30 May 08
Im sitting here watching the Test match between West Indies and Australia and Ricky Ponting has just scored his 10,000th run at an average of just under 60.
I know Bradman had a better average and Lara and a few others have scored more, but I think in my own opinion that Ponting is probably the best of all time.
31 May 08
Originally posted by Virtue76SORRY dont agree
Im sitting here watching the Test match between West Indies and Australia and Ricky Ponting has just scored his 10,000th run at an average of just under 60.
I know Bradman had a better average and Lara and a few others have scored more, but I think in my own opinion that Ponting is probably the best of all time.
01 Jun 08
Originally posted by Virtue76I love to mull over dream games and wonderful player match ups.
Im sitting here watching the Test match between West Indies and Australia and Ricky Ponting has just scored his 10,000th run at an average of just under 60.
I know Bradman had a better average and Lara and a few others have scored more, but I think in my own opinion that Ponting is probably the best of all time.
Ponce is probably the best today but the ever question is much harder to eval..
Pitches today are far and away better and there's the the anti bouncing rules of today.
There are lots of comparison sites and articles around but I'd love to see figures on which batsman single-handedly made the biggest contribution to the most games. It's not just how many runs it has to be a delicious mix of runs, balls faced (ability to score fast and to slow down to save games), pitch conditions and strength of opposition.
If you look at the impact factor vs opposition strength instead of just averages then Viv Richards was probably the best ever attacker and Brian Lara would be close with his combined ability. The ability to devastate and terrify.. thrills me.
01 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Virtue76I never saw some of the older batsmen like Bradman play, but I would definitely put Ponting in the top 10 of all time.
Im sitting here watching the Test match between West Indies and Australia and Ricky Ponting has just scored his 10,000th run at an average of just under 60.
I know Bradman had a better average and Lara and a few others have scored more, but I think in my own opinion that Ponting is probably the best of all time.
At the moment, there isn't many things more frustrating for opposition teams watching the likes of Ponting and any of the Aussie top order start to take the bowling apart, but of the current players I would still rate Sachin above Ricky, although by a pretty small margin.
Lara also gets close and his records seem even better when you think he had to carry a struggling windies team many a game...
01 Jun 08
Originally posted by Crowleygood point...lets not forget Pointing is playin for a team who have been the no.1 test team for nearly 10 years..way..way ahead of anyone else.
I never saw some of the older batsmen like Bradman play, but I would definitely put Ponting in the top 10 of all time.
At the moment, there isn't many things more frustrating for opposition teams watching the likes of Ponting and any of the Aussie top order start to take the bowling apart, but of the current players I would still rate Sachin above Ricky, ...[text shortened]... ecords seem even better when you think he had to carry a struggling windies team many a game...
Also we need to see this scores against Bangledesh....and take them out of the equation.. as they are a very very poor test team.
02 Jun 08
Originally posted by spurs73Naah, it's useless going down that road.
Also we need to see this scores against Bangledesh....and take them out of the equation.. as they are a very very poor test team.
If you do that then people start saying things like: "But the [insert team] in the [insert decade] were crap and [insert player] played many games against them!"
It's arguments that just go round and round, but never gets to a point...
03 Jun 08
2 edits
Originally posted by Virtue76There's no doubt he's a great (one of the best of the last 10-15 years)batsman, fielder and captain.
Im sitting here watching the Test match between West Indies and Australia and Ricky Ponting has just scored his 10,000th run at an average of just under 60.
I know Bradman had a better average and Lara and a few others have scored more, but I think in my own opinion that Ponting is probably the best of all time.
What I find enormously frustrating (as a Kiwi!) is the number of times he gives chances (or looks quite vulnerable) early in his innings ... the chance isn't taken and he goes on to score a century or something!
Haha - probably sour grapes but every time we play the Aussies it's usually a complete thrashing with an anguished, 'If only so and so had held that catch to get rid of Ponting when he was only on 15 " gripe after the game! 🙂😞🙂
03 Jun 08
Originally posted by treetalkHa!
There's no doubt he's a great (one of the best of the last 10-15 years)batsman, fielder and captain.
What I find enormously frustrating (as a Kiwi!) is the number of times he gives chances (or looks quite vulnerable) early in his innings ... the chance isn't taken and he goes on to score a century or something!
Haha - probably sour grapes but every t ...[text shortened]... eld that catch to get rid of Ponting when he was only on 15 " gripe after the game! 🙂😞🙂
At one stage, I think about 4-5 seasons ago Herchelle Gibbs had a great statistic: If opposition didn't get him before he made 16 runs, he made at least 93.
Can't remember the exact numbers, but it looks about right.
08 Jun 08
The problem with subjects like this is that it is virtually impossible to compare people across eras, so much changes. I think all you can do is say how dominant they were in their own era and compare them that way.
Bradman dominated his era in a way Ponting hasn't.
But for my money the best of all time was W.G.Grace.
09 Jun 08
Originally posted by lilchristopherThis I don't agree with at all, because it leaves the door open for emotional decisions when what we need are facts and stats.
The problem with subjects like this is that it is virtually impossible to compare people across eras, so much changes. I think all you can do is say how dominant they were in their own era and compare them that way.
At the end of the day, as has been proven in this and a myriad other forums around the web, one cannot argue these points as every person has a differing opinion and it just turns into stupid arguments...