Has Ponting Done Enough?

[Shehezaada]

The last blot on Ponting's record was his average in India which was around 12. After his performance in India this time it nearly doubled, and now is at 20.85. He stroked 123 in the first test and made 87 in the third, with complete failures in the 2nd and 4th test. IMHO, no. He still looks extremely shaky playing quality spin on a turning wicket. None of the pitches were really dustbowls and Ponting needs to make big runs on a rank turner before he can be termed a great. His 123 was on the flattest deck imaginable and was plumb LBW to Sharma early on in the innings. He played well at Delhi though. What do you guys think? Still the greatest batsmen in the world? Better then Tendulkar, Lara?

[Gambit]

I was about to start a similar topic. Apart from a ton on the flattest track in the series, Punter didn't do much at all. With a mighty average of 20 here, he will always be remembered as a gigantic failure.

[King]

He's still a great batsman but with difficulties of his own. He's generally a very good batsman against pace bowlers as you would expect him to be coming at no.3 He hasn't done enough in my books. He has not done anything in this test series to prove he can consistently challenge an aggressive bowling attack. He did all right but should have done twice as good to have been considered alongside the likes of Tendulkar and Lara. He's way short of those two blokes that set the contemporary standard for batting ability and finesse.

[Donny]

How conveniently you blokes 'choose' to turn a blind eye to the 100+ times (from 252 innings) Sach has failed in Tests when you start comparing these three batsmen - a nonsensical pursuit anyway.

[King]

I don't see the point in debating. Ponting himself feels among the contemporaries two giants ruled the roost in terms of batting, Tendulkar and Lara. Pretty much every player I have read has mentioned the same. We don't need any more testimony. Ponting is among all time greats but nowhere near Tendulkar or Lara. He hasn't got that zing thing.

[Kohum]

How conveniently you blokes 'choose' to turn a blind eye to the 100+ times (from 252 innings) Sach has failed in Tests when you start comparing these three batsmen - a nonsensical pursuit anyway.

Donny - keep to the topic. The topic is about Mr. PONTING and in this series.

[DomainK]

How conveniently you blokes 'choose' to turn a blind eye to the 100+ times (from 252 innings) Sach has failed in Tests when you start comparing these three batsmen - a nonsensical pursuit anyway.

Donny, you are again making a statement without making a point. Use a few more words. Ponting's failure in India is very clear. You want me to give you Tendulkar's average in Australia? To be termed a great (forget greatest) you have to have decent averages in different parts of the world. Tendulkar's lowest average is in SA.....few decimal points below 40.

[King Tendulkar]

How conveniently you blokes 'choose' to turn a blind eye to the 100+ times (from 252 innings) Sach has failed in Tests when you start comparing these three batsmen - a nonsensical pursuit anyway.

What did you think of pontings captaincy in the last test?

[Donny]

Donny' date=' you are again making a statement without making a point.[/quote'] If you can't see the point, Dom, it's not my problem.

[DomainK]

If you can't see the point' date=' Dom, it's not my problem.[/quote'] There you go....another nothing reply.

[Donny]

Yes. Maybe you could try thinking for yourself. :regular_smile:

[Fontaine]

Far more than Ponting failing in India, the due credit has got to go to Sharma/Bhajji. Those deliveries that Sharma blasted down would have beaten the best and time and time he did it again. Ponting didn't so much fail as he got dominated by superb bowling. Even in his century he was very hesistant and early on was lucky to survive Ishant spell.

[King Tendulkar]

Donny still no views on Pontings captaincy in last test?

[bharat297]

How conveniently you blokes 'choose' to turn a blind eye to the 100+ times (from 252 innings) Sach has failed in Tests when you start comparing these three batsmen - a nonsensical pursuit anyway.

Donny ... Let me explain Mathematics to you and how this wonderful thing works. With fractions we have both a numerator and a denominator ... if the denominator increases in proportion with the numerator then the fraction remains the same. So if we count a failure as a score of less than 50, then lets compare here ... Ponting: 129 failures from 206 innings ... So thats 129*100/206 = 63% Tendulkar: 161 failures from 252 innings ... So thats 161*100/252 = 64% Lara: 150 failures from 232 innings ... So thats 150*100/232 = 65% Now if we take into account the quality of the pitches and bowlers and the fewer batsman friendly rules during the first 10 years of the careers of both Lara and Tendulkar there is not much between the 3. Thats all for this lesson. Next week I'll review concepts such as basic algebra and geometry. PS: For homework I would like you to do Exercises 1-20 from Chapter 2.

[DomainK]

Donny ... Let me explain Mathematics to you and how this wonderful thing works. With fractions we have both a numerator and a denominator ... if the denominator increases in proportion with the numerator then the fraction remains the same. So if we count a failure as a score of less than 50, then lets compare here ... Ponting: 129 failures from 206 innings ... So thats 129*100/206 = 63% Tendulkar: 161 failures from 252 innings ... So thats 161*100/252 = 64% Lara: 150 failures from 232 innings ... So thats 150*100/232 = 65% Now if we take into account the quality of the pitches and bowlers and the fewer batsman friendly rules during the first 10 years of the careers of both Lara and Tendulkar there is not much between the 3. Thats all for this lesson. Next week I'll review concepts such as basic algebra and geometry. PS: For homework I would like you to do Exercises 1-20 from Chapter 2.

:haha::haha::haha::haha::two_thumbs_up:

[King Tendulkar]

Donny ... Let me explain Mathematics to you and how this wonderful thing works. With fractions we have both a numerator and a denominator ... if the denominator increases in proportion with the numerator then the fraction remains the same. So if we count a failure as a score of less than 50, then lets compare here ... Ponting: 129 failures from 206 innings ... So thats 129*100/206 = 63% Tendulkar: 161 failures from 252 innings ... So thats 161*100/252 = 64% Lara: 150 failures from 232 innings ... So thats 150*100/232 = 65% Now if we take into account the quality of the pitches and bowlers and the fewer batsman friendly rules during the first 10 years of the careers of both Lara and Tendulkar there is not much between the 3. Thats all for this lesson. Next week I'll review concepts such as basic algebra and geometry. PS: For homework I would like you to do Exercises 1-20 from Chapter 2.

:hysterical:

[Donny]

If you 3 want to keep slinging insults, to make yourselves feel good, go right ahead. Makes absolutely no impression other than to further downgrade you as people. :regular_smile:

[Donny]

Those deliveries that Sharma blasted down would have beaten the best and time and time he did it again. Ponting didn't so much fail as he got dominated by superb bowling.

Spot on.

[bharat297]

Donny calm down ... You get very emotional when you get owned like this. If you actually go back and look at what you said, you would realise how little sense (mathematically) you actually make. Don't get angry at us just because we point that out. Thats what happens when people argue.

[bharat297]

Btw ... anyone else find it ironic that Donny is talking about not insulting people in the very same sentence he is calling us morons?