May 13, 2010

Ian Chappell rates Ponting higher than Waugh

Cricinfo staff
86

Former Australian captain turned commentator Ian Chappell has rated Ricky Ponting a better leader than Steve Waugh. Chappell said Ponting has managed to keep Australia competitive even after losing star players, while Waugh, who had high-class players at his disposal for most of his captaincy career, struggled when challenged.

"I think out of the last four Australian captains, Steve Waugh runs fourth in my book. I have got Mark Taylor, Ricky Ponting and Allan Border…" Chappell told Harsha Bhogle on Cricinfo's Opening Up. "I think Ponting is a bit conservative with his field placings for my liking, but when you think of the turnover... in the case of Warne and Glenn McGrath, two champion bowlers. He has had an enormous turnover of that level of players, and yet he has still kept Australia competitive."

In 2009, Ponting became the first Australian captain since Billy Murdoch in the 19th century to lose the Ashes twice. But Chappell said he did not rate captains by their win-loss records and that Ponting fared better than Waugh when on the back foot. "The reason why I don't rank Steve Waugh very highly is because I think he ran out of ideas pretty quickly. He didn't have to run out of ideas quickly very often, because he wasn't under the pump very often. But I saw him run out of ideas. Kolkata, for instance, in 2001... I have never seen Ricky Ponting run out of ideas."

Imran Khan, Mike Gatting and Arjuna Ranatunga were other captains Chappell said he admired. Mike Brearley, the England captain famous for his tactical nous but not his cricketing talent, was not on Chappell's list. "I think I would say about Mike Brearley that I always thought it was hard enough to win a game when you are playing 11 v 11. Why are you going into the game with 10 v 11?"

Ranatunga's mettle was proved not only at the 1996 World Cup but also when Sri Lanka were clearly the weaker side, Chappell said. "I saw him in a game at Bellerive Oval where he was outgunned. fact, Australia really only won the game on the final day in the last session, when they were the only team who were going to win from three and a half days on. But Arjuna kept that side in the game for much longer than they had any right to be."

Chappell said captaining a side was harder today because of the different formats and the interaction with the media, but he said captains today were not doing right by prioritising boundary-saving over wicket-taking and by delegating match-turning decisions to their team-mates. "My order of priority is wickets, way up there, right at the top by miles; saving singles next, quite a distance down; and then, way down, saving boundaries."

Chappell pointed at South Africa as a side that placed a premium on boundary-saving. "The idea with South African captaincy basically is, if you've got a couple of quickies, use them, and then you've got these seamers to hold things tight in between times till your real quickies are ready to come back again. So I think they place too high a store on containment, whereas I like captains who are always trying to get the opposition out."

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Creevs on May 16, 2010, 12:12 GMT

    Shane I agree with you totally. He has never rated Steve. Never would. Steve always played to win. Ian was an average cricketer a sub standard commentator.

  • abhipunter on May 16, 2010, 8:07 GMT

    I agree with Ian.Because and the pressure situations both Ricky Steve had are totally different. Steve is fans favorite but not Ricky. People always try to find out something wrong in Ricky. But time to time, again and again he proved critics wrong. With the amount of turnover Oz had over the past few years rebuilding a team is not an easy task. Punter did that and still maintained Australia's position as one of the strong contender for any of the big tournament. It's easy to criticize the team or captain when they lose but not easy to face that situation Ponting faced such situation and rebuild ed the team If Australia dominate cricket for nex 5 to 10 years then the credit should go to Ricky. Because he has built entire new team. a new generation.

  • crusty52 on May 15, 2010, 10:35 GMT

    Ian Chappell is so bitter and twisted he sounds more and more like a grumpy old man better suited to a retirement home!

  • djp9 on May 15, 2010, 8:36 GMT

    i totally agree with Ian Chappell's article. Ex-players have mentioned that Steve Waugh hardly game suggestions / comments on the field and was hardly inspirational ... i saw Damien Fleming during Fox commentary say that when he (Fleming) had to bowl the last balls in the World Cup semi final against South Africa and South Africa only needed 1 run to win, he asked Steve Waugh for advice and Steve Waugh told him it didn't matter since they (Australia) were stuffed anyway. I can't imagine Allan Border or Ricky Ponting saying that and basically giving up.

  • tugga_bsb on May 15, 2010, 6:58 GMT

    Nice to see lots of support for Steve!! This is not something new from Chappell. He does it time and again. When Waugh was given the captaincy, he commented him to be unfit as he is too self focused. But Steve proved him wrong. Most of the trophies lined up at CA HQ was won by Steve Waugh. As many has said here, he changed the way test cricket is played. He always played to win. There were very few no of draws. All teams have great players, but there is no point in having them unless u use them the right way and thats how the aussie team formed under Steve. During 1999 world cup, there was talks about Shane Warne's performance and probably resting him, but Steve instilled his confidence in him and Shane did the rest. He taught the other teams the importance of batting with the bowlers and now we see many lower order players too saving games. We can go on and on. Its good that Steve Waugh doesnt react to all these comment. We are tired of these comments Mr. Chappell, please rest it

  • Shane on May 15, 2010, 6:16 GMT

    Chappelli has been banging on about this for years and it is getting boring. Surely his opinion of Steve Waugh is no longer newsworthy! (Maybe 50+ comments says otherwise) He really should preface any comment with Steve Waugh by saying 'I hate his guts' or 'I hate him because he was captain and Warney was not.' Some of his commentary is reasonable but his bias and hatred of Waugh is so great that it just becomes white noise. In terms of best captain from the last four (exlcuding Gilly filling in) Taylor is probably number 1, AB no 2 - not because of his captaincy on or off field but purely because of his batting brought us back from the doldrums to the brink of greatness, Waugh 3 and Ponting 4. That is not to say Ponting is terrible but he is number 4 of that grouping.

  • bretty_jack on May 15, 2010, 3:57 GMT

    Ian u know a lot about Cricket but u have always had it in for Steve, and I think if he had of been Captain of last years Ashes we would have won. Ponting is a champian batsmen but just an average Captain.

  • BillyCC on May 15, 2010, 1:16 GMT

    It is true that there is bad blood between Chappell and Waugh, so any comments made must be taken with a grain of salt. I think both Ponting and Waugh are good captains but Taylor and Border were streets ahead. Ponting has some well-known flaws that he has been addressing. He is still quite conservative and doesn't know how to really blast an opponent. Ironically, Steve Waugh could do that, but Waugh selfishly chased history at the expense of the team's results by losing the unloseable series against India. I remember that test match well, and waugh had many opportunities to pull the plug and stop chasing the win (they were leading 1 nil already). Instead Australia lost, and that changed the mindset of Australian cricket (we rarely ever enforce the follow-on anymore). Incidentally, if you want to talk stats, Taylor had a better series captaincy record than Waugh, he lost two test series just like Waugh, but Waugh also drew one series while Taylor won all the other.

