Best Australian test batsmen this century

[Kyptastic]

He obviously doesn't figure in these discussions but Voges deserves more plaudits for his efforts in the Test side. Classy player.

Marcus North is another who played some top knocks overseas. His problem was the gap between his best and his worst was huge - it was either 100 or a score under 10.

 

[PhatBoy]

Good call on Martyn. I’d have him above Langer and probably Clarke, given some of his overseas exploits. Won Australia a series in Sri Lanka off his own bat.

 

[Doss]

I think you can make an argument for him being above Langer, but not Clarke.

 

[PhatBoy]

I think you can make an argument for him being above Langer, but not Clarke.

I know home exploits don’t just count for nothing, but when Martyn averages 46 away to clarke’s 39, it makes a fair bit swing into his favour given that there’s only a few runs difference overall.

Played 4 absolute epics to win Australia the 2004 series’ back to back against Sri Lanka and India, played match winning knock in NZ and made a century helping Australia chase 290 8 wickets down in South Africa.

Maybe didn’t have the longevity of Clarke but had a knack for playing outstanding innings in the most necessary circumstances

 

[Doss]

Martyn played in a much stronger side for much of his career though, which can't be ignored. Martyn was an outstanding overseas player without question, but I think when you look at the overall picture and the respective strengths of the sides they were playing in, it's hard to justify having Martyn above Clarke.

 

[to1994]

He obviously doesn't figure in these discussions but Voges deserves more plaudits for his efforts in the Test side. Classy player.

I'd be bringing up Rogers before him as he actually succeeded in English conditions unlike Voges who disappeared when the going got tough (except for his debut) and cashed in against some pretty poor bowling at home. Overall there wasn't any value of having him in the side aside from his debut and we would've been better off trying someone else after he let us down in England.

 

[Tigerssaints]

Brad Hodge, His mum said so

 

[Yoda_]

Ponting

From the fourth test of the 01 ashes to the 2007 World Cup final. He dominated world cricket

Haven't seen an Australian do that for as long, or as sustained as he had until Smith did in the last 3 years.

 

[Yoda_]

I reckon I'd rank them as thus:

1. Ponting
2. Smith
3. Hayden
4. Clarke
5. Gilchrist
6. Hussey
7. Langer

I'm quite prepared to accept that Smith will usurp Ponting very soon though, and I'm certainly open to swapping Hayden and Clarke.

Hussey was a super player. Looking at the list, he's probably the only one (actually Langer also) who retired when still well and truly worthy of carrying on had he wanted to.

Steve Waugh is stiff. He still scored 2825 runs @ over 50 with 11 centuries and 9 half centuries.

He was a brilliant bat and one who absolutely dominated attacks for 3 years (00, 01, 03).

Was a shame his fall from grace was as fast as it was. He was the consumate counter punching Australian cricketer.

Not going to discount the fact that Gilly changed the face of international cricket but not sure he was in the best 7 bests of the 21st century.

Couldn't argue against Ponting (#1), Smith (#2), Hayden (#3) or Clarke (#4) but feel S.Waugh should be considered.

 

[footyfan1978]

Maddinson

 

[Doss]

Steve Waugh is stiff. He still scored 2825 runs @ over 50 with 11 centuries and 9 half centuries.

He was a brilliant bat and one who absolutely dominated attacks for 3 years (00, 01, 03).

Was a shame his fall from grace was as fast as it was. He was the consumate counter punching Australian cricketer.

Not going to discount the fact that Gilly changed the face of international cricket but not sure he was in the best 7 bests of the 21st century.

Couldn't argue against Ponting (#1), Smith (#2), Hayden (#3) or Clarke (#4) but feel S.Waugh should be considered.

Not if the parameter is 2000 onwards, in my view. If you took that back to even, say, 1997, then absolutely.

But that's just me.

 

[Topkent]

There's nothing wrong with opinion but if you mention Adam Voges your opinion is wrong. I don't like slaying blokes who average big at home for being 'flat track bullys' because someone has to score the runs at home but both North and Voges would have scored their runs when the team score hit 500+

 

[PhatBoy]

There's nothing wrong with opinion but if you mention Adam Voges your opinion is wrong. I don't like slaying blokes who average big at home for being 'flat track bullys' because someone has to score the runs at home but both North and Voges would have scored their runs when the team score hit 500+

Not that it constitutes dire trouble but 4 of North’s 5 centuries came when the side was:
4-151
4-151
4-170
4-195

And they were all overseas.

 

[Topkent]

Not that it constitutes dire trouble but 4 of North’s 5 centuries came when the side was:
4-151
4-151
4-170
4-195

And they were all overseas.

This will contradict my last statement of 'someone had to make them' but what sides were they against?
I'm guessing one was Cardiff where him Clarke Hussey and Haddin hit centuries.

 

[PhatBoy]

This will contradict my last statement of 'someone had to make them' but what sides were they against?
I'm guessing one was Cardiff where him Clarke Hussey and Haddin hit centuries.

In order of how I wrote them:

South Africa - Wanderers
England - Headingley
New Zealand - Basin
India - Chinnaswamy

The century I didn’t mention was Cardiff where every man and his dog made runs.

