Better ODI Batsman : Gayle or Sehwag?

[Jono]

Gayle was better for most of his career, but Sehwag is now the better player.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

If I had to pick one to play for me tomorrow I'd choose Sehwag.

Gayle hasn't scored an ODI hundred since January 2009 against New Zealand and over the last two years he's played 29 matches and averages only 30.66, though he has improved his strike rate to just over 100.

By comparison, Sehwag over the same period has played 31 matches averaging 40.27 at a phenomenal SR of 118, with 3 hundreds.

Blimey!

 

[vic_orthdox]

Gayle was better for most of his career, but Sehwag is now the better player.

Bascially, would pick Sehwag to play for me now, but Gayle has had the better ODI career.

 

[Howsie]

Gayle hasn't scored an ODI hundred since January 2009 against New Zealand and over the last two years he's played 29 matches and averages only 30.66, though he has improved his strike rate to just over 100.

Yeah, his lean patch over the last two years is definitely disappointing, Gayle at one point had scored 19 career ODI hundreds in just 190 odds games, an amazing stat really.

 

[weldone]

Sightly surprised at the omissions in this list.I always thought Ganguly and Anwar would be up there with the SRs,so would Hayden.But they all lie in the lower.Anwar has a SR of 80 btw,whereas Ganguly has a SR of 72.Massive shock there TBH.I was sure that Ganguly scored his runs quicker.

Ganguly was a different ODI batsman after he came back from the Chappelli episode. His strike rate was 77-79 for a long time...

We remember Ganguly as an ODI batsman mainly for the 1999-2003 period. I'm sure his SR was well above 80 (along with an average of over 45) in that period.

 

[sachin200]

Ganguly had a strike rate of 78 and an average of 44 in the 1999-2003 period

 

[vcs]

I often think Dravid is a bit underrated as an ODI player. Fabulous WC record (top-scored in '99 IIRC), selflessly kept wickets for the sake of team balance in the 2003 WC and was often shunted all over the batting order according to team requirements throughout his career. True team man.

When you think about it, he's not too far off the likes of Inzi who is pretty much accepted as an ODI legend.

 

[smash84]

I think the fact that Dravid is quite under rated as an ODI player has to do with the initial image that he carried with him of not being a good ODI player. That stuck with him for some time.

Also the fact that he has had players like Azhar, Sachin, Ganguly, Yuvraj, and Dhoni playing ODIs along with him so it really is not too difficult to under rate him. Inzi on the other hand did not really have that kind of solid support around him hence he was able to shine more easily

 

[Blaze 18]

I'd say that, on average, the Pakistan ODI side that Inzamam-ul-Haq was part of > the Indian ODI side that Rahul Dravid was part of.

 

[smash84]

I'd say that, on average, the Pakistan ODI side that Inzamam-ul-Haq was part of > the Indian ODI side that Rahul Dravid was part of.

the Pakistan ODI side of Inzi was better not because of its batting (which was quite ****ty too) but because of its outstanding bowling.

 

[vcs]

Yeah, India have been blessed to have a really good ODI batting core for a long time. The bowling was the main problem. For Pakistan it was the other way around, they had a great attack but batting was mostly reliant on Anwar, Inzi and Mohammed Yousuf.

 

[smash84]

For Pak the batting mainly relied on Anwar and Inzi in the 90s. Ijaz Ahmed was very inconsistent and Amir Sohail was good for a certain period but not that great.

MoYo really came to the party after 2003 but by then the bowling attack was much depleted

 

[Blaze 18]

If we're including Azharuddin, Sehwag, Yuvraj and Dhoni for Dravid, then can I include Javed Miandad, Younis Khan, Mohammad Yousuf, Ijaz Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq, Aamer Sohail, etc. for Inzamam? I take your point that bowling was Pakistan's stronger suit, but make no mistake, their ODI batting was quite good for much of Inzamam's career - certainly better than India's bowling.

Not arguing Dravid > Inzamam, BTW.

 

[vcs]

I was just going over the CW top 50 ODI cricketers list.. can you believe Dravid and Mohammed Yousuf didn't even get nominated, while the likes of Stuart Broad did?

 

[smash84]

If we're including Azharuddin, Sehwag, Yuvraj and Dhoni for Dravid, then can I include Javed Miandad, Younis Khan, Mohammad Yousuf, Ijaz Ahmed, Abdul Razzaq, Aamer Sohail, etc. for Inzamam? I take your point that bowling was Pakistan's stronger suit, but make no mistake, their ODI batting was quite good for much of Inzamam's career - certainly better than India's bowling.

Not arguing Dravid > Inzamam, BTW.

Fair point but let's see the era of 00s. The bowling attack was down and out from 2003-2007 while Inzi was the most prolific batsman in the team with good support from MoYo. Younis was in development phase. Who else?

I was just going over the CW top 50 ODI cricketers list.. can you believe Dravid and Mohammed Yousuf didn't even get nominated, while the likes of Stuart Broad did?

Pathetic

 

[marc71178]

I was just going over the CW top 50 ODI cricketers list.. can you believe Dravid and Mohammed Yousuf didn't even get nominated,

Can perfectly understand why that happened - they're not that good at ODIs relatively speaking.

Yousuf is a minnow basher who only averages over 40 against one proper nation.
Dravid averaged under 40 and didn't strike that quickly.

 

[smash84]

Can perfectly understand why that happened - they're not that good at ODIs relatively speaking.

Yousuf is a minnow basher who only averages over 40 against one proper nation.
Dravid averaged under 40 and didn't strike that quickly.

yeah and Stuart broad is the ****

 

[tooextracool]

Dravid is possibly underrated as an ODI batsman but theres absolutely nowhere that hes anywhere near being an all time great. And let it be known that there isn't a bigger fan on this forum of Rahul than myself.

 

[Blaze 18]

Can perfectly understand why that happened - they're not that good at ODIs relatively speaking.

Yousuf is a minnow basher who only averages over 40 against one proper nation.
Dravid averaged under 40 and didn't strike that quickly.

Out of curiosity, why forty? Just went through Mohammad Yousuf's stats - he averages just a shade under forty against quite a few teams. That is good enough for ODIs, surely?

 

[smash84]

Dravid is possibly underrated as an ODI batsman but theres absolutely nowhere that hes anywhere near being an all time great. And let it be known that there isn't a bigger fan on this forum of Rahul than myself.

yeah but the point that VCS was trying to make was that even accounting for the fact that Dravid might not be an ATG he still deserves a place ahead of Stuart Broad any day in a ranking of top ODI players.