Dhoni Vs Gilchrist in ODIs.

[Ikki]

I made a point that keeping doesn't have to be about blunders and that it can be a measure of differences in certain situations that dictate who is better. You then posted two videos as if I had said Dhoni was a dirt-poor keeper, and accused someone else of missing the point. So how does your not considering it of material importance change the point I made that Gilchrist was a much better keeper? The fact that you don't think the difference is materially important in the format doesn't change that one was a far better keeper. That facing faster bowlers/better spinners is cancelled out be erratic bowling is also an opinion you have which doesn't change the fact that it is relevant to consider. I don't think the Indians are so erratic as often as the Australian bowlers were consistently fast and span the ball a mile. So we don't agree, still doesn't make it irrelevant.

I would agree that there is a sort of diminishing gains element going on but if you want to pick the best XI then I'll pick an ATG batsman who just happened to be an ATG keeper at that level too. Heck, I might pick Dhoni as a specialist batsman anyway.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

The irony. Gilchrist > Dhoni as a keeper, not even that close for mine. Kept to a higher standard, against better bowlers of pace and spin as well.

Close as batsman, although I'd probably give Dhoni the edge; they've played completely different roles.

Gilchrist would make a better fit in an all time world XI (frankly, the only obvious alternative that comes to mind as Tendulkar's partner would be Gayle) - given that there are are enough better middle-order batsmen than Dhoni - but head to head, prima facie, Dhoni is more valuable to his side than Gilchrist was to his, especially in light of their respective bowling attacks to cover their failures when they didn't fire.

 

[Daemon]

Added advantage with Dhoni is that he can be moved around the order, especially when chasing a total where a proper pacing of an innings is required.

 

[Spark]

Gilchrist would make a better fit in an all time world XI (frankly, the only obvious alternative that comes to mind as Tendulkar's partner would be Gayle) - given that there are are enough better middle-order batsmen than Dhoni - but head to head, prima facie, Dhoni is more valuable to his side than Gilchrist was to his, especially in light of their respective bowling attacks to cover their failures when they didn't fire.

Sanath?

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Sanath?

Good point, but cbf to edit.

 

[Daemon]

Gambhir is a better ODI batsmen than Sanath. Sanath was a ****.

 

[Shri]

Hayden > all other ODI openers except SRT

 

[ganeshran]

Gambhir is a better ODI batsmen than Sanath. Sanath was a ****.

He was the original explosive batsman though, completely changed the way ODI openers bat.He went beserk in the Singer cup in 96

 

[Migara]

Gambhir is a better ODI batsmen than Sanath. Sanath was a ****.

Definitely, in his last few years. Was a greedy ****. But in better years, a valuable opener as Gilchrist, due to his high impact batting, useful bowling and brilliant fielding. Not to mention his successful captaincy (although was placid and non expressive).

 

[ankitj]

To say Gayle is only alternative to Gilchrist is to do disservice to an array of great ODI openers : Greenidge, Mark Waugh, Anwar, Jayasuriya, Ganguly, Haynes, Hayden etc.

 

[Ikki]

I think he meant in that role of accelerating the play up the order, to contrast with a Tendulkar-like opener.

 

[Uppercut]

ODI stats aren't worth much at all, maybe good for the occasional "heh, that's interesting", the way they're used in football. We're only stuck with them because test cricket came first.

 

[Burgey]

Aren't you supposed to be a lawyer/law student or something?

Fairly obvious you aren't...

 

[Shri]

Yeah and thats something to be proud about as you seem to remind Teja at every opportunity.

 

[vic_orthdox]

To say Gayle is only alternative to Gilchrist is to do disservice to an array of great ODI openers : Greenidge, Mark Waugh, Anwar, Jayasuriya, Ganguly, Haynes, Hayden etc.

I think an explosive option next to Tendulkar, who can switch through gears at will, makes a Gayle/Jayasuriya/Gilchrist style option a good one for an All Time OD XI.

 

[Shri]

I think an explosive option next to Tendulkar, who can switch through gears at will, makes a Gayle/Jayasuriya/Gilchrist style option a good one for an All Time OD XI.

Yeah but it depends on what version of Tendulkar you have in the line up. You don't really need Gilchrist or any other slogger in there if you have the 1998 version of Tendulkar at the top. Gilly might actually be the mellow one if that were the case.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Yeah but it depends on what version of Tendulkar you have in the line up. You don't really need Gilchrist or any other slogger in there if you have the 1998 version of Tendulkar at the top. Gilly might actually be the mellow one if that were the case.

Yes, he was explosive at times, but really he has been throughout his ODI career a genius at calculated risk. I think that he's best served when he can bat in his own little bubble and pace himself how he likes; I think even India recognise this, from the time of Ganguly pairing Tendulkar at the top of the order. It's not like I'm saying that he bats slow or anything, no-one's saying that Tendulkar has to play an anchor role, it just provides a platform for Tendulkar to control the innings.

 

[ajithgantala]

What is the use when he cannot score runs

 

[Burgey]

Agreed.

 

[Jono]

I think an explosive option next to Tendulkar, who can switch through gears at will, makes a Gayle/Jayasuriya/Gilchrist style option a good one for an All Time OD XI.

yes I've always felt this.