 

[Topkent]

In order of how I wrote them:

South Africa - Wanderers
England - Headingley
New Zealand - Basin
India - Chinnaswamy

The century I didn’t mention was Cardiff where every man and his dog made runs.

All 4 reasonably impressive then which puts him miles in front of Voges. The main frustration with North was his ability to be out for sub 10 scores

 

[Hellgood]

I'd be bringing up Rogers before him as he actually succeeded in English conditions unlike Voges who disappeared when the going got tough (except for his debut) and cashed in against some pretty poor bowling at home. Overall there wasn't any value of having him in the side aside from his debut and we would've been better off trying someone else after he let us down in England.

I think that's a bit ridiculously drastic, he earned his shot with supreme performances in first class cricket and his leadership abilities was very necessary to assist Smith in those days of transition. Yes there was elements of flat track bullying in the games he scored big in, but at the end of the day there was not a batsman in Australia outside the test regulars more deserving of his spot in the side. I think everyone knew/knows to take his record with a grain of salt (certainly not in the class of Ponting, Smith, Gilchrist, Clarke & Martyn), but as reward for a lot of hard effort and being a quality leader.

There's nothing wrong with opinion but if you mention Adam Voges your opinion is wrong. I don't like slaying blokes who average big at home for being 'flat track bullys' because someone has to score the runs at home but both North and Voges would have scored their runs when the team score hit 500+

As already has been responded to, that perception couldn't be much more wrong about North (though reasonably valid for Voges). Had a quality technique and mature head to help lift Australia at the right times against high class bowling in difficult circumstances, but weirdly just didn't cash in when everything in theory was set up for him to put the cream on the cake.

In regard to the thread topic, I'd still sit Ponting on top of the tree. Smith's getting up there now and maybe nostalgia plays a part, but Ponting was just a machine in those peak years and played some of the most memorable knocks in adverse circumstances. The way he treated pacemen with such disdain and dominated from ball one was just ridiculous. Had an absolutely classic and very aesthetic technique with a full range of shots.

 

[Pykie]

Martyn is on Hussey’s level.

Clarke slightly in front of them, he has a mixture of some outstanding overseas knocks and some monster home ones.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Smith is a clear #1 ahead of Ponting even if he retired tomorrow. What Smith did in India early this year is levels above what Ponting managed in the subcontinent (avg of 26 in India with 1 century). Smith averages 55 overseas - nobody comes close to those numbers in foreign conditions and he has done it against all teams at crucial times.
Ponting was amazing in that peak period, which just highlights how good Smith is.

So Ponting #2, then Clarke/Hayden/Hussey/Gilly at 3, 4, 5 and 6 depending when and where they were playing, you could make arguments for all of them to be #3. I think Langer might be just below.

 

[Yoda_]

Not if the parameter is 2000 onwards, in my view. If you took that back to even, say, 1997, then absolutely.

But that's just me.

Waugh did make 11 of his 32 test hundreds in that four year period. He did paddle his average with 3 of those hundreds being not out but surely can't hold that against the bloke?

 

[Yoda_]

Smith is a clear #1 ahead of Ponting even if he retired tomorrow. What Smith did in India early this year is levels above what Ponting managed in the subcontinent (avg of 26 in India with 1 century). Smith averages 55 overseas - nobody comes close to those numbers in foreign conditions and he has done it against all teams at crucial times.
Ponting was amazing in that peak period, which just highlights how good Smith is.

So Ponting #2, then Clarke/Hayden/Hussey/Gilly at 3, 4, 5 and 6 depending when and where they were playing, you could make arguments for all of them to be #3. I think Langer might be just below.

Couldn't agree more. Even I got sucked into seeing Ponting's sheer weight of runs to say he is a clear number 1. Smith (4 centuries/5 fifties in 26 innings) is on track to better Ponting's output (5 centuries, 10 fifties in 48 innings) over his career.
Smith's average (1200 runs @ 48) is already far superior to Ponting's (1889 runs @ 41.97).


I think you may have a very good case to place Smith ahead of Ponting already.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

1. Ponting - remove his later years, was brilliant against all types of bowling.
2. Smith - likely to overtake Punter by the time his career finishes if continues to smash allcomers

Gap

3. Gilchrist - changed the way the game was played, changing the course of a game in a session
4. Hussey - made runs when it mattered. So dependable.
5. Clarke - Handy & classy replacement for Ponting, but a level below.

 

[pugsville]

!. Smith -
2. Ponting
3. Hussey
4. Clarke
5 Gilchrist superlative number 7, but the top order shapes tests.
6. Hayden (I'm massively biased against Hayden)
7. Warner
8. Langer
9. Martyn.
10. Katich

Everyone else not good enough for long enough in General.

 

[Yoda_]

!. Smith -
2. Ponting
3. Hussey
4. Clarke
5 Gilchrist superlative number 7, but the top order shapes tests.
6. Hayden (I'm massively biased against Hayden)
7. Warner
8. Langer
9. Martyn.
10. Katich

Everyone else not good enough for long enough in General.

No Steve Waugh is blasphemy

 

[pugsville]

No Steve Waugh is blasphemy

Simply wasn't that good in the 21st century, some easy runs against Bangladesh aside he has a good patch 2000/2001 he wasn't a Great batsman in his later career that often. He was a great player but the tail end wasn't that awesome.