Greatest ODI batsman of all time

[weldone]

You are definitely underestimting Kapil's ODI bowling and ODI captaincy. 253 wickets @ 27.45 is great when you combine with the economy rate of 3.71. They are very much comparable as ODI bowlers IMO. Kapil was a fine captain too, won India a World Cup as captain (and as player too). A miserly wicket-taker and a destructive lower-order batsman.

His batting strike rate of 95.07 is awesome for the era. In today's era that will be comparable to a 110+ strike rate for sure. I can't think of anyone who managed that from the lower-order consistently in last 20 years. And that is the tie-breaker in the Imran vs Kapil discussion in ODIs.

Of course, there's no comparison in test cricket. Imran is way ahead, mainly because he was a much more prominent match-winning bowler in all conditions compared to Kapil.

 

[Debris]

No mention of Lara in this thread (especially when we are discussing AT ODI XIs) is disappointing. Yes, he was a better batsman in test cricket overall perhaps but we so conveniently forget the first part of his ODI batting career. When he used to bat at top 3 (and he batted there for quite a few years) he was very very clearly the best ODI batsman in the world - miles ahead of Tendulkar. Later on he wanted to sacrifice his top-order spot for the team (which was a stupid decision as it didn't help the team either).

Some say his stats aren't good enough. OK here's a task for you:

Among all ODI batsmen of all-time make a list of batsmen who made 4000+ runs batting at top 3 with a 43+ average and a 80+ strike rate.

You think the list shouldn't be too tiny, don't you?

You will be surprised to know that the list comprises of only 2 names - Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara. You'll be more surprised to know this:

Even though they are the only 2 batsmen who scored 4000+ runs at top 3 with 43+ average and 80+ strike rate, they both actually scored 6000+ runs at top 3 with 45+ average and 81+ strike rate. So the point is even though they are the only 2 who make that list, they both make the list very comfortably. Lara was such an unstoppable force in the first part of his OD career.

Haha probably I bored you all with stats by now. But opening the innings with Lara and Tendulkar gives you a left-hand right-hand combination, and gives you an opening combination which is technically very solid in spite of being aggressive - something which can't be said about Jayasuriya or Gilchrist IMO. I shall rely more on such a technically solid opening combination when my team is up against top opening bowlers. Plus opening with Lara lets you play Dhoni at no. 6 and add someone like Klusener or Kapil at no. 7.

I see nothing wrong with this team for example:

Brian Lara
Sachin Tendulkar
Ricky Ponting / Zaheer Abbas
Viv Richards *
Michael Bevan
Mahendra Dhoni +
Lance Klusener
Wasim Akram
Joel Garner / Richard Hadlee
Glenn McGrath
Muttiah Muralitharan

If Kapil plays at 7 in place of Klusener, Pollock could be added at no. 8 dragging Wasim down to no. 9 and dropping the the Garner / Hadlee option altogether.

...but the main point stands.

One too many bowlers/all-rounders. Most of the successful ODI sides are stacked with batting.

 

[Red]

Kapil is a definite for me in an all time ODI team. Massive striker of the ball, with a proper technique, batting at 7, and an incredibly skilled swing bowler as your 5th bowler.

Often surprises me how many people pick Klusener in that role, when Kapil to me is SO much better...

 

[SJS]

To include someone in an AT squad just because he pioneered something is a selection criteria of doubtful credentials. Bosanquet's "bosie" changed leg spin and how people faced up to it for all times to come as did Sarfaraz and company's introduction of the reverse swing but these two worthies rarely find a place in any one's AT teams of their own countries let alone the world. One has to hold a place in a side with others who may have benefitted from one's pioneering style but gone on to greater heights.

Jayasuriya , despite his tremendous deeds, would find it tough to get into an ATW XI

 

[weldone]

To Monk : Only place where Klusener is ahead of Kapil is the consistency in batting. Klusener has an average of 41.10, while Kapil's is in mid-20s. While both were great hitters, and Kapil was the better bowler...the consistency in Klusener's destructive batting makes him more suited for the no. 7 role in an all-time side. Dhoni and Klusener batting together in the last 10 overs can cause an earthquake every match.

And to Debris' post, that's really not the case. In an ATG ODI XI you would need very good/great 40 overs and good 10 overs. Klusener gives me good 10 overs, and he was a fine fine batsman for no. 7. If you look at the side more closely, you'll realise that the batting is strong and deep. I hope you don't have a problem with top 5. Dhoni is as good a no. 6 batsman as any. Wasim is good suited for no. 8, and Hadlee is over-qualified for no. 9. If you look at Klusener's ODI batting career closely you'll find out that he's a gun batsman for no. 7. 3500 runs @ 41 with a strike rate of 90. What more can you ask from a no. 7 batsman? Forget his bowling. He's as good a no. 7 specialist batsman in ODIs as any. In fact, most of the time in his career, he has batted at no. 6 or above for South Africa if I remember correctly. So, I don't see what your problem is with the batting. In my side if you replace Lara with Jayasuriya and Klusener with someone like Hussey, you'll not only weaken the bowling but also weaken the batting IMO. The difference between a Lara and a Jayasuriya is bigger than the difference between a Hussey and a Klusener batting-wise (in ODIs).

 

[Plumbinfront]

1.Saeed Anwar 2.Sachin Tendulkar 3. Brian Lara 4. Viv Richards 5. Lance Klusener 6. MS Dhoni 7.Kapil Dev 8.Shaun Pollock 9.Wasim Akram 10.Muttiah Muralitharan 11.Glenn McGrath would be my side. Ponting is a gun test bat but vastly overrated in ODIs because of two innings - one on a pancake against India in 2003 and the other against us in 2006 on a highway where Smith was batting like Viv Richards.

