• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Gilchrist v Dhoni

Whom would you pick in your team?


  • Total voters
    91

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
There are 2 principal purposes of openers:

Anchor an innings and score big.
Tee off in the Powerplays and get your side off to a flier.

Tendulkar is perfectly capable of doing both. No other opener in the history of the game has put the sort of numbers up Tendulkar has, be it runs, centuries or average - and precious few have bettered his strike rate.

IMO, it would be a waste of such a superemely talented player to bring him at 4. Tendulkar in an all time side simply must open.
As I say, Tendulkar may indeed have been more likely to fulfill either of the opening requirements, but he was not more likely than several others to fulfull the second. "Anchoring an innings and scoring big" is basically attributable to being able to work the ball around in the middle-overs, something a batsman is more likely to be faced with at four than as an opener.
The reason I put Gilchrist alongside him in my all time ODI side is because I want one opener who can tee off and one who will score big. IMO, no-one has bettered Gilchrist in the "teeing off" role.
IMO several have - Saeed Anwar being one such example. Gilchrist was never very good at teeing-off against particularly good bowling - in fact precious few are. Against good bowling he tended to either make a decent but orthodox 30-odd then get out, or have a swing and get out very early. Gilchrist was outstanding at massacring bowling with all that much wrong with it, but so to were any number of others (Jayasuriya, Anwar etc.) but the best players must realise that there is bowling they simply cannot massacre (because the bowler controls the game and if he does sufficiently little wrong the batsman cannot score quickly without considerable good fortune)
 

Flem274*

123/5
You don't usually play top teams until the finals in the WC, or have you not watched one before? He scored 42 against S.Africa and 30 against Sri Lanka in the prelims. He then scored 149 in the final. So you have 0 case. Especially when one of the "top teams" you are bringing forth are the West Indies and the other a non-event against New Zealand. :laugh: No one said Gilchrist was superlative throughout, but at the very least he was consistent. Anyway...
Consistently crap

*waits for ikki to leap at the attempt to defend an Aussie*
 

bagapath

International Captain
There is no such thing as a cricketer who is a top-ten player based on ODIs. Best-ever cricketers are based on Tests, simple as - almost all true connoisseurs of the game acknowledge that. Gilchrist was indeed a good ODI batsman and a more than acceptable wicketkeeper, but it's not that that makes him one of the best cricketers in history - it's the fact that he's very probably the best Test wicketkeeper-batsman there's ever been.
top 10 oneday cricketer. along with sachin, richards, akram, jayasuriya etc... i should have made myself clearer
 

Shri

Mr. Glass
Starting to prefer Dhoni these days though I am a big fan of Gilly. Is improving steadily in test cricket too.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
If you're talking about me, how can you say I am being inconsistent when I never cared nor gave undue importance with regards to Bevan's average?

Anyway, it seems as even a finisher he has some way to get to Bevan's average.
You mean 2 points or am I missing something?
 

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
I voted for Gilchrist. Not a factor in my decision but just a comment. Gilchrist looks better style wise than Dhoni does. Dhoni is very effective but he is not a graceful player. They have showed replays comparing Dhoni's technique to Tendulkar's technique and the difference is night and day.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Haha, its true, but I'd say the difference between Gilly's technique and Sachin's is night and day as well.

I think when describing Dhoni and Gilly's batting, graceful is one of the least likely words to come up.

Its incredibly effective though.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
top 10 oneday cricketer. along with sachin, richards, akram, jayasuriya etc... i should have made myself clearer
Only because he was a wicketkeeper. Had Gilchrist been specialist batsman only rather than batsman-wicketkeeper, he'd not be anywhere near so good a ODI cricketer.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I think when describing Dhoni and Gilly's batting, graceful is one of the least likely words to come up.
Yeah, good as both were\are, they're both players who'd come plenty way down my list of those I'd choose as enjoyable to watch.
 

bagapath

International Captain
Only because he was a wicketkeeper. Had Gilchrist been specialist batsman only rather than batsman-wicketkeeper, he'd not be anywhere near so good a ODI cricketer.
sure, i agree. but he was a wk also. so he does remain a top 10 ODI cricketer ever and a shoo-in for an alltime XI at the moment. if dhoni continues to deliver like he is doing now, then he will have a shout in the future.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'd pick at least 6-7 people to open in modern-day ODIs before Gilchrist, regardless of his wicketkeeping.
Same here, S Anwar & G Smith spring to mind immediately & reasonable cases could be made for M Waugh, N Knight, H Gibbs, S Tendulkar (when he opened), M Hayden, S Ganguly & V Sehwag.
 

Top