  • mew_mew_cat on May 14, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    By disrespecting Steve Waugh, all Ian Chappell will be able to accomplish is to earn disrespect from fans. Totally disagree with Chappell's comments, all of which is biased and some of which are unrealistic and self-contradictory. A captain is always judged according to the success he brings. Thats the way cricket is played, and most other sports too. Let me not talk about Steve's achievements as batsmen. As a capitain, Steve Waugh by records is the most successful in Test cricket, and in my opinion better than anybody ever, including Sir Don and Clive Lloyds. He has changed the face of test cricket. He led his team to win in WC 99 when nobody thought they had a chance. These type of comments and false analysis from Ian are extremely unaaceptable.

  • surendra1507 on May 14, 2010, 16:08 GMT

    Quite iteresting, I did not see any mention of Clive Lloyd in the article,

  • Creevs on May 16, 2010, 12:12 GMT

    Shane I agree with you totally. He has never rated Steve. Never would. Steve always played to win. Ian was an average cricketer a sub standard commentator.

  • abhipunter on May 16, 2010, 8:07 GMT

    I agree with Ian.Because and the pressure situations both Ricky Steve had are totally different. Steve is fans favorite but not Ricky. People always try to find out something wrong in Ricky. But time to time, again and again he proved critics wrong. With the amount of turnover Oz had over the past few years rebuilding a team is not an easy task. Punter did that and still maintained Australia's position as one of the strong contender for any of the big tournament. It's easy to criticize the team or captain when they lose but not easy to face that situation Ponting faced such situation and rebuild ed the team If Australia dominate cricket for nex 5 to 10 years then the credit should go to Ricky. Because he has built entire new team. a new generation.

  • crusty52 on May 15, 2010, 10:35 GMT

    Ian Chappell is so bitter and twisted he sounds more and more like a grumpy old man better suited to a retirement home!

  • djp9 on May 15, 2010, 8:36 GMT

    i totally agree with Ian Chappell's article. Ex-players have mentioned that Steve Waugh hardly game suggestions / comments on the field and was hardly inspirational ... i saw Damien Fleming during Fox commentary say that when he (Fleming) had to bowl the last balls in the World Cup semi final against South Africa and South Africa only needed 1 run to win, he asked Steve Waugh for advice and Steve Waugh told him it didn't matter since they (Australia) were stuffed anyway. I can't imagine Allan Border or Ricky Ponting saying that and basically giving up.

  • tugga_bsb on May 15, 2010, 6:58 GMT

    Nice to see lots of support for Steve!! This is not something new from Chappell. He does it time and again. When Waugh was given the captaincy, he commented him to be unfit as he is too self focused. But Steve proved him wrong. Most of the trophies lined up at CA HQ was won by Steve Waugh. As many has said here, he changed the way test cricket is played. He always played to win. There were very few no of draws. All teams have great players, but there is no point in having them unless u use them the right way and thats how the aussie team formed under Steve. During 1999 world cup, there was talks about Shane Warne's performance and probably resting him, but Steve instilled his confidence in him and Shane did the rest. He taught the other teams the importance of batting with the bowlers and now we see many lower order players too saving games. We can go on and on. Its good that Steve Waugh doesnt react to all these comment. We are tired of these comments Mr. Chappell, please rest it

  • Shane on May 15, 2010, 6:16 GMT

    Chappelli has been banging on about this for years and it is getting boring. Surely his opinion of Steve Waugh is no longer newsworthy! (Maybe 50+ comments says otherwise) He really should preface any comment with Steve Waugh by saying 'I hate his guts' or 'I hate him because he was captain and Warney was not.' Some of his commentary is reasonable but his bias and hatred of Waugh is so great that it just becomes white noise. In terms of best captain from the last four (exlcuding Gilly filling in) Taylor is probably number 1, AB no 2 - not because of his captaincy on or off field but purely because of his batting brought us back from the doldrums to the brink of greatness, Waugh 3 and Ponting 4. That is not to say Ponting is terrible but he is number 4 of that grouping.

  • bretty_jack on May 15, 2010, 3:57 GMT

    Ian u know a lot about Cricket but u have always had it in for Steve, and I think if he had of been Captain of last years Ashes we would have won. Ponting is a champian batsmen but just an average Captain.

  • BillyCC on May 15, 2010, 1:16 GMT

    It is true that there is bad blood between Chappell and Waugh, so any comments made must be taken with a grain of salt. I think both Ponting and Waugh are good captains but Taylor and Border were streets ahead. Ponting has some well-known flaws that he has been addressing. He is still quite conservative and doesn't know how to really blast an opponent. Ironically, Steve Waugh could do that, but Waugh selfishly chased history at the expense of the team's results by losing the unloseable series against India. I remember that test match well, and waugh had many opportunities to pull the plug and stop chasing the win (they were leading 1 nil already). Instead Australia lost, and that changed the mindset of Australian cricket (we rarely ever enforce the follow-on anymore). Incidentally, if you want to talk stats, Taylor had a better series captaincy record than Waugh, he lost two test series just like Waugh, but Waugh also drew one series while Taylor won all the other.

  • mew_mew_cat on May 14, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    By disrespecting Steve Waugh, all Ian Chappell will be able to accomplish is to earn disrespect from fans. Totally disagree with Chappell's comments, all of which is biased and some of which are unrealistic and self-contradictory. A captain is always judged according to the success he brings. Thats the way cricket is played, and most other sports too. Let me not talk about Steve's achievements as batsmen. As a capitain, Steve Waugh by records is the most successful in Test cricket, and in my opinion better than anybody ever, including Sir Don and Clive Lloyds. He has changed the face of test cricket. He led his team to win in WC 99 when nobody thought they had a chance. These type of comments and false analysis from Ian are extremely unaaceptable.

  • surendra1507 on May 14, 2010, 16:08 GMT

    Quite iteresting, I did not see any mention of Clive Lloyd in the article,

  • Fazham on May 14, 2010, 15:39 GMT

    Mr. Chappell may have his views but I can't I agree . Speacially if he says Ricky Ponting was able to maintain No.1 position even after losing several star players. The example is 2005 Ashes. Australia had everyone Hayden,Langer,Ponting,Mcgrath,Warne,Gilchrist etc. Still they lost the TEST 2-1. So how can Chappel say that Ponting dint have the best team? Its good captains that brings out the best out of the players on the field. Waugh was the grittiest cricketer u can ever see. Exceptionally talented Players like Warne come once in lifetime but even the present Aussie team has lots of good players.Its Aussie system that produces good cricketers. Ponting is good Captain but certainly not better than Waugh

  • Drew12 on May 14, 2010, 15:08 GMT

    It is difficult to assertain the influence a player has as an individual and captain on a team that is made up of 10 other players. Presumably if the other players are great it makes little difference as captain, if not so great a captain, as player showing the way and as a leader, can make a difference. As an example that will register will India-centric cricinfo readers, Shane warne leading Rajasthan to win the first IPL.

    @rags1892 how you could call that team a 'shambles' is mystifying. They had established themselves as the best and the turn-over in captaincy had been worked out well before. Look at the team playing in that first test as captain. It has well established players.

