Ponting is such an awesome player under pressure

[kabira]

Forget 4th innings of test matches I'd say 140 not out when he creamed india in a world cup final is an innings under pressure in a huge game. Indian people can bag ponting all they want but at the end of the day he has the silverware and trophies from winning big tournaments and so on while most other supposedly good cricket nations like india and south africa have nothing.

so all those silverwares were won by Ponting alone... :omg::omg::omg:

[CSK Fan]

Forget 4th innings of test matches I'd say 140 not out when he creamed india in a world cup final is an innings under pressure in a huge game. Indian people can bag ponting all they want but at the end of the day he has the silverware and trophies from winning big tournaments and so on while most other supposedly good cricket nations like india and south africa have nothing.

Batting first on a flat track, coming in after Gilchrist and Hayden had already demorialsed indian bowlers at 103/1 after 14 overs? I wouldn't call it huge pressure, would you? It was Indian bowlers who were under pressure by the time Ponting came in Also Ponting got 4 chances in world cup finals but this was the only time he scored over 50! Give any good player 4 chances and he is bound to click in at least one. Ponting has all the silverware from the time he had the best team on the planet. Heck, some of the most average Aussie players have more silverware than Sachin or Lara or Richards! Just for being in a team which was such a champion. After the greats retired, we can now see for ourselves how effective Ponting is. Now Sachin has more series wins and his team is at a higher rating than Ponting's. Whcih all goes to show that its foolish to use team results to compare individuals

[EnterTheVoid]

Batting first on a flat track, coming in after Gilchrist and Hayden had already demorialsed indian bowlers at 103/1 after 14 overs? I wouldn't call it huge pressure, would you? It was Indian bowlers who were under pressure by the time Ponting came in Also Ponting got 4 chances in world cup finals but this was the only time he scored over 50! Give any good player 4 chances and he is bound to click in at least one.

:fail: Ganguly WON the toss and CHOSE TO BOWL. The remainder of the post is just finding something in that great innings to nitpick about.

[Robelinda]

No way was that 03 final flat, ball was moving everywhere, the Indians couldnt control it early on. That 140* and Steve Waugh's 120* could lay claim to be the two greatest ODI innings ever. I said could, not should, so dont get all yer knickers in a twist.

[CSK Fan]

:fail: Ganguly WON the toss and CHOSE TO BOWL. The remainder of the post is just finding something in that great innings to nitpick about.

So? How is it nitpicking? When after 14 overs your team is at 103/1, pray tell on who the pressure exactly is? On the bowler or the batsmen? I am not saying it was not a great innings, but having a start like 103/1 at over 7 runs per over with the bolwers all demoralised certainlyhelps you

[CSK Fan]

No way was that 03 final flat' date=' ball was moving everywhere, the Indians couldnt control it early on. That 140* and Steve Waugh's 120* could lay claim to be the two greatest ODI innings ever. I said could, not should, so dont get all yer knickers in a twist.[/quote'] Ball stopped moving long before Ponting came to the crease. The moving ball was dealt with ably by Hayden and Gilchrist, not Ponting

[The Outsider]

The point of the OP was to show that pressure in test matches can happen in a huge variety of situations and quoting someone's average in the 4th innings to show he is better under pressure is senseless. For example, in this series the 4th innings where Ponting batted in was the most meaningless test innings one can get. And the pressure in all other innings was much more than that one, where he failed in all attempts. This is not a knock down on Ponting. It's an attempt to show how and why simplistic statistical queries to prove a notion have huge limitations in a sport like cricket.

[EnterTheVoid]

So? How is it nitpicking? When after 14 overs your team is at 103/1' date=' [b']pray tell on who the pressure exactly is? On the bowler or the batsmen? I am not saying it was not a great innings, but having a start like 103/1 at over 7 runs per over with the bolwers all demoralised certainlyhelps you

You contradict yourself. If there was no pressure or very limited pressure on him as the first part implies, how can it classified as a great innings?

[Mamu]

It is not the failure the befuddled me, the 15 or 20 balls he stayed, he looked like a bunny jumping up and down. He had absolutely no clue what to do with Swann. Even the sweep shot he played the ball before was more out of desperation rather than a batsmans' shot. He was all over the crease and no balance.

[CSK Fan]

:giggle:

You contradict yourself. If there was no pressure or very limited pressure on him as the first part implies' date=' how can it classified as a great innings?[/quote'] Pressure is soemthing which cannot be measured. To say just because its a fourth innings or a final that means the batsman was under pressure is simplistic. Similarly just to discount another innings because it was in the first innings of a test or a non-final is alos simplistic It was a great innings because an innings of 140 in an ODI against a good opposition is great. Lets leave all the final pressure, etc out of it

[King Tendulkar]

This is not a knock down on Ponting. It's an attempt to show how and why simplistic statistical queries to prove a notion have huge limitations in a sport like cricket.

Some of the stats used by peole are stupid. The worst one is tons/runs made in winning matches etc etc. I mean what does that prove, that the batter is some kind of match winner?? Utter BS. I mean if you were an aussie playing in last 20 years if you made a ton the aussies won and if you did not make a ton the aussies would win!! I bet S Waughs win ratio when he scores a ton is massive and no doubt when he did not make a ton the win ratio is massive as well. I mean just imagine if you are a bangla who makes a ton, likely hood is banglas will still lose. That does not make that bangla a choke or that he did not score importnat runs, simply that bangla are rubbish and wether you score a ton or not your team loses.

