Who is the best ODI player of all time?

[Cevno]

If we are talking about all rounders then Lance Klusener may not be far off .

Only person bar greg chappel to have played so many ODI'S averaging above 40 with the bat with a excellent strike rate and under 30 with the ball with a good strike rate and a decent economy rate.

As for Jayasuriya ,i think Sachin's Batting has been better than his batting by a slightly better distance than Sanath's jayasuriya's bowling has been than sachin's.
Sachin was a very effective bowler for a big part of his career .And was a matchwinner with the ball on few occasions too.

He was also a pretty handy fielder with a very strong arm from the deep and a very good catching ability in the slips which often gets overlooked.He was pretty quick on the ground too.Excellent runner in between wickets too.

 

[Migara]

Only thing that splits SRT is captaincy. Having said that Jayasuriya was quite a bit better fielder than SRT.

 

[social]

It's difficult to go past Jayasuriya and Richards.

Richrads the better batsman, Jaya the better bowler. Equal in the fielding brilliance, equal with their captaincy as well. Jaya has a better record for conduct.

Very difficult to seperate these two, but my national bias says it is Jayasuriya!

No chance

Richards is one of the greatest fieldsmen in history (e.g. only person to virtually win a WC Final with his fielding alone), Sanath simply isnt in his league

 

[wfdu_ben91]

If Jayasuriya didn't play as many games as he has then would everyone still consider him one of the best ODI cricketers of alltime? Because longetivity shouldn't automatically equal greatness. There have been many allrounders that haven't played anywhere near as many games that have been better then Jayasuriya. Couldn't see him playing as many ODI's as he has if he was from any country barring maybe England or New Zealand out of the stronger sides in International cricket.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Afridi's 6 wicket haul was good enough even consdering that it was against a largely third string Aussie line up and that a stronger Aussie team struggled against Botha and Van Der Merwe just weeks before that against South Africa.Afridi's bowling may have improved over the last couple of years but over his career,he is neither a good batsman or good bowler.

Main contenders are : Sanath,Richards,Kallis,Ponting,Tendulkar,Dhoni if you count w/k,Klusener.

 

[Burgey]

It's difficult to go past Jayasuriya and Richards.

Richrads the better batsman, Jaya the better bowler. Equal in the fielding brilliance, equal with their captaincy as well. Jaya has a better record for conduct.

Very difficult to seperate these two, but my national bias says it is Jayasuriya!

That sort of deliberate anti-Sachin trolling cannot and will not be tolerated around here mate

Jayasuriya a very good shout imo.

 

[vcs]

If we are talking about all rounders then Lance Klusener may not be far off .

Only person bar greg chappel to have played so many ODI'S averaging above 40 with the bat with a excellent strike rate and under 30 with the ball with a good strike rate and a decent economy rate.

As for Jayasuriya ,i think Sachin's Batting has been better than his batting by a slightly better distance than Sanath's jayasuriya's bowling has been than sachin's.
Sachin was a very effective bowler for a big part of his career .And was a matchwinner with the ball on few occasions too.

He was also a pretty handy fielder with a very strong arm from the deep and a very good catching ability in the slips which often gets overlooked.He was pretty quick on the ground too.Excellent runner in between wickets too.

I'll go with that, out of Jayasuriya and Sachin I'd go for Sachin, and I'd like to think it isn't just the national bias speaking. But I think Viv trumps them both, so it's academic.

 

[The Sean]

It's difficult to go past Jayasuriya and Richards.

Richrads the better batsman, Jaya the better bowler. Equal in the fielding brilliance, equal with their captaincy as well. Jaya has a better record for conduct.

Very difficult to seperate these two, but my national bias says it is Jayasuriya!

No chance

Richards is one of the greatest fieldsmen in history (e.g. only person to virtually win a WC Final with his fielding alone), Sanath simply isnt in his league

Would agree with Social that Sanath - fine fieldsman though he was - wasn't in the same class as Viv in that respect. Definitely think both men belong right in the middle of this discussion though.

 

[Migara]

No chance

Richards is one of the greatest fieldsmen in history (e.g. only person to virtually win a WC Final with his fielding alone), Sanath simply isnt in his league

Most of the people in CW has only seen Sanath post 1996. In his very early days 1989 - 1999 period he was damn awesome, and was as good as Mahanama.