    @ Sesha Raghav, your attempt at proving a contradiction in Ian's argument is completely flawed. You actually mention success but forget this when you suggest Andy Flower et al to be best captain. The criteria is sucess with what you have at your disposal: Ponting had sucess with a lesser team they didn't.

  • A.P.B. on May 14, 2010, 14:50 GMT

    I always get a laugh at some of the comments made regarding Australian cricket by people who are largely clueless on the subject matter (I'm referring to the feedback not Chappelli). You all say that the article highlights Ian's dislike for Steve Waugh...I think the majority of your comments highlight YOUR dislike and disrespect for Ponting. I am definitely not going to say that Ponting is the best captain ...he's not...but people saying he's the worst...you are CLUELESS! He has made some mistakes (Edgbaston 05, over rates in India etc.) but so did Waugh. The difference is the Aussie team under Waugh were by far and away better than everyone else so he got away with it. "They didn't win in India" I hear you all say ... you didn't beat them in Australia either ... nor could you beat either of them in neutral venues during World Cups. Cue the umpire & cheat comments now! For mine, Taylor was the best Aussie captain...great tactitioner & leader.Oz will regain test no1 under Ponting soon.

  • shyam.v on May 14, 2010, 12:32 GMT

    Mr Chappell, when r u going to stop this nonsense.... there is no harm in supporting Ponting (a fine batsman, not so much a leader)but not at the expense of showing down others.Steve changed the way test cricket is played... if by chappell's own comments on "taking wickets being more important than saving runs", nobody played more aggresive cricket than Steve himself... and he may hav saved the kolkatta test if he went for a draw which ponting may hav done surely... hope u wont repeat this Mr chappell!

  • Psyc_s on May 14, 2010, 12:03 GMT

    I could sense Mr.Ian use the word "I" to a good extent when compared to most other writers at cricinfo. A safe bet indeed, if someone questions about a controversial topic...A good strategy by Cricinfo as they knew there is a big fan following to hear or read what Mr.Ian got to tell to understand one side of coin and that is the wrong side...Keep Talking Mr.Ian.

  • NISH67 on May 14, 2010, 9:25 GMT

    Most of Chappell's so called analysis is based on personal likes and dislikes and this is an obvious fact ! As a former Aus captain he is entitled to his expert opinion but it would be apt if he provides an unbiased view rather than mollycoddle his favorites and bad mouth his supposed rivals !!

  • sideliner on May 14, 2010, 8:03 GMT

    The question i would ask is if i had Waugh, Taylor, Ponting and Chappell in my side, who would i want to lead them? All of them were capable of leading by example - with with Ponting the standout class batsman, and Waugh and Chappell having exceptional courage. Tactically, Taylor and Chappell were excellent, while Waugh and Ponting, to me lack imagination in the field. As a"moulder" and "inspirer" of his men, all had/have that ability, with the exception of Ponting from an outsiders point of view. Finally, off-field public respect, given todays media requirements, i'd suggest that only Waugh and Taylor had this respect - with Taylor the standout. Therefore, on the criteria above, i'd suggest that Mark Taylor would be my choice - which surprisingly is what Mr Chappell has said. I just wish he had said it as nicely as i have have.

  • sideliner on May 14, 2010, 7:56 GMT

    Ian Cappell is no literary genius and to my mind does himself no favours in the way he expresses himself - even if some of his points have validity. He needs to learn how to make a positive valid point without denigrating someone else - especially someone who deeds - both on and off the field - and public respect, far outweighs his own.

  • Marcus74 on May 14, 2010, 7:06 GMT

    This article is so typical of Ian Chappell - any chance he gets to say how bad Steve Waugh was he takes. The reality is that Steve Waugh has a better captaincy record, considerably better test batting average, and better first class batting average, has scored more test and first class centuries and is more popular than Ian Chappell. As always Ian Chappell can never say a good word about Steve Waugh. One day Chappelli might wake up to himself and state writing something that is actually objective. He's still sore that is tosser of a mate Shane Warne wasn't Australian captain! (Betting scandal, stupid antics and failed drugs test aside!)

  • RajaSw on May 14, 2010, 6:54 GMT

    I had posted a comment yesterday, it was here - but it seems to have disappeared.

    Anyway, I think this is a wonderful interview. Like many here, I also do not agree on the Ponting vs Waugh bit (for me Ponting's Cardiff blooper was the BIGGEST captaincy blunder one can imagine - and that is not an isolated example of Ponting losing the plot). Having said that, it is Ian's opinion that Ponting is a good example - and he is entitled to his opinion.

    I like Ian's way of thinking. IMO he is spot on about Brearley. He only ever won against Packer-impoverished weak sides. And certainly did not merit a place in the England side for his batting.

    Why do people have a problem when somebody says it as he sees it ? At least he does not try to sugar-coat his views. I have a problem with people who feel that Buchanan is crap but think it would be politically incorrect or "hurtful" to call this out. That is why we have loads of "nice" interviews nowadays.

    More such interviews pls.

  • babya on May 14, 2010, 6:45 GMT

    I dont agree with Chappelle here being an Oz supporter for last 14 years..i have seen tugga captaining for his entire span years and punter too so far..I have never seen as good as tugga so far..i agree in test cricket he had pigeon and warney to do it..But u cannot forget tugga's knock against rsa in super eights against rsa..It was the best one day innings by any captain i have ever seen though it cannot be quickest and huge as few made by punter..Agree with chappellee waugh struggled in india series in 2001 and in his last VB series which rsa took..i too dont go with statistics as u chappelle..but tugga had much weaker batting line up than punter..And 2001 series punter as well as gilly failed miserably.Only haydos was the man for them..No Doubt punter is best batsman in oz line up now but tugga surely was greatest oz captain in last 2 decades atleast..99 wc was really hard to win than 2003 or 2007..Also he has build entire attitude which oz possesses currently..

  • rags1892 on May 14, 2010, 6:00 GMT

    Ha...ha.. what a joke... When Steve Waugh received a team from Taylor it wa in shambles.. the players were disoriented ... Whereas when Ponting got a team everyone new their jobs.. each one had a fixed role... I think Ponting's influence on the team was minimal...

  • chhayesh on May 14, 2010, 5:40 GMT

    Ricky Ponting---"The worst captain AUSSIE's ever had in the whole history of their cricket"...He is the biggest loser I have ever saw!!!

  • KhanFromAus on May 14, 2010, 5:07 GMT

    I totally agree with Ian Chappell, I think Ponting is THE best captain Australia has ever had. The best example of Ricky Ponting's leadership could be the time when Australia lost the services of McGrath, Heydon, Langer, Gilchrist, Hogg, Warne in relatively short span of time and people started talking they are no longer the best team but Australia could manage to keep themselves as the number one team in tests and ODIs.

  • wanderer1 on May 14, 2010, 4:50 GMT

    I rate Greg Chappell higher than Ian. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

  • on May 14, 2010, 4:37 GMT

    Ian, I never expected this sub par article from you. Waugh defined the success of Aussie team in Test cricket. If you look at Waugh and other captains or even Sachin, he would have played more match winning knocks. It takes a good leader to manage your resources. If Ian rates Captain on the quality of the players the captain had at its disposal and not on win/loss @ home/away stats, I guess Andy Flower or Steve Tikolo should be ranked above the rest.

