that the recent CB series were his only notable achievements in cricket, then they need to start watching fishing or something because cricket is too complicated for them.

Please tell me sohum, does he not collapse under pressure often? So many instances its not funny.

Sachin is a great batsman, yes. But there are some who are better than him.

Just something for people to chew on - Sachin has 35 50s in losses, Ponting has 8. - Thats in ODIs.

 

[Sureshot]

Keep it friendly, chaps.

 

[manee]

Just something for people to chew on - Sachin has 35 50s in losses, Ponting has 8. - Thats an ODIs.

What in the world does that prove? Perhaps that Australia win more often than India? Do fifties even win matches, high ones perhaps, but the majority play a small part, especially as totals are getting higher and pitches flatter.

 

[shravi]

You say it as if Ponting was the only one to score in those matches. Yeah, Ponting got 50, the rest got ducks and Australia went on to win :. Great theory. Cricket is a team game.

 

[Insomniac]

What in the world does that prove? Perhaps that Australia win more often than India? Do fifties even win matches, high ones perhaps, but the majority play a small part, especially as totals are getting higher and pitches flatter.

It proves that Sachin is sometimes not a team-player

By the way, I counted for you manee. You speak of totals getting higher, thats occured since 2006 (we saw a surge right after 06 I believe)

Sachin has 9 50+ scores since 2006, which is 2 100s.

So, if you wanna look at it this way, 28 50s in losses, while Ponting has 8 50s in losses.

Now let me give you some examples of Sachin playing for himself:

Belfast, 2007 v South Africa

Pitch:
The surface, because of the generous sunshine, looks good with no cracks. It may seam around a little bit, but after a while should settle in to a good batting track.

Sachin Tendulkar: 99 off 143 balls, strike rate of 69.

India made only 242/8 on a good pitch, SA chased it down easily.

Sachin Tendulkar: 55 off 86 balls v England S/R: 63

India 212 all out, due to Tendulkar batting like a snail and he went at 103/4 after 30 overs, causing Indian tail to slog their way to 212

Pitch: There is not much green grass on the track. It looks a pretty firm one. Graham Gooch reckons it is a bat-first track. Gooch says there might be a little movement with the new ball but not much.

While Indian bowlers did well to get England 7 wickets down, it really was a 270+ wicket.

Sachin Tendulkar: 55 off 97 balls, S/R 56.70

Pitch had only a bit of moisture, but that went away after the first 6 overs or so

India made only 200/9, thanks to MS Dhoni.

South Africa chased it in less than 32 overs thanks to Sachin's slow and probably looking for a 100 batting.

SR Tendulkar - 100 off 113 balls.

Now you may ask why I've included this, let me tell you why. Flat pitch. VERY flat pitch, India made 328/8 thanks to Yuvraj and Dhoni.

Tendulkar nudges his way to 100. Right after he gets 100, he attempts to paddle the ball, goes LBW. He was the set man, he was the man who should have stayed. If anyone can find the wicket, you can tell he presented the wicket to Pakistan.

Pakistan chased it down thanks to Salman Butt and Shoaib Malik in dim light, although really India were looking at 380+ in that game.

And there are so many more examples.

zMario added 2 Minutes and 2 Seconds later...

You say it as if Ponting was the only one to score in those matches. Yeah, Ponting got 50, the rest got ducks and Australia went on to win :. Great theory. Cricket is a team game.

What are you talking about? Please clarify for me. Are you saying that I don't think the Australian batsmen do as much as Ponting? Guess what, that is what I think. Ponting is the real big "kahuna" of the Australian team, with great support.

Now please don't use the excuses Sachin doesn't get support, like you guys have been trying to say. What happened to Sehwag, Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, Yuvraj :

In those matches above, his teammates also scored, for the team (unlike Tendulkar playing for his 100. )

 

[King Pietersen]

So Tendulkar making scores in games that India lose makes him a selfish player ? Could it not be that the rest of the team failed to perform around him, or that the bowlers had a bad day at the office. Your point is completely factuous and makes no sense.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

Wow..I am not intrested to compare Ponting with anyone as that is not the thread topic.though someone has no idea about Sachin's average in matches that India have won.
He is far more ahead of anyone in this area.
Check out.

Sachin play for himself? lol..
He has got the highest Man of the Match awards.

opps...
He also has the record for highest Man of the series awards..

 

[sohum]

Yes zMario, pointing out 4 examples out of over 400 matches he's played really proves that Sachin is a selfish and below-par ODI player. :