Ricky Ponting’s press conference yesterday raised more questions than it answered. It was thought that his axing from Australia’s One Day International (ODI) squad had precipitated his retirement from all forms of the game.
Instead he declared himself eligible for the Test team; an admirable but potentially misguided decision.
John Inverarity had remarked the previous day that he hoped Ponting would continue to play Test match cricket.
I can see why Australian cricket still wants Ponting – no one in Shield cricket has demanded his spot – Shaun Marsh and Khawaja have failed at test level and Peter Forrest has a very meager first class record.
Moreover Ponting himself is still fit and hungry and has become a valued elder in the dressing room. But I can’t really understand his motivation to play on. It is admirable and not out of character for a guy who has refused to give in or give up throughout his illustrious career.
No doubt his good form against the Indians this summer was the reason for Inverarity’s comments and Ponting’s willingness to go on. But that form line might be an illusion.
As we know Ponting had not made a century in the previous two years and made his centuries this summer on very flat pitches in Sydney and Adelaide against an insipid Indian bowling attack that had virtually given up after being plundered by the Poms and the Aussies in successive test series.
Kerry O’Keefe on ABC Radio yesterday made the observation that Ponting’s reaction times seem to have slowed a little meaning that he will still struggle against good fast bowling on pitches that are doing a bit.
To take this line of thinking further – the only possible motivation to go on for Ponting is to finish on a high by being part of a successful Ashes campaign in England in 2013. He has unfinished business there.
However, it is doubtful he will last that long and even if he does – the conditions and bowlers in that series are likely to expose a batsman whose reflexes are not what they once were. Precisely the conditions O’Keefe was referring to.
Ponting got dropped from the one day team and now risks the same fate in the test arena. It is a selfless act to go on. On that note – it is worth mentioning the qualities in Ponting that have come to the surface in the twilight of his career.
In his hey-day he was aggressive with umpires, at times short with the media and seemingly unconscious of his own short comings. Yet his dethroning as captain has revealed a character with much less ego than we all expected.
Therefore whatever damage he may do to his legacy by playing on will be offset by the character he continues to reveal. Put simple, Ponting has become very likeable.
Finally it would be remiss not to reflect on the end of his ODI career. He is second only to the great Tendulkar in total runs scored at 13704. His average (42.03) and strike rate (80.39) are both world class. He loved the big stage – having won Three World Cups and captained two of them.
In full-flight he may have been the best ODI player the game has seen. You always knew that when he sliced the off side with a perfect cover drive or jumped on a pull shot in the first few balls – the opposition was in trouble and some first class entertainment was on offer.
Of his many innings the 140 not out from 121 balls (in a total of 359) in the 2003 World Cup Final against India sticks in my mind.
Even more precious is his legacy in the Test game. I hope that both the selectors and Ponting himself can reach an end befitting of the man.
Bayman
Guest
Vas, I was fortunate enough to see both the Sydney and Adelaide centuries by Ponting this summer. Timing, for spectators and batsmen, is everything. I have long been critical of the view that Ponting had a divine right to play for Australia when his performances did not support that right. However, those two hundreds (with a double in Adelaide) were a delight to watch. It was the very essence of sport and part of what makes sport such a wonderful thing. To see a great player respond and achieve those two innings, given his recent record and the pressure he's been under, was fantastic and I don't mind admitting to a slight lump in the throat when he passed 200 on the greatest ground in the world (yes, I'm from Adelaide). As I said, I've been as critical of Ponting as anyone in recent times but I can't remember being more proud of him than in Adelaide. It was a comeback to rival Lazarus - even if the track was an absolute belter. Sport can be clinical and it can be emotional and both of those things are part of what makes it great.
mushi
Guest
Bravo. The only person Ponting need consider is himself and obviously he just wants to play test cricket. We won’t be there when he’s 65 and sitting on his back deck thinking about his career to tell him he did the right or wrong thing.