[Sachin=GOD]

S I mean if you were an aussie playing in last 20 years if you made a ton the aussies won and if you did not make a ton the aussies would win!! I bet S Waughs win ratio when he scores a ton is massive and no doubt when he did not make a ton the win ratio is massive as well. I mean just imagine if you are a bangla who makes a ton, likely hood is banglas will still lose. That does not make that bangla a choke or that he did not score importnat runs, simply that bangla are rubbish and wether you score a ton or not your team loses.

:hatsoff:

[Ram]

The point of the OP was to show that pressure in test matches can happen in a huge variety of situations and quoting someone's average in the 4th innings to show he is better under pressure is senseless. For example, in this series the 4th innings where Ponting batted in was the most meaningless test innings one can get. And the pressure in all other innings was much more than that one, where he failed in all attempts. This is not a knock down on Ponting. It's an attempt to show how and why simplistic statistical queries to prove a notion have huge limitations in a sport like cricket.

This.

[yoda]

It was a great innings because an innings of 140 in an ODI against a good opposition is great. Lets leave all the final pressure, etc out of it

Even with the start provided, it was his demoralizing innings which setup that crazy target. It was a great innings cause it was in the most important ODI that comes every four years not because of any random ODI. Reason? Such an innings helps your team win THE cup unlike any other ODI. Anyways the OP was about tests, so we all digress.

[Bradman99]

Some of the stats used by peole are stupid. The worst one is tons/runs made in winning matches etc etc. I mean what does that prove, that the batter is some kind of match winner?? Utter BS. I mean if you were an aussie playing in last 20 years if you made a ton the aussies won and if you did not make a ton the aussies would win!! I bet S Waughs win ratio when he scores a ton is massive and no doubt when he did not make a ton the win ratio is massive as well. I mean just imagine if you are a bangla who makes a ton, likely hood is banglas will still lose. That does not make that bangla a choke or that he did not score importnat runs, simply that bangla are rubbish and wether you score a ton or not your team loses.

Well said

[Mamu]

Some of the stats used by peole are stupid. The worst one is tons/runs made in winning matches etc etc. I mean what does that prove, that the batter is some kind of match winner?? Utter BS. I mean if you were an aussie playing in last 20 years if you made a ton the aussies won and if you did not make a ton the aussies would win!! I bet S Waughs win ratio when he scores a ton is massive and no doubt when he did not make a ton the win ratio is massive as well. I mean just imagine if you are a bangla who makes a ton, likely hood is banglas will still lose. That does not make that bangla a choke or that he did not score importnat runs, simply that bangla are rubbish and wether you score a ton or not your team loses.

A better stats would be to see what percentage of his team total a player scores when they go on to win -- more so if all 40 wickets have fallen.

[King Tendulkar]

A better stats would be to see what percentage of his team total a player scores when they go on to win -- more so if all 40 wickets have fallen.

Nah. Its all bakwaas. Most Bangla bats would not even get a stat in runs scored in team wins. Tammin Iqbal would have horrible stats in such matters and be labelled a choker. The fact is not a lot you can do if the rest of the team plays like douche bags!

[youngindia]

Just to keep things in perspective , Pontings fourth innings record is highly influenced by the wickets of australia On india, a fifth day wicket is highly notorious. Historically, 276 was the highest chase made in india before that epic 387 vs england.the fact there was only two sucessful chases over 250 tells the whole story. there was one chase of 347 in chennai which ended in a tied test and one chase of 360 vs pakistan where we fell short by 30 runs.razzaq and akmal came up with that epic partnership in mohali. but these are exceptions. generally, a fifth day indian wicket is very difficult if we examine ponting's record closely, ponting averages a startling 68 in australia and nz.but there are around 11 not outs of 22innings.half of the time, he has been not out! this has been his primary contributor to the record. in asia, predictably he averages around 28. it may look like he has a good average in SA and england but it is a tiny sample size,with just one hundred inflating things and hence nothing can be concluded either way. when you are talking about ponting's 54 ave,it has to be kept in mind you are basically talking about his 11 Not outs OF 22 INNINGS in aus/nz and 1 hundred each in SA and england. and the fact that australia has been so dominant that the number of his 4th innings efforts even at home has been astonishingly low. i.e only 25 out of 255 test innings and around five times , he didn't bat! he has batted only around 20 times at home in the 4th innings !

[Mamu]

Nah. Its all bakwaas. Most Bangla bats would not even get a stat in runs scored in team wins. Tammin Iqbal would have horrible stats in such matters and be labelled a choker. The fact is not a lot you can do if the rest of the team plays like douche bags!

Well my point is on the Positive Side -- it would say something, like if you want to say A is a match winner -- then my point would probably hold a bit of ground. Now just because the point I made is made is not true, does not mean the reverse is true and I agree with that.

[Ram]

This notion that batting in the 2nd innings of a test match involves having to endure significantly more levels of pressure and stress is pure baloney. Sure, a fighting 2nd innings batting effort gets a lot of publicity because we have bought into this idea that 2nd innings efforts are superior to those in the 1st. But try telling that to someone like Dravid, who played two of the best innings of our lifetime in Leeds and Adelaide, both of which came in the first innings. At the end of the day, whether its first innings of 2nd, batting or bowling, a cricket match always involves a batsmen, a bowler and a pitch in the middle. The circumstances of the match may vary, but the fundamental nature of the challenge of batting never changes.