  • bobagorof on May 14, 2010, 3:57 GMT

    While Chappell has some intelligent things to say about captaincy, and cricket in general, there are some points where he contradicts himself. For example: "So I don't judge captains from their win-loss records.", followed later by "He may have been better than what I ranked him, but from what I saw, he lost 0-3, so he wasn't making a hell of a difference as a captain"

  • bobagorof on May 14, 2010, 3:16 GMT

    I'll state first up that I'm not a Ponting fan. I think he is immature and arrogant when it comes to cricket and his team. Having said that, he has done well to develop the talented players who followed the retirements of the stars he inherited. But I don't think he is a good tactical captain. Most of Ponting's early captaincy was heavily reliant on the experience of Darren Lehmann, with whom he chatted every over or so. He is very reluctant to use a Plan B if things don't work - part time bowlers are almost never used, it's always Johnson, Johnson, Johnson. The much vaulted win against India in Sydney only came about because Ponting finally decided to stop ignoring his vice-captain Clarke's suggestion to bring on a change of bowling, which apparently had been going on for half the day. In contrast, Waugh would often turn to M. Waugh, Blewett, Ponting if Plan A didn't work - even in THAT match in 2001 he gave everyone a bowl, trying different things. Waugh was much better IMO.

  • Meety on May 14, 2010, 2:17 GMT

    Hi, Everyone is entitled to their opinions, I thought Tubby Taylor was the best captain Australia have had since my 30+ years of watching cricket started. I don't think Border should be compared with the other 3. He carried Australian cricket for a decade and his captaincy was born in an environment where the Baggygreen was not competitive. He was naturally defensive. Tubby Taylor took over from Border and was quick to latch onto the talents of a budding Warne. I think Taylors field placements and bowling changes were far better than anything Ponting, Waugh & Border did. Waugh took over an Australian side that was now #1 in the world. He tightened up a tendancy to lose dead rubbers and instill the mentality that a whitewash was the series goal, (99 World Cup was awesome), Ponting is probably the best ODI captain of the lot, but is too defensive in Tests, but he has done a great job holding Australia near the top, with a less impressive artillery. To praise one is not to bag the other.

  • BillyCC on May 14, 2010, 2:12 GMT

    It is definitely true that there is bad blood between Chappell and Waugh. However, the reasons that Ian gives are quite valid. Steve Waugh lost one unloseable series against India because of lack of ideas but primarily because of a rash approach. There were times in Kolkata when he could have scaled back and played for a draw (Australia were leading one-nil anyway), but he didn't. The lure of history beckoned and Waugh was captivated. Taylor and Border wouldn't have cared much so long as the result was in their favour. The ruthless approach by Waugh never sat well with me because by going out to win everything, you could actually lose everything (which is what happened in India). And if we are looking purely at records, Taylor's record is actually better than to Waugh's. They each lost two series (not including Taylor's loss of the one-off test played in India in 1996), but Waugh drew one as well (against the West Indies). Taylor won the rest of his.

  • santhoshkudva on May 14, 2010, 1:47 GMT

    chappell had amnesia during the '99 world cup.

  • hornet18 on May 14, 2010, 1:16 GMT

    I think Ian Chappell has a lot of good things to say about the game but unfortunately he often tarnishes he's own comments with obviously bitter and personal remarks. This brings down the quality of his journalism. If I am reading an article on or by Ian Chappell I can see the anti Waugh comments coming paragraphs away. He will use any opportunity to dig the knife in - even if he has to go out of context and off on a tangent. He used the mention of Gatting in this interview not to praise Gatting himself but to launch straight into an anti Botham offensive. It's a shame because you can be honest without being bitter.

  • Itchy on May 13, 2010, 23:32 GMT

    Don't think Steve Waugh will be losing any sleep over this article - looks like the chip is well and truly stuck on Chappelli's shoulder! While Ponting has made great strides as a captain in the last 6-12 months, I still think he lags behind Steve Waugh in this role (not that this is an indictment on Ponting). A couple of lost Ashes series against England won't help his claims but he was captain of a 5-0 whitewash which should count for something!

    Ponting has also presided over a time of immense change in players (which, as the article correctly pointed out, Waugh never had to face) - while the team standards are not as high as they once were, they are still pretty good and other teams are still struggling to cope.

  • DADA on May 13, 2010, 22:57 GMT

    Ponting better than Waugh !!!!! No way. I think Ian chappel is getting old. Steven Waugh is not the best Aussie captain but he is better than Ponting. Personally I would rate pointing as once of worst captain, but he is a good batsman. I Think I am better captain than Pointing.

  • on May 13, 2010, 21:43 GMT

    Makes me wonder if Chappell ever watches cricket or has a selective memory problem. Ponting should be one of the first chosen in the test side as a batsman only (not in ODI or 20/20 sides) but have nothing to do with any decision making. Not innovative enough and uses his resources poorly although not helped by the selectors who have on many occasions not provided him with the form players.

  • mdharis on May 13, 2010, 21:20 GMT

    Quote Chappell "My order of priority is wickets, way up there, right at the top by miles; saving singles next, quite a distance down; and then, way down, saving boundaries."

    In other words, his style is to always deploy an attacking PowerPlay field. It is this rigidity that makes me wanna disagree with Chappell , despite his really credible assessment of Ponting.

  • krisvem on May 13, 2010, 20:22 GMT

    Most of the comments have already hashed the bottom line that Waugh was by far a better captain over Ponting. Waugh changed the way test cricket was played, he was instrumental in bringing in an aggressive attitude to the side with an ideology of win no matter what and from any situation, yet be classy about it.

    If we are comparing lack of imagination based solely on 1 match and comparing Waugh running out of ideas in 2001 Kolkata, then what about Punter's imaginative captaincy when Aussies lost after scoring the highest score ever in ODIs, what about Punter persisting with Mick Lewis, when others more economical (comparatively) didn't even finish their quota of overs. Imo, he not only ran out of ideas, he lost the plot utterly.

    When compared with Border, Taylor or Waugh, Ponting when under pressure runs out of ideas more quickly, time and again. Having said all that Ponting get's this much he has made sure Aussies remained more than competitive over the years. Not an easy task.

  • Himad on May 13, 2010, 19:50 GMT

    Just another attempt by Chappell to glorify ponting....No one takes it seriously anymore, and seriously this behaviour of his is affecting his standing as a commentator too. He is fast becoming a nuisance on TV watching my favourite game of cricket. I am seeing Chappell more of a "splitter" these days...in his books, either you are ''too good" especially if you are OZ or "too bad" if you are a Paki or any other team player playing against OZ. Here he went wrong again by saying Waugh was not the best australian captain of the past 25 years. Having watched cricket closely over this period, I can have my own favourites like Chappell. And I will go with Imran, Waugh and Ranatunga particularly in that order as the best captains that have graced the cricket field during the past 25 years. Now Ponting, he is just another captain for me as I see nothing special about him. And I also don't consider winning as a criteria for selecting my best.