Rick
Guest
I have read all these so called experts on this that and the other concerning Ricky Ponting , why did Ricky Ponting not retire from all forms of international cricket most of you have asked hmmmmmmmmmm well perhaps his averaging over 100 in the recently completed test series against India could be an indicator. none of you have commented on why India have not asked THE BIG 3 of India to retire from Test Cricket , what were their averages in the tests but no Ricky is Tasmanian he has to be dropped Dave Warner has also failed in the one dayers he is a new south welshman and without the Hussey Brothers and the bowlers Australia would be last in the competition and Geoff Lawson please attempt to have an unbiased opinion
Maggie
Guest
+1
Vas Venkatramani
Guest
Beautifully put Bayman. Not often I agree with Kev, but I'll give that a massive thumbs up there. In answering the question of the article, it doesn't matter whether Ponting's decision to play on is right or wrong. It is right for him, because that is what he wants to do. It is right for the selectors, because they want him to be available for Tests. The best thing was that Ponting did not relent to the pressure of public sentiment and retire before he truly wanted to. In a show of strength from our selection panel which I feel would be absent from an Indian one, we've shown we don't mind dropping a true legend of the game on the eve of an ODI at their hometown, with one of the selectors a long-time teammate and understudy. Whatever reservations people had about the selector's ability to make tough calls just got wiped out in one fell swoop thanks to this decision. At this point, it is the right decision that Ponting is playing on because both he and the selectors feel there is a case for his presence. It will only be proven wrong if his form later on does not warrant his selection, or worse still, mean someone in reserve doesn't get an opportunity ahead of blockbuster games against India (4 Tests) and England (10 Tests) in 2013. But that is for the selectors to decide. All Ponting can do now is make runs. I hope he does, because few sights are better than a Ponting straight drive or pull shot...
Bigbaz
Guest
Yes. I wish I could write well enough to say that.
Red Kev
Guest
That is a superb post sir! Where is the "Like" button around here?
Bayman
Guest
Joe, On balance, Ponting's decision to play on, at least in the longer form of the game, is the right one for him. He is now, and always has been, a professional cricketer. To that end, he understands that his continuation in the team may be terminated at any time - as it has been in the T20 and ODI format. Ponting's current standing in Australian cricket is at a curious point. For two or three years prior to this recent Indian series - and including those series against Sri Lanka, South Africa and New Zealand - Ponting's Test form has been subject to criticism and rightly so. He is not, or was not, the player of his prime. Poor or non-existant footwork, lunging onto the front foot, hard hands combined with poor shot selection and execution all looked to be signalling the end of a great career. His successes were diminishing as fast as the number of single figure scores - not to mention first or second ball ducks - were rising. For such a great player it was tragic to watch. No more tragic, though, than his continued selection presumably on the grounds that he still had a great deal to offer even if that was not in the scorebook. It has always been difficult to measure off-field contributions compared to on-field scores. Not surprisingly Ponting refused to give in and went to work in the nets. In Melbourne he made a few without ever really looking convincing. In Sydney, on a flat track as you say, he made a solid hundred even if he did display some suicidal tendencies - no doubt a result of the pressure he's been feeling for some time now. With the Perth result completely destroying what was left of India's morale Ponting went to work in Adelaide, in concert with his captain, and buried what was left of India. If the two hundred tracks (Sydney after day one and Adelaide) were roads, and they were, then it can still be said that Ponting made the runs he should have made while India's much vaunted batting lineup failed miserably. In truth, he could not have done any more and he certainly could have done a lot less given his recent form. He must get some credit for that. It even appeared as if the work he had done was paying dividends. His footwork was better, seemingly more back and across than front foot lunging. He seemed to spend the time to get in without trying to pull the fast bowler's second ball to the fence. In other words, he seemed to have regained some composure with his approach more akin to a Test match. This has been missing for some time. It was interesting to hear him say he still felt he could dominate any bowling attack. He may still be able to - but only after he's been in long enough to properly assess the conditions and the bowling. An immediate all out assault upon arrival at the crease is from days long ago and long since left behind. In the ODIs this summer he has been completely unable to force the pace. It is a sign his powers are waning if not gone altogether. It should be a lesson to him, and a reminder, that Test match attacks may also prove to be difficult to "dominate" from now on. On a personal level I have been very pleasantly surprised how well Ponting has submitted to Clarke's leadership this summer. For one so reluctant to give up the captaincy previously it has been a revelation and for that he deserves enormous credit - as does Clarke. Far from being divisive he has been a positive force within the team. Clearly the team still thinks highly off him. However, it also became clear his ODI days were numbered and Clarke was one of the panel which terminated his one day career. By making this decision to play on, for no other reason than he loves the game, Ponting has also sent a clear message to the public, the media and the selectors that when the time comes he expects the tap on the shoulder and will hold no grudges. He may, of course, pre-empt that tap and retire at a time of his own choosing. This is his right but it should not be confused with a right to hang on until he wants to go - his form by then may already have forced the selectors hands. I have long been fascinated by the modern view that professional sportsmen are entitled to pick and choose, without selectorial help, when to retire. This should only be true while the selectors are still inclined to pick him. The notion of a "farewell" game is a romantic fantasy. It might work if it's for the Mowbray Cricket Club but it should never be the case for state or country. You're either good enough to be in - or you're out. Ponting, I'm sure, would expect it to be so.
Warren
Guest
Ponting was a great player. However, I would have liked to see the selectors tap him on the shoulder and tell him he was to be dropped. Ponting then pre-empting the announcement with one of his own - his immediate retirement from all International cricket. Dignity intact all round.