The most SUCCESSFUL batsman of this decade (2000's) discussion.

[mdoggie]

Ponting has being the best batsman for the last seven years but just like Kallis he is starting to lose his edge now. But you also need to count in that he comes in when his team is often on top and the bowling attack is tired and demorilised. that often helps a batsman, and that is what puts someone like Lara above the rest.

Ponting is the best batsman of the last few years but in no way the best of this generation. It would interesting how he would fare if he played in a much lower team, would he make the same impact Lara made for the West Indies if he was Jamaican

 

[aussie_ben91]

Lara played in the best team in the world for the first 5 years of his career.

 

[stereotype]

I dont see how the success of the side works, Ricky Ponting has played better when more pressure is on him eg world cup finals or batting at 3.

Ponting started his career batting at 6 in a very successful side and he didnt do it that well. Where is the motivation to score big runs when your side doesnt need them from you?

on the other hand since he was made the focal batsman at 3 and captain his batting has been beyond reproach. That and he made the test side playing for Tasmania who for a long long time were the perennial underdog of domestic cricket.

The side is successful more for his batting than the other way around

 

[sohum]

I dont see how the success of the side works, Ricky Ponting has played better when more pressure is on him eg world cup finals or batting at 3.

Ponting started his career batting at 6 in a very successful side and he didnt do it that well. Where is the motivation to score big runs when your side doesnt need them from you?

on the other hand since he was made the focal batsman at 3 and captain his batting has been beyond reproach. That and he made the test side playing for Tasmania who for a long long time were the perennial underdog of domestic cricket.

The side is successful more for his batting than the other way around

The argument that Ponting had it easier was based on the fact that he came in after 2 quality openers most of the time in his career, and hence the opposition was already on the back foot after a good start and also the fact that he had a world-class bowling line-up which meant his team usually wasn't hundreds of runs in the arrears when he had to walk on to the pitch.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Lara played in the best team in the world for the first 5 years of his career.

Out of a 16 year career. Less than a third. His form from 1995 (5 years after his debut) to 2006 is 8905 runs at 50.59 with his 400* included. Not bad for a batsman in a struggling team...

 

[Cricketman]

Tendulkar is the best in the world. Proof? Look at the last innings he played.

 

[Dare]

Lara played in the best team in the world for the first 5 years of his career.

and Pontings been playing in the best team in the world all his career.

 

[udhay.govind]

Just imagine what Ponting can do if he steps down from captaincy and simply performs as a player?It may benefit both CA and Ponting.

 

[aussie_ben91]

You could argue that there is more pressure to perform in a stronger lineup as the likelihood of getting dropped from the lineup when you are not performing is greater. It'd be also harder to take the iniative in a stronger lineup full of world-class batsman.

Lara may have not batted along side a bunch of world-class batsman but Chanderpaul, Sarwan and Gayle are far from minnow batsman. It wasn't as if Lara always dominated in a weaker side anyway. Infact, he really struggled to adjust in the late 1990's.

Playing in a weaker team can reek benefits such as concentrating more, better shot selection, etc, etc.

 

[stereotype]

The argument that Ponting had it easier was based on the fact that he came in after 2 quality openers most of the time in his career, and hence the opposition was already on the back foot after a good start and also the fact that he had a world-class bowling line-up which meant his team usually wasn't hundreds of runs in the arrears when he had to walk on to the pitch.

ok.

Now as a cricketer why is it harder to score runs when you are in arrears. This is a very big myth, yes certainly centuries when your back is against the wall or in big matches are fulfilling and deserve more of a sense of achievement but that doesnt make them more difficult to score. My point is that Ricky Pontings career has improved whenever he has had more responsibility on his shoulders, which is similar to what you are saying.

Batting at 6 for Australia he was good but certainly not great, but since he moved to number 3 he has been a world class batsman and since he took over the captaincy he has had an even better batsman. So Ricky Pontings career points to him succeeding whenever pressure is on so to say "what if he played for a team without the superstars" the evidence really points to him being able to do so.

A little stat as well, his record when his team has lost the toss and fielded, meaning the other team gets first use of a good pitch he averages 64.93 in 48 matches so another example of when conditions may not suit him as well he shines through. Also in those same matches in a 4th innings run chase he averages 65 as well. What does this mean? it means he performs better when he is batting second and is chasing totals, kinda makes that point irrelevant especially when we talk about Ricky Ponting.


Now i agree some people do struggle more when pressure is on like big matches, big totals to chase or losing the toss on a pitch that heavily favours the first batting side. But when you look at his record he isnt one of them.

stereotype added 6 Minutes and 17 Seconds later...

the point could be argued the other way too, if Lara played for an all conquering team like Australia his entire career and had to play along side the like of Hayden, Langer, the Waughs, Ponting, Martyn, Hussey, Bevan, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Lee, Taylor, Slater etc would his career have stood out as it did? would he have been head and shoulders above that crop like he is for the Windies? Would he have had the capacity or time to come in and score triple hundreds at 4 or 5 if he comes in and the score is already 3 for 320 or something? Would his spot even be secure?

And even worse if his career ended up being identical to it is now would we be trying to sell it short by saying it was done while playing for a dominant side so it isnt an even stat?

 

[m_vaughan]

The argument that Ponting had it easier was based on the fact that he came in after 2 quality openers most of the time in his career.

This can be put again him as well because he has had to compete for runs with other great batsmen that have played with in the same Australian side. Had he played in a inferior team, he would got a lot more chances to score more runs himself. And as far as I am concerned, Ponting has made the most crucial and important knocks for Australia (maybe along with Hussey, but the latter's batting position allowed him to do that).

You really do not need stats to show that Ponting has been the best batsman of the modern era. But these stats are really very convincing.