  • on May 13, 2010, 19:31 GMT

    it is ponting who was captain when SA chase 434, it is he who lost 2 ashes to england with last one against an ordinary english side, lost comfortably test series to SA and india..it is he who nearly let india chase 350 ,it is he who lost back to back finals in CB series against idea. So it is he who normally ran out of ideas. and btw australian team under ponting has very good players..most of players are international stars.. He is at best a very gud batsman. And mr. chappell ..he likes to have different views from rest just for the sake of being different...He thinks sehwag is best batsman after bradman..whereas ratio of match winning innings to total matches sehwag has played is much less than some other players...i agree when sehwag contributes he does that in huge way..but no. of failures for sehwag are also huge...

  • akpy on May 13, 2010, 19:17 GMT

    Ian chappel who?? why do we give him or his views importance??Remember 'the next modern master' prediction of duminy..poor guy is still suffering from the curse..save your comments to yourself ian..

  • rajthegreat on May 13, 2010, 16:50 GMT

    Well there goes Ian and his oft repeated criticism of Steve Waugh. Well Ian i thinl you are doing this only to get mileage and people are getting bored mate.. Most non biased people would rate Steve Waugh a far better captain than Ponting ever will be. When Steve waugh took over in 98-99 , Warne and Mcgrath were not the match winners they were considered at time of retirement in 2007. For instance McGrath only had about 200 wickets when Steve Waugh took over,warne about 300 and Gilchrist, Lee were all debutants. Steve waugh was the captain who instilled the "Invincibles" spirit in them when they won 16 matches in a row. I would consider Steve the best captain of all time for this reason. In fact if Chappell was unbiased himself, according to his standards too steve would be among the best captains because he was a very aggresive captain and had probably the lowest ratios of draws to result matches of modern times.

  • andrew-schulz on May 13, 2010, 16:46 GMT

    How can you ignore win/loss record, you goose? Ponting has cost Australia at least four Tests with poor captaincy and field placing. No such criticism could be levelled at Waugh. Chappell is a hack. It is hilarious to hear him talking about batsmen not handling the short ball when he, as captain, let the team down massively by shocking batting against the short ball in England in 1972.

  • SameerSharma on May 13, 2010, 16:35 GMT

    hahahaha....Mr. Chappel I think hav lost his analyzing ability. During India's early exit in the 2007WC he had told that Tendulkar shud retire now as he still don't possess those caliber and now he's of the view that Ponting is a better captain than Waugh....Mr. Chappel no captains in the world has ever justified a Captains role as Waugh has done..!!!

  • sandeepH2O on May 13, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    My My

    I think it is Ian Chappel's job to create controversies and generate interest

    Anyone understanding cricket and who has seen it over last 2 decades will know that it was the other way round

    Steve Waugh did not have so many great players at his disposal still he managed many things

    Ponting is just lucky to have got the best team ever and also succeeding Steve

  • Naren on May 13, 2010, 15:35 GMT

    Wake up Ian and keep your personal grudges against someone to yourself. Just like Warne, Ian also tries to use the media to settle personal grudges. I am not sure how people with such attitudes be good captains or even good enough to judge others. Also remember Ponting has lost twice in England and has never won in India. It was Gilly who actually led them to victory. I am still not convinced of Ponting's credentials, I like him very much though. He has looked to run out of ideas in several close matches. Waugh was a fighter and he deserves better respect. Advice to Ian, as a media person your are supposed to give your unbiased view. Pass this advice to your friend Warne too.. we know why he came up with those 100 best cricketers... lol.

  • apaco73 on May 13, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    Ummhh, guess Ian is not telling us all there is. Steve started playing test matches as if it was a one-dayer forcing many games to end with a result rather than a draw.This brought about a lotta interest in the rather than the usual drab draw. Giving a scenario of one of the very few time Australia lost as an example for Steve and saying in the next line that he does not judge players on the win/lose ratio is tough. Australia lose the last two Ashes because Ponting lost the plot. He failed to close out a lotta of games. Could not bow Swann and Monty!!!!! Australia bats men had more centuries scored more runs in total and Ponting go nothing out of it. Steve got the best out of his players including Ponting. If Steve was still captain, Andrew Symmonds will still be a test player because he would have been better managed.

  • Hiteshdevilliers on May 13, 2010, 15:14 GMT

    Mr. Ian, this is a very poorly written article, did not expect this to come from you of all people. Steve Waugh was a terrific leader and deserves much more credit than you are giving him. The only reason Ponting has been so successful is because he took over the captaincy when Warne, McGrath & Co. were at their bowling peaks. Heck, even then they lost the ashes pretty convincingly in 2005. Ever since aussies two best bowlers retired in Sydney 07', the results haven't been all that special. I don't know how much memory you have lost, but Ponting cheated his way to series series victory over India in 2007/08 and has lost test series against the big teams, barring RSA last year. You really should give more evidence to back up your claims against Steve Waugh, otherwise it's just being unfair on him. How many times has Ponting batted with the tail for long periods? Though I will agree with you on Ponting the one day captain, he is the best ODI captain Australia have ever produced.

  • IGL2010 on May 13, 2010, 14:57 GMT

    Chappel has lost it completely. Any judgment he had is now only better left to only himself

  • waspsting on May 13, 2010, 14:22 GMT

    a captain is really only as good as his team - and most captains with a big rep are known more as man managers than tactical giants (imran khan, worrell for example).

    i don't think it makes any difference who was captain - waugh or ponting. given a team, they'd do just as well or badly as the other.

    mark taylor was a shade ahead of the rest though.

  • crickethung on May 13, 2010, 14:10 GMT

    I think that winning does matter. Clive lloyd was a brilliant leader of men but not necessarily a great captain but that was what WI needed to harness the talent. Viv Richards stay was short but he was not a good captain but his short stint piggy backed on LLoyd's success. Brian Lara was a brilliant tactician and from a cricket perspective was outstanding captaincy material. However, he was not a good leader of men like LLoyd was and plus he had a horrible team. Ponting has had the resources to work with and was good but pressure showed up weaknesses whereas Waugh had less to work with but was excellent under pressure and he really set the tone for what Ponting inherited. Sorry Mr. Chappell

  • OzForAshes on May 13, 2010, 14:07 GMT

    I'd agree with what Chappell is saying. People forget that Ricky has been the ODI captain since the start of 2002; the team has gone from strength to strength and Ricky's ODI performance has been consistent. Nearly 9 years as captain is a great achievement.

    Anyone remember India racking up 700 at the SCG, when Waugh didn't have Warne and McGrath, Australia struggled. Chappell has a point there.

    You could argue that Ponting's character is ideally suited to taking on the dirty job that is taking Australia back to #1. Ponting has copped a heap for losing but just keeps on going. Indeed, in the years to come we will most likely look back and say that Ponting was the right man for the job, because he had the thick skin to deal with the media and the extra pressure.

    Indeed, it almost seems to fuel him at times. I'd agree with what Chappell is saying, Ponting isn't the most popular Australian cricketer ever but he is a great leader and a sound tactical captain.

