*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[Burgey]

I'm not saying that Gilchrist wasn't a good player or that he didn't play a pivotal part in the side. Arguably hes still one of the most valuable ODI keeper batsmen in the history of the game. However, is it really implausible that there might have been one English ODI batsman better than him?

Saying how many matches did Australia lose when Gilchrist made is score is equivalent to saying how many matches did Pakistan lose when Afridi made a score. Bottom line is that the way in which these guys play when they make a score it usually is a match winning contribution. That is the definition of what a slogger is, when it pays off its f'ing brilliant.

Yes, I'm afraid it is

 

[vcs]

Yes, I'm afraid it is

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Ikki]

Gilchrist was perfect for Australia and I am sure it was a tactic that they pushed on his shoulders knowing the benefits. It would of course be hit and miss...but when it hit...we usually won. When it missed, usually we had a batting line up to compensate.

Heck, in Tests he averaged 48 at an SR of 82 - which would be awesome even at ODI pace.

 

[vcs]

Eoin Morgan's gonna be awesome though, and the best ODI batsman of the next decade. You heard it here first.

 

[Jono]

Think you meant to type Virat Kohli.

 

[tooextracool]

Big fan of both to be honest. Kohli has been a God for RCB, unfortunate that he usually had to bat after Kallis has already lost the game though.

 

[Jarquis]

Morgan's already ****ing incredible.

 

[Matt79]

Gilchrist is a slogger? Ffs.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not buying into the Morgan hype yet. He's been good but I'm not yet convinced it's much more than a purple patch.

 

[Migara]

Well the strike rates are not easily comparable. For his time and his role, think he did really well and could really take apart the fast bowlers. And consider the fact that he has the second best frequency of winning MoM in ODIs after Viv Richards (Tendulkar comes 3rd I think). I might reconsider Dhoni's place, but Greenidge is a certainty

Yest it is EASILY comparable. Greenidge made 42.8 @ 63.8 against top oppositions as an opener, where during his time global average was 26.3 @ 66.2. (SR is below average). Jayasuriya made 34.1 @ 91.6 as an opener against top sides (exl B/Z and associates), during global average was 28.0 @ 73.5. I understand that both played a similar role in their teams. The way to have a trade off is to see (Avg * SR) / (Global Avg * Global SR). The result for Greenidge is 1.57. For Jayasuriya, 1.51. Considering Greenidge did it over 16 seasons compared to Jayasuriya whose done it over 20 seasons and 150% matches you had to give it to Jaya. This is just forgetting how brilliant he was in the field and how useful was his darts at the death.

 

[Anil]

Gilchrist is a shoo-in for my all-time ODI XI, and I daresay most people would agree.

gilchrist is a shoo-in as a competent 'keeper and a big-hitting middle order batsman in an all-time xi, an irresistible combination in a one day setting...it's just that most people have him as an one day opener opposite tendulkar and that is one of the most ridiculous selections ever...the guy is just the most overrated (not the worst just the most incredibly overhyped) one day opener there is...there are so many better odi openers when you consider all-time players it's not funny...mark waugh, gordon greenidge, des haynes, saurav ganguly, saeed anwar, matty hayden just to name a few...

 

[vcs]

TBH, I'd take Tendulkar-Gilchrist over Tendulkar-Ganguly/Hayden. I sort of subscribe to Ian Chappell's philosophy that an all-time XI should have an attitude to match - a "go out and smash them into oblivion" attitude that Gilchrist epitomized perfectly.

 

[robelinda]

TBH, I'd take Tendulkar-Gilchrist over Tendulkar-Ganguly/Hayden. I sort of subscribe to Ian Chappell's philosophy that an all-time XI should have an attitude to match - a "go out and smash them into oblivion" attitude that Gilchrist epitomized perfectly.

 

[ankitj]

TBH, I'd take Tendulkar-Gilchrist over Tendulkar-Ganguly/Hayden. I sort of subscribe to Ian Chappell's philosophy that an all-time XI should have an attitude to match - a "go out and smash them into oblivion" attitude that Gilchrist epitomized perfectly.

Which totally misses the point that an all-time XI is not chosen to play a minnow but a top class opposition, perhaps a second XI. So they will be facing likes of Donald, Pollock, Warne, Ambrose. Other than sir Viv I don't expect any one to smash them into oblivion. Greenidge can be expected to stand solidly against them and Sachin to score intelligent hundreds.

TEC did change my view of Gilly a bit but even before that I would have considered a number of other openers before him. Batting averages do count for a bit after-all. Even Sehwag has a very comparable record (similar average and better SR) and has about the same credentials against quality bowling. But if Sehwag doesn't fall in the consideration set (rightly so) then why should Gilly?

 

[vcs]

I'm starting to agree with Flem's impression that it seems only Viv is allowed to demolish attacks without the quality of the opposition or difficulty of conditions being questioned on here.

Gilchrist has done the job on the biggest stage of all. Vaas-Murali are no mugs and were among the best bowlers in the '07 WC. Srinath-Zaheer-Nehra were among the best bowlers upto the final in '03. The same bowling attack that "found him out technically" in Ashes 2005, he demolished a few weeks earlier in the Natwest Trophy final. He also scored a century against SL in a deciding final of the Australian tri-series (think it was in 2006). The guy can certainly bat against good bowlers.

 

[robelinda]

I'm starting to agree with Flem's impression that it seems only Viv is allowed to demolish attacks without the quality of the opposition or difficulty of conditions being questioned on here.

Gilchrist has done the job on the biggest stage of all. Vaas-Murali are no mugs and were among the best bowlers in the '07 WC. Srinath-Zaheer-Nehra were among the best bowlers upto the final in '03. The same bowling attack that "found him out technically" in Ashes 2005, he demolished a few weeks earlier in the Natwest Trophy final. He also scored a century against SL in a deciding final of the Australian tri-series (think it was in 2006). The guy can certainly bat against good bowlers.

Agree. Dont see how it could ever be questioned.

 

[Flem274*]

Haha, I remember that comment. Pretty sure it had a after it, but I think the point still stands. These days it seems some people will go out of their way to find any way to downplay the achievements of an aggressive batsman.

FTR I'd have Gilchrist at 7 in my all time ODI side, but that's mainly because I don't need him to open. As far as openers go we're spoilt for choice when it comes to these things.

 

[ankitj]

Look, I am not saying Gilly is a mug with the bat. He might make it to my second or third XI as an opener purely (with wicket-keeping role he has more value). To say there are a handful of better ODI openers is hardly a disrespect that it is being made out to be. And Nick Knight is not among my handful btw

As for Viv, he hit the best bowlers around at a strike rate which when adjusted for his times would perhaps be equivalent to that of Sehwag. And to do that while maintaining an average that is about 12 runs clear of other batsmen with similar belligerence does put him miles ahead of all others. Only if you consider the weight of Tendulkar's runs, does anyone come close to Viv as an ODI batsman.

 

[vcs]

Oh Viv is for sure miles ahead of any other ODI batsman. I just think Gilchrist is a great fit for an ODI opener/keeper in an all-time XI, as he proved to be for his national team.

 

[Flem274*]

I don't think anyone is disputing Viv is better than Gilchrist in ODIs.

It's the slogger part that has people up in arms.