 

[Debris]

And to Debris' post, that's really not the case. In an ATG ODI XI you would need very good/great 40 overs and good 10 overs. Klusener gives me good 10 overs, and he was a fine fine batsman for no. 7. If you look at the side more closely, you'll realise that the batting is strong and deep. I hope you don't have a problem with top 5. Dhoni is as good a no. 6 batsman as any. Wasim is good suited for no. 8, and Hadlee is over-qualified for no. 9. If you look at Klusener's ODI batting career closely you'll find out that he's a gun batsman for no. 7. 3500 runs @ 41 with a strike rate of 90. What more can you ask from a no. 7 batsman? Forget his bowling. He's as good a no. 7 specialist batsman in ODIs as any. In fact, most of the time in his career, he has batted at no. 6 or above for South Africa if I remember correctly. So, I don't see what your problem is with the batting. In my side if you replace Lara with Jayasuriya and Klusener with someone like Hussey, you'll not only weaken the bowling but also weaken the batting IMO. The difference between a Lara and a Jayasuriya is bigger than the difference between a Hussey and a Klusener batting-wise (in ODIs).

Are you arguing that Klusener is in the top 6 ODI batsmen (non wicketkeeper) that you have seen? You could pick an opening batsman, for instance, and shuffle all the batsmen above him down a spot. I guess I am saying that with the other bowlers in the side, his bowling has no value.

 

[weldone]

Are you arguing that Klusener is in the top 6 ODI batsmen (non wicketkeeper) that you have seen?

He's among the top 5 finishers that I've seen for sure.

If I take Jayasuriya as a batting allrounder (5th bowler) and if I'm playing against an equally strong side I wouldn't put much money on Jayasuriya conceding less than 70 runs in his 10 overs.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I don't think you can seriously pick an all time ODI side and not have Bevan in it. He was that good a finisher and vital to one of the greatest one day sides ever. For all the talk of Klusener how many times in big matches did he perform and see his side over the line? Bevan did it so often it became a greater shock when he failed to do it.

Would have no problem putting Bevan up there with Viv and Sachin as the greatest ODI bat ever. As we have seen from this thread there are others to consider but for me they are my top 3 with Ponting a close 4th.

 

[smash84]

I don't think you can seriously pick an all time ODI side and not have Bevan in it. He was that good a finisher and vital to one of the greatest one day sides ever. For all the talk of Klusener how many times in big matches did he perform and see his side over the line? Bevan did it so often it became a greater shock when he failed to do it.

Would have no problem putting Bevan up there with Viv and Sachin as the greatest ODI bat ever. .

awta

 

[weldone]

For all the talk of Klusener how many times in big matches did he perform and see his side over the line? Bevan did it so often it became a greater shock when he failed to do it.

Now now - you are behaving as if anybody in this thread has compared Klusener's batting with Bevan's.

It's like somebody coming here and suddenly having a go at people for selecting Adam Gilchrist over Javed Miandad in their sides.

 

[sledger]

Nick Knight.

 

[Spark]

One too many bowlers/all-rounders. Most of the successful ODI sides are stacked with batting.

Really? I think that's a really well-balanced side, actually. Not my personal pick but balance is a big strength. I'm from the school of thought that says that #7's batting isn't that significant beyond the finishing role and anything from the lower order beyond slogging is really just a luxury you'll rarely use.

 

[Debris]

Really? I think that's a really well-balanced side, actually. Not my personal pick but balance is a big strength. I'm from the school of thought that says that #7's batting isn't that significant beyond the finishing role and anything from the lower order beyond slogging is really just a luxury you'll rarely use.

How many sides winning the ODI world cup have gone in with 5 batsmen? Are there any?

 

[Spark]

MS Dhoni is easily worth his place in any ODI team in history that you care to name as a specialist bat (save possibly for our top sides from 00-07, and even that's up for debate), and Klusener is no mug at all. There's plenty of batting in that side.

 

[Debris]

Richards and Bevan can easily cover the 5th bowling option in that side, probably better than Klusener with the way game is going. Plenty of bowling without Klusener. You could even do something like choosing Symonds and supercharge the fielding for the side.

 

[Spark]

(1) You're going to gain so little so rarely by choosing the better batsman in comparison with someone who can bowl a bit more, though.

(2) Symonds is not a finisher. Klusener is perfectly suited to the #7 spot in his role anyway.

 

[Howe_zat]

What's an ODI without someone sending down some filth in the middle overs to try and get in a couple of overs before the oppo notices

It's practically in the laws

 

[Debris]

1) How many more runs is Symonds going to save over Klusener in the field? He would be much more useful if the top order collapses and, if the top order does not collapse, you don't need them to bat anyway.

2)You already have Dhoni and Bevan in the side. How many finishers do you need?

We are probably talking small differences here but it is the search for perfection.

 

[Dan]

So you go with something like this?

5. Symonds
6. Bevan
7. Dhoni +

Could be a lot worse, ITBT. Symonds/Bevan/Viv/Sachin (depending on selections) could probably split 10 reasonably well. Plus it fills Howe's 'middle-overs filth' requirement.

EDIT:
Actually, how about this?
1. Tendulkar
2. Anwar (or opener of choice)
3. Ponting (or batsman of choice)
4. Richards
5. Kallis
6. Bevan
7. Dhoni