  • Hoggy_1989 on May 13, 2010, 13:42 GMT

    So let me get this straight, Chappelli is saying that Waugh was a worse captain than Ponting, because Waugh had better players at his disposal, therefore he can't be that good? Ponting had a full strength side (more or less) for the '05 Ashes and got beaten, because they couldn't master reverse swing.

    Chappelli does make one good point; captains who prioritize saving runs over taking wickets are useless. For example, Australia v Pakistan last season, the so-called 'Great Escape' by Australia. Australia, should have for all money lost that game...but Mohammed Yousuf thought it was a good idea to have 8 men on the fence with Peter Siddle (by his own admission a complete bunny) at the crease, when they had every chance to bowl Aus out and get a win. Seriously?!

    Might I mention that neither Waugh nor Ponting captained a team to a series win against India in India...Gilly was captain for all matches that Australia won. Not saying Gilly is better than the other two, but food for thought

  • RBadman on May 13, 2010, 13:41 GMT

    It's sad when a once-respected figure's opinions become totally irrelevant due to broken-record, living-in-the-past meanderings, generally poorly thought-out arguments and dull, revert-to-type commentary. In my mind, though, Ian Chappell has been a pretty sad figure for about a couple of decades now. Judging by the vast majority of comments in this forum, I'm probably not alone in that sentiment. Singling out Steve Waugh again for special attention... Yet. Again. It's pathetic. We get it, mate. It would seem of us don't agree with it. Let it go. Do us a favour, Channel Nine, and at long last put this bullish, boorish dinosaur out to pasture. Let him instead reduce his dinner party guests to a catatonic state with his tedious tales of the "good old days".

  • on May 13, 2010, 13:35 GMT

    It was under Steve Waugh that Matthew Hayden, Justin Langer, and Ponting himself blossomed. Ponting's average prior to Waugh's captaincy was in the 30s. Waugh turned the Aussies from a successful unit to ruthless unbeatable one. Ponting merely had to continue what Waugh started, in the context of which he lost the Ashes twice in England, lost a home series to South Africa, lost in India (the India series win was under Adam Gilchrist with the Aussies losing the only match in the series that Ponting captained). In fact, Ponting's captaincy record has been considerably bolstered by the fact that he has consistently thrashed New Zealand, the West Indies, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan. Against India, England, and South Africa, his record has been pretty much average.

  • STondulkar on May 13, 2010, 13:32 GMT

    This is more of a tactical ploy by Ian Chappel to keep the morale of the Australian Skipper. Since he will be captaining Aus in the 2011 WC also, may be Ian is helping his beloved batsman regain his confidence in batting. I agree to one of the comments that no team can match Aus as Unit and that's their biggest strength. I think captains (should) play part in grooming youngsters and bring the best out of them. Otherwise anyone with good cricketing sense can be a good captain with good players. As they say Capatain is only as good as the team is.

  • CricketLover73 on May 13, 2010, 13:22 GMT

    Does anyone believe this nonsense??? The Chappell brothers need to get a life, really. They have spent the last 15 odd years trying to belittle Steve Waugh, Ian in particular. Many people would rate Steve an even better captain than Ian. He should put that thought in his pipe and blow smoke elsewhere.

  • knowledge_eater on May 13, 2010, 13:20 GMT

    Lot of fans here on commenting section are very very young, most of us have no idea what we are talking about, and we end up insulting them for random biased reason. However, this interview should wake up and mature lot of us, who have never seen cricket the way Mr Chappell have seen. We take lot of things for granted by enjoying cricket the way we are enjoying right now. This interview definitely proves what is difference between Child (us) vs Grown old Yoda (the wise one). I am going to call Mr Ian "Yoda" Chappell. I kind of agree with Ponting being better than Waugh (even though I have more respect for Waugh because of his Humble nature) In Steve Waugh time there were probably players who were better than him, so he probably trusted players' instinct more than his own orders. In Ponting time, there are almost all players who have under achieved than him, so when Ponting gives orders, people listen to him and follow him and probably respect his decisions even more. Very wise man.

  • Paulk on May 13, 2010, 13:16 GMT

    ICs bias is way too transparent. He is damaging his reputation as a cricket expert with his long history anti-Waugh statements. Time to let go of personal grudges man. I respect his other opinions (on technical issues) but I know not to take him seriously when it comes to personnel such as Waugh and to a lesser extent Gilchrist (not his personal favorite) etc. Funny he never has anything to say ever about Ian Botham. Wonder what it is in a person's life that makes him carry such such meanness inside him. Actually this makes me respect Steve Waugh more.

  • Quazar on May 13, 2010, 13:15 GMT

    Chappell's biases have become abundantly clear in recent years. Warne and Ponting are tops for him, while Steve Waugh (among others) are irredeemably flawed. All of Ponting's captaincy errors are overlooked, while a once in a lifetime turnaround (Kolkata) is attributed to Waugh running out of ideas! Well, just going back one year - whose call was it to omit Hauritz on a dry-looking surface? Or bowl North, instead of a Johnson, at Panesar at Cardiff? Sorry, but Waugh was the man (leading from the front) under whom Oz made a stunning turnaround to win the 1999 WC, and created an aura of near-invincibility in all major ICC tournaments since.

  • on May 13, 2010, 13:09 GMT

    Well.. well.. well.. look who's talking, the Chappell again has his ideas which he himself knows will only earn him a "Laugh" in return... There is no doubt about Ponting's ability or his captaincy skills... but then boy, yes you- Chappel boy, do u know what Australi were just a few days before Steve Waugh took over its reigns, they were on a losing streak, they did not have a solid opening pair, they did not have a tearaway pace attack, they had forgotten winning long back.... that's when Steve Waugh captained Australia, and on his early days, he toured South Africa, the then best ODI team those days and defeated them at their home soil,, Steve waugh showed the world what he was, he got Jason Gillsepie from nowhere to partner along Mc-grath, he got his brother Mark to open and succeed, he also found Adam Gilchrist to tear away the bowling attack..... That is how a new ODI australian team was formed, which started to win everywhere. And Chappel boy,, just to refresh Urold brains..

  • Celtics24 on May 13, 2010, 12:56 GMT

    No One take any notice of this article please, Anyone who knows anything about cricket and Waugh and Chappell knows that there is bad blood between the two, at least from Chappell's end and Chappell often has criticized him over the years for no apparent reason.

    Most people would rate Waugh above Ponting as a captain, and Chappell is heavily biased towards certain players, Ponting is one of those, and against certain players.

    Quite annoying really.

  • _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on May 13, 2010, 12:39 GMT

    What I would like to see is more RESULT pitches in this era to really show up captains and teams alike. Pitches that offer something to the bowler means that scenarios have a greater chance of changing and force captains to be flexible, intuitive and sharp. It also forces captains/teams to add more balance to their side rather than just bolstering batting or bowling (which ever way u see it to counter increasingly batsman friendly tracks worldwide). Only then some1 with less knowledge of captaincy like myself will be confident enough to say oh, well yes, this guy is a better captain than this guy. I would like to add that the nature of t-20 really helps separate captains as well. I thought Sanga's captaincy vs Ind was spot on, whilst G.Smith vs Pak was terribly off.