I don't think many would try to claim than Richards was better than Mahanama in the field. If Richards is better than Jaya in the field, it's a marginal decision. As Richards' fielding ability was on the Wane post 1985 period so was Jayasuriya's post 2003.n Problem with things lik fielding is it can get rather subjective. So we could settle with different opinions.

 

[Teja.]

Most of the people in CW has only seen Sanath post 1996. In his very early days 1989 - 1999 period he was damn awesome, and was as good as Mahanama.

I don't think many would try to claim than Richards was better than Mahanama in the field. If Richards is better than Jaya in the field, it's a marginal decision. As Richards' fielding ability was on the Wane post 1985 period so was Jayasuriya's post 2003.n Problem with things lik fielding is it can get rather subjective. So we could settle with different opinions.

I for one, would.

 

[Migara]

Can have you opinions. But Mahanama belongs to a elite group of top fielders of last 30 years in company of Jonty, Arthurton, Ponting, Harper, Harris etc. He is so much underrated because most of his brilliant catches has not been on internet. Ones that are remaining will testify for his brilliance. Put it another way, Mahanama was way better than Dilshan. That will give you an idea how good he was.

 

[Teja.]

Can have you opinions. But Mahanama belongs to a elite group of top fielders of last 30 years in company of Jonty, Arthurton, Ponting, Harper, Harris etc. He is so much underrated because most of his brilliant catches has not been on internet. Ones that are remaining will testify for his brilliance. Put it another way, Mahanama was way better than Dilshan. That will give you an idea how good he was.

Viv Richards was as much a part of the 'elite' group you mentioned, as anyone else. I feel Viv's fielding is severely underrated due to him being a phenomenal Batsman.

 

[The Sean]

Viv would be one of the first names mentioned in any discussion of the finest all-round fieldsmen of all time.

 

[zaremba]

Am happy to throw up Pollock, if we are looking at all-rounders.

Glad to hear you're coming to terms with your fish allergy




sorry

 

[SaeedAnwar]

Dhoni for me.

Is dhoni in your bed? you keep mentioning him all the time

and plus, he's hardly one would consider all time great, not yet alteast

 

[Migara]

Is dhoni in your bed? you keep mentioning him all the time

and plus, he's hardly one would consider all time great, not yet alteast

Actually when given a little thought Xuhaib has a point. H may not be considered a great now, but very close to it. He's easily my pick to be the among the 5 greatest ODI batsmen, acceptable wicket keeper, good captain and exemplary in the conduct. So he has all the ingredients to be best ever ODI player.

 

[Sanz]

Either IVA Richards or Wasim Akram, Can't see anyone else as better cricketer @ ODIs.

 

[Athlai]

If Jayasuriya didn't play as many games as he has then would everyone still consider him one of the best ODI cricketers of alltime? Because longetivity shouldn't automatically equal greatness. There have been many allrounders that haven't played anywhere near as many games that have been better then Jayasuriya. Couldn't see him playing as many ODI's as he has if he was from any country barring maybe England or New Zealand out of the stronger sides in International cricket.

The length of his career has significantly hurt Jayasuriya's figures. He began as a bowler and was only introduced at the top for lack of a better pinch hitting option. After a couple years he developed his game to be one of the first to perfect it. He has also possibly played a few years too many.

 

[Athlai]

If you take from when he was genuinely a batsman in 1996 till after the 07 world cup (would've been the ideal time for him to retire IMO)
He scored 10,461 runs @ 36.44 with a SR of 93.44 with 236 W @ 37.79 economy of 4.76

Note that this isn't really trying to find a period of 300 matches a feat which only 14 players have ever completed. Higher average than Gilchrist's career at a SR of 3 less. Jayasuriya to me is a better batsman than Gilchrist however marginally that gap may be. Was more prone to completely take away the game from the opposition with a huge fast hundred than Gilly was.

 

[Migara]

There have been many allrounders that haven't played anywhere near as many games that have been better then Jayasuriya

That is because they may have played in another era. The ones who played after 1990, it was due to their poor physical fitness that they could not play 400 ODIs.

Couldn't see him playing as many ODI's as he has if he was from any country barring maybe England or New Zealand out of the stronger sides in International cricket.

At his peak as a bowler (1994 - 2000 era) would have replaced Hauritz with absolute ease, only even his bowling consiered.