 

[sohum]

Now as a cricketer why is it harder to score runs when you are in arrears. This is a very big myth, yes certainly centuries when your back is against the wall or in big matches are fulfilling and deserve more of a sense of achievement but that doesnt make them more difficult to score. My point is that Ricky Pontings career has improved whenever he has had more responsibility on his shoulders, which is similar to what you are saying.

Why is it harder to score runs when you are in the arrears? Consider coming into bat at 10/1 when your opposition has been bowled out for 250, compared to coming into bat at 10/1 when your opposition has been bowled out for 550. Difference in pressure? I think so. Runs on the board are always worth more... a bird in hand is worth two in the bush. Scoring runs when your opposition has scored a mammoth total is always difficult... and it is my assumption that Ponting didn't have to face that a whole lot while being surrounded by a quality attack.

A little stat as well, his record when his team has lost the toss and fielded, meaning the other team gets first use of a good pitch he averages 64.93 in 48 matches so another example of when conditions may not suit him as well he shines through. Also in those same matches in a 4th innings run chase he averages 65 as well. What does this mean? it means he performs better when he is batting second and is chasing totals, kinda makes that point irrelevant especially when we talk about Ricky Ponting.

Your first conclusion (that he shines through when conditions do not suit him) is not logically obvious. His average batting second on a good pitch does not take into account if the pitch was still playing well and if the opposition team actually made use of the pitch. You are assuming that the team winning to toss and batting first against Australia always makes a large score, which is a fallacy, considering that they were operating with the best bowling line-up in the world for a while. Also, I don't know what point your statistical analysis made irrelevant. I would suggest doing an analysis of Ponting's average batting second when the opposition has scored at least 400 runs in the first innings... and that's being conservative. I don't think it's easily doable using the StatsGuru search but I can try looking into it for the sake of debate.

And finally, you did not address my point about the openers at all. Ask any former Test cricketer, and they will agree that the openers job is one of the toughest and most important jobs in the game. Ponting has had the luxury of coming in after a good opening partnership since the batsmen opening were usually world-class.

sohum added 4 Minutes and 12 Seconds later...

This can be put again him as well because he has had to compete for runs with other great batsmen that have played with in the same Australian side. Had he played in a inferior team, he would got a lot more chances to score more runs himself. And as far as I am concerned, Ponting has made the most crucial and important knocks for Australia (maybe along with Hussey, but the latter's batting position allowed him to do that).

You really do not need stats to show that Ponting has been the best batsman of the modern era. But these stats are really very convincing.

You tend not to compete for runs when you come in at 3. The point I am making and that you quoted, is that he usually comes in after a decent beginning and with runs under the board, the shine of the new ball and the opposition on the back foot. There is obviously still a pressure to justify your position in the team, but you have to agree with me that there would be less pressure coming in at 100/1 compared to 0/1.

Make no mistake, I'm not arguing that Ponting is not the best batsman of this decade. Despite these supposedly helpful situations, he has outperformed every other batsman this decade, for the most part. I'm sure if we actually compared statistics of his performance given the opposition score and the openers performance, he would still come out on top. The only reason I am in this discussion is because it is still important to recognize that these arguments are valid as to why Ponting may have had it easier.

 

[aussie_ben91]

The grounds in the West Indies have like the smallest boundaries in world cricket; it's no wonder why Lara scored 2 over 350+ in an innings mutiple times.

Also, to say that Lara always had to bat with the score 0/1 and trailing by 500+ runs is a farse. I highly doubt that Lara would've encounted this situation whilst he played with the likes of Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh.

 

[stereotype]

I didnt respond to your openers statement because there is no stat suggesting Ponting played any better or worse because of a successful opening stand.

If your memory serves you well Ponting made 156 in the 4th innings of the 3rd test in England 2005. Langer was bowled out in the first 5 overs and Pontings side required 423 runs to win.

At Melbourne 2003 v India India scored 366 in the first innings with a 195 from Sehwag, Langer was dismissed for just 14 and Ponting made 257.

These are two examples from the top of my head, i could probably dig more up but the point is these innings show he certainly needed no help from the opener.

See you are the one making the claim, IF you think Ricky Pontings record is helped by these factors you need something to back up that claim. A good number 3 is supposed to be able to save teams from those situations and Ponting has done that numerous times

stereotype added 17 Minutes and 45 Seconds later...

Ricky Ponting to use this year as an example has 3 test centuries. His one in Adelaide was on a very good batting strip however India had scored 526 in the first innings and when he arrived at the crease he trailled by 404 runs still, He scored 158 against the West Indies after his openers were dismissed for 9 and 12. His other one was the first test in India, he came in then when the score was 1-0 and ended up with 123.

So his 3 only centuries were when Australia were in some degree of discomfort in the match, and if i look back at previous centuries i see no correllation between opening stands and centuries.

 

[mdoggie]

I am in no way saying that he isn't a brilliant batsman and he will sometimes perform amazingly when the chips are down. This year Ponting hasn't being on his best form and Australia haven't being doing amazingly, when Ponting does well Australia do well because he lifts the team and the team lifts him, Most batsman will tell you that coming in when the team is doing well is a lot easier and you have far less nerves.

Here is an example of someone other than ponting, but AB De Villiers had being doing average the whole season, but as soon as he came in after India were bowled out for 76 and they already had a lead he went on to score a double, not because he was in great form but the teams was confident and the pressure wasn't bad. Many batsman get out due to being under to much pressure, that's why collapses happen.

Ponting could come in and be confident that there were players either side of him that if he messed up, the team would still be in with a good chance. Also if you team gets bowled out for 200, than a opening partnership of 50 will demorilse the team.

Ponting is a brilliant player and probably the best for a few years now but for me, he just doesn't rank up with the best ever.