  • tragicmagic on May 13, 2010, 11:58 GMT

    Agree whole heartedly with Ian. Steve Waugh had such a great bunch of players right at there peak not least of which, Ponting. He also faced weaker opponents than Ponting particularly England. All he had to do was turn up and bulldoze the opposition, there was no quarter and it was boring. Under Ponting the games have been a lot more interesting and it has been fascinating to watch the growth of one of our greatest players and captains.

  • AsifRathod on May 13, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    Stop taking names of Warne & McGrath over and over again. Aussie team is wining because they have 11 very good players, not because of these four captains. Players like, Waugh bros., M. Hughes, D. Boon all were good players who lead Aussie to Victory under the captaincy of Border. When Taylor was captain, Warne, McGrath start bowling marvelously. While Waugh was captain, they have players like Gili, Lee, Gillespie all coming along. Ricky Ponting has services of players like, Hussey,Johnson,Clarke and all. All these four guys are known as good captain because many good players played under them. Aussie team win most of the tests they played because of combined team effort. Captaincy is not big point mate!!

  • on May 13, 2010, 11:45 GMT

    I thick Chappell should open his eyes. Steve Waugh always had a back up plan if A didn't work. While Waugh would bring on a variety of bowlers to get wickets if his stars couldn't get the job done, Ponting just sticks to the one plan, he has no sense of tactical change, just one plan. Also, remember when he bowled North instead of Hilfenhaus in England? Hilfy would have gotten the wicket, North is for going through overs quickly, thus Ponting is playing for his own selfish gain, not the good of the team winning. In addition, Ponting doesn't know ho to grind a team into submisson, instead, preferring to go more defensive, such as not enforcing the follow on, which Waugh did regularly. On the biggest note, Ponting has brought his scruffy, untidy looks onto others, just remember Andrew Symonds and his untidy hair, not to mention unsportsmanship, Ponting can control Johnson.

  • Kart_in_Quartz on May 13, 2010, 11:30 GMT

    "It doesn't really take an odd instance here and there to judge a captain's material. It's over a substantial period of time and when proven well and truly successful over one and all, the captain is ought to be appreciated. And that is where Steve Waugh falls under. One cannot really quote on the quality team he had, had it not been for his captaincy to achieve the results...

    Take the '99 World Cup, winning consecutive games one after the other, literally after being pushed to the wall, on the verge of elimination... It does call for someone tough to motivate and get the best output from the team no matter how good it may be… And then leading from the front… Who can forget the Waugh-Gibbs duel... from an anti-climax leading to scoring a 100 to proceeding to lift the cup... He's the gutsy man of mettle for sure, right at the top."

  • loggerfloodles on May 13, 2010, 11:12 GMT

    I think Ponting is a much, much better captain now than he was even a couple of years ago. I think losing in India and the flak he copped really improved his hunger. They're both different types of captains, much like they're different from tubby, who was an out and out strategic genius. Waugh was brilliant at using the psychological side of cricket against his opponants, and an inspirational captain. Punter is more technical, almost like a coach, but he seems to be getting the best out of his young team and teaching them how to fight. That's not to say Waugh couldn't have, but like Bradman VS a modern pace attack, we'll never know for sure if he could. All that aside, Steve is my second favourite Waugh!

  • ThinknAct on May 13, 2010, 10:51 GMT

    Dont agree with the view expressed at all ...

    Nothing Beats the ICE MAN ... As a player he was very talented and committed ... One of the best averages in the 4th innings of Test matches ...

    If winning doesnt count, am sure playing too wont ...

  • thenightwatchman on May 13, 2010, 10:37 GMT

    Ridiculous! Ponting has lost to the Poms twice, including keeping with second rate spinners on and failing to bowl out Monty Panesar in Cardiff 2009. He took an Aussie team of Warne, Langer, Hayden, Martyn, Gilchrist, McGrath at the peak of their careers to england in 2005 and couldn't get a victory out of them? Come on....

  • EVH316 on May 13, 2010, 10:32 GMT

    Hmmm. Not one of the great articles. There is ample evidence to suggest Waugh was an excellent leader and citing one example - Kolkata, 2001 which was pretty unique - to prove Ponting was better is not a strong argument; having seen most of Australia`s Tests under Ponting, he has cost Aus. strong positions and series due to his bad decisions rather than a dearth of match-winners (which of course Waugh had plenty of). Criticism of Brearley is a bit silly too. For one thing, he got Botham firing and that`s worth two players!

  • JogeshPanda on May 13, 2010, 10:24 GMT

    Its hard to buy your idea Mr Chappell, first of all, Ponting got a team which was invincible, After all star left where was ponting Ideas. Last India series what you say going with White as lone frontline spinner for all the tests. Nagpur Test and Mohali Test where was his ideas. Beating Pak and WI at home turf was easy noone bump him for new Ideas.While Steve Waugh was instrumental in building an Invincible unit, Haydos and Langer blossoms during his time, He himself played some of the fighting knocks. 99' WC was not a cake walk like 2007s.

  • Vasanth.C on May 13, 2010, 10:22 GMT

    Glad to hear this. After SRT, Steve Waugh frequently figures in Ian's Tirade... I was a massive fan for Ian during the Late Nuneties when he was a part of TV Coverage of numerous Series and Tournaments held in Sub Continent. Off late, I am unable to tolerate most of his views, for most of them seems biased and favor of particular player / team.

  • ShaanAgha1 on May 13, 2010, 10:11 GMT

    IAN PLEASE READ ALL THE COMMENTS I have stopped reading Ian Chappell's articles and comments because they are biased to the extent that they are trash at times. Specially when it comes to Steve Waugh, I think it might stem from the fact that Steve was a greater captain than Ian himself. Steve Waugh built a team which was second to none, not even to the invisibles of Bradman or the mighty West Indians. Not border, not Taylor, it is Waugh who built and inspired them.

  • arslan7777 on May 13, 2010, 10:07 GMT

    Well i dont think many people agree with this. It is true that steve waugh had champion players at his disposal but one has to remember that when he came at the helm after mark taylor his side was nowhere close to being the world beaters that they became under him. They were a good side but he turned them into one of the best sides ever, ruthless champions. He says that ponting has managed to keep his side competitive. Well that is no great achievement given that, even after mcgrath and warne, he has still had plenty of talent and bench-strength to work with.

  • ronnie_cric_freak on May 13, 2010, 10:04 GMT

    Mr Chappel it would be helpful if you can point a few matches where Australia won purely because of Ricky`s moves... Ask any Cricket follower and they`ll list you many for Steve Waugh`s. Like everyone mentioned...Its time you put personal grudges behind and comment with unbiased views...

  • anil80 on May 13, 2010, 9:41 GMT

    Utter rubbish steve waugh for is a better batsman under pressure,better captain and a better human being than ricky ponting.

  • on May 13, 2010, 9:29 GMT

    what chappell says is unbelievable. chappell doesnt like steve waugh. i dont like both chappell brothers. I rate steve waugh is best captain after sir don bradman. this is chappells personal issue with steve.

  • hassan10591 on May 13, 2010, 9:26 GMT

    Yeah 1999 World Cup is the perfect example of Waugh's brilliance. His innings against South Africa are two of the best under pressure. Both the 100 in the super 6 and the fifty in the semi-final. Despite being a just above average batsman in ODIs, Waugh was a great captain. In test cricket too. And Waugh was certainly the more aggressive captain. Ponting isn't bad either and you have to give England credit too for winning the 2005 and 2009 Ashes. However, when you look at the controversies Ponting has been involved in, the arguments with umpires and all shows that he ran out of ideas and instead of moving on and bowling opposition out, he starts a war with umpires.

  • DONSILVA on May 13, 2010, 9:09 GMT

    The Asia is blessed with more good captains than rest of the world. Imran, Arjuna and Savouro were the best in the business. Doni and Sanga have the potentiality to be good captains as well

  • Mitcher on May 13, 2010, 9:00 GMT

    Puuuhhhlllease!!!! There is no surprise in this as it is nothing but typical Chappelli pushing his anti-Steve Waugh agenda. Remember he called Waugh selfish for the way he batted with the tail when Waugh did more than anyone to galvanise tail-enders by showing trust in them. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the Ponting bashing camp as I agree he has done a great job with diminished resources but it's hard to argue he is a better than captain than Tugga. Even then, coming from Chappell it means nothing. Time to let go of your petty hatreds Ian, life's too short mate.

  • Abaa on May 13, 2010, 8:59 GMT

    unbelievably hilarious !!! I can't quite manage to understand how he could have come up with that ... Ponting might have been a better batsman but was nowhere close to the class of Steve Waugh when it came to being a captain

  • AJ_Tiger86 on May 13, 2010, 8:53 GMT

    A pathetic comment from Ian Chappell. Ricky Ponting is the most defensive captain of the modern era. During the Ashes 2005, on the first morning of the 5th test match at the Oval -- a match Australia had to win to retain the Ashes -- Ricky Ponting set an incredibly defensive field for Shane Warne. That's just one of numerous examples of Ponting's poor captaincy. Ian Chappell shouldn't let his personal issues with Steve Waugh affect his reputation as a cricket pundit.

  • cook on May 13, 2010, 8:40 GMT

    What Chappell says is pointless. It's common knowledge that Chappell doesn't like Steve Waugh, so it's no suprise what he has said here. To say that Waugh was no good under pressure is also wrong. The World cup in England is a perfect example of Waugh captaining and playing well under pressure. Australia were all but gone in that tournament, yet came through and won it. The same can be said for Ponting struggling under pressure. The last 2 Ashes series in England is a perfect example.

  • AakashM on May 13, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    a lil disappointing as i am a big steve fan:(. Having said that Ian is in a better position to comment/expert. And no indian captain mentioned:)..

  • Nothing_Lost_For_Ever on May 13, 2010, 8:14 GMT

    If Steve ran out of idea in Kolkatta, the same is true for Ponting in the Nagpur test (where he is worried for being penalised for slow over rate) also right? why you are biased?

  • tinkertinker on May 13, 2010, 7:58 GMT

    Ian chappell's downright hate of steve wauigh is boring and bizarre.

    Waugh states in his autobiography that he barely even knows chappell and has no idea why he has such a issue with him.

    But seriously how many other cricket followers truly think ponting is a superior skipper to waugh?

    Waugh changed the test match scene only a truly biased individual could not give credit for that.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • tinkertinker on May 13, 2010, 7:58 GMT

    Ian chappell's downright hate of steve wauigh is boring and bizarre.

    Waugh states in his autobiography that he barely even knows chappell and has no idea why he has such a issue with him.

    But seriously how many other cricket followers truly think ponting is a superior skipper to waugh?

    Waugh changed the test match scene only a truly biased individual could not give credit for that.

  • Nothing_Lost_For_Ever on May 13, 2010, 8:14 GMT

    If Steve ran out of idea in Kolkatta, the same is true for Ponting in the Nagpur test (where he is worried for being penalised for slow over rate) also right? why you are biased?

  • AakashM on May 13, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    a lil disappointing as i am a big steve fan:(. Having said that Ian is in a better position to comment/expert. And no indian captain mentioned:)..

  • cook on May 13, 2010, 8:40 GMT

    What Chappell says is pointless. It's common knowledge that Chappell doesn't like Steve Waugh, so it's no suprise what he has said here. To say that Waugh was no good under pressure is also wrong. The World cup in England is a perfect example of Waugh captaining and playing well under pressure. Australia were all but gone in that tournament, yet came through and won it. The same can be said for Ponting struggling under pressure. The last 2 Ashes series in England is a perfect example.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on May 13, 2010, 8:53 GMT

    A pathetic comment from Ian Chappell. Ricky Ponting is the most defensive captain of the modern era. During the Ashes 2005, on the first morning of the 5th test match at the Oval -- a match Australia had to win to retain the Ashes -- Ricky Ponting set an incredibly defensive field for Shane Warne. That's just one of numerous examples of Ponting's poor captaincy. Ian Chappell shouldn't let his personal issues with Steve Waugh affect his reputation as a cricket pundit.

  • Abaa on May 13, 2010, 8:59 GMT

    unbelievably hilarious !!! I can't quite manage to understand how he could have come up with that ... Ponting might have been a better batsman but was nowhere close to the class of Steve Waugh when it came to being a captain

  • Mitcher on May 13, 2010, 9:00 GMT

    Puuuhhhlllease!!!! There is no surprise in this as it is nothing but typical Chappelli pushing his anti-Steve Waugh agenda. Remember he called Waugh selfish for the way he batted with the tail when Waugh did more than anyone to galvanise tail-enders by showing trust in them. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the Ponting bashing camp as I agree he has done a great job with diminished resources but it's hard to argue he is a better than captain than Tugga. Even then, coming from Chappell it means nothing. Time to let go of your petty hatreds Ian, life's too short mate.

  • DONSILVA on May 13, 2010, 9:09 GMT

    The Asia is blessed with more good captains than rest of the world. Imran, Arjuna and Savouro were the best in the business. Doni and Sanga have the potentiality to be good captains as well

  • hassan10591 on May 13, 2010, 9:26 GMT

    Yeah 1999 World Cup is the perfect example of Waugh's brilliance. His innings against South Africa are two of the best under pressure. Both the 100 in the super 6 and the fifty in the semi-final. Despite being a just above average batsman in ODIs, Waugh was a great captain. In test cricket too. And Waugh was certainly the more aggressive captain. Ponting isn't bad either and you have to give England credit too for winning the 2005 and 2009 Ashes. However, when you look at the controversies Ponting has been involved in, the arguments with umpires and all shows that he ran out of ideas and instead of moving on and bowling opposition out, he starts a war with umpires.

  • on May 13, 2010, 9:29 GMT

    what chappell says is unbelievable. chappell doesnt like steve waugh. i dont like both chappell brothers. I rate steve waugh is best captain after sir don bradman. this is chappells personal issue with steve.