Greatest ODI batsman of all time

[Spark]

That really looks like too many batsmen to me. Pick someone who can bat reasonably but who can actually bowl for #7 IMO.

 

[weldone]

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

Picking Gilchrist is a better option than playing Dhoni at 7. Dhoni is the kind of batsman who likes to pace the chase in the last 10-15 overs. No. 6 is his ideal spot. Kallis at 5 is also a slight misfit. If I'm supporting this side, I will want Kallis to get out if Kallis and Bevan are playing in the 44th over with 220 on the board. ... which isn't a good thing...Dhoni isn't the kind of batsman who I'd want coming at the crease when I need 18 off the last over.

And before that, you pissed me off by picking Anwar over Lara.

 

[Ikki]

Personally, have started putting Watson in my ODI all-time XI. It may be a bit early, but he is arguably the best all-rounder ever at even this stage. He gives you a genuine top-order batsman who, by himself, can win a game; and he is also a brilliant bowler to have as a 5th option. He'll bowl the 10 overs and is likely to pick up a wicket or two cheaply.

 

[Daemon]

Yeah, I guess we have been overlooking Watson, his record while opening is pretty impressive. He's got really stiff competition in the top order though his bowling might just give him the edge.

Bit of a minnow basher as well imo. Probably wouldn't be in my AT side for now.

 

[stephen]

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

Kallis? Really? I'd much rather play Symonds than Kallis in an ODI side. Or any number of other batsmen for that matter.

 

[stephen]

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

I was never advocating Jayasuriya for a spot in the AT XI, only saying that he was one of the best aggressive openers we've seen. It's no coincidence that he was a part of the 1996 World Cup win and is 4th on the list of WC run scorers.

It's interesting reading the comments about Kapil Dev. I am too young to remember too much about him (I can remember Imran's bowling, but much less about his batting).

I really like the concept of having a world class bowler shoulder the bulk of the 5th bowler option overs, which is why I went Imran over the other options. The #7 does need to be able to hit out though and if Imran wasn't really a lower order hitter then I would probably switch to Dev.

The thing is that with only 50 overs, the stronger your top order gets, the less your middle order gets to bat. Starting with Gilchrist, Tendulkar and Ponting, followed by Bevan, Dhoni and some other gun ATG bat, I really can't see the #7 and below getting all that much batting (less so if Lara is picked as the other opener). Look at Hussey in the 2007 World Cup, he did not get to bat in half the games, simply because the batting lineup was so strong (and it's stronger in our AT XI).

 

[smash84]

And before that, you pissed me off by picking Anwar over Lara.

Anwar was a fantastic ODI opener.

 

[Ikki]

The thing is that with only 50 overs, the stronger your top order gets, the less your middle order gets to bat. Starting with Gilchrist, Tendulkar and Ponting, followed by Bevan, Dhoni and some other gun ATG bat, I really can't see the #7 and below getting all that much batting (less so if Lara is picked as the other opener). Look at Hussey in the 2007 World Cup, he did not get to bat in half the games, simply because the batting lineup was so strong (and it's stronger in our AT XI).

I agree with this logic, which is why when Chappell put Sehwag in his XI for Tests I wasn't as surprised as others.

For a team full of proven run-scorers, you need a Gilchrist-like batsman to give that slight advantage of just mashing the opposition, if he gets going. In a team like that you can afford the risk, and you should probably be taking it.

 

[shankar]

Does anyone consider Sehwag to be anything other than an average ODI batsman? Then Gilchrist who has similar figures must be considered the same. Simply for the sake of an all-rounder we'd be having an average batsman when much superior options are available.

I'm surprised Mark Waugh's name hasn't come up so far. Was as good as Anwar in addition to being a decent bowler and awesome fielder.

 

[Ikki]

Gilchrist was a big match player who came up trumps and basically made it a cakewalk to win 3 WC finals. He's also arguably the best wk-batsman there is. It's basically between him and Dhoni for that keeping spot. Pick Dhoni and you're giving up lot in keeping, as there are also alternatives to Dhoni for batting like there are to Gilchrist. Its a trade-off, but it doesn't mean we're picking an average player for the XI.

 

[Teja.]

Does anyone consider Sehwag to be anything other than an average ODI batsman? Then Gilchrist who has similar figures must be considered the same. Simply for the sake of an all-rounder we'd be having an average batsman when much superior options are available.

I'm surprised Mark Waugh's name hasn't come up so far. Was as good as Anwar in addition to being a decent bowler and awesome fielder.

Yeah, I rate Mark Waugh far ahead of Jayasurya/Gilchrist as far as taking apart quality pace attacks is concerned and he was an extremely good fielder which is of increased importance in LO cricket.

S Tendulkar
M Waugh
V Richards
Z Abbas
M Bevan
MS Dhoni (wk)
S Pollock
W Akram
S Warne
J Garner
G McGrath

I rate Mark as a considerably better opener to Gilchrist, The remaining four of the top five pick themselves with some consideration to Ponting. Dhoni satisfies three roles, finisher and keeper.

In an AT LO XI, I don't want even one non-ATG bowler touching the ball, Therefore I don't even consider Dev or Klusener for extra fire power. S Pollock in for being the greatest ODI cricketer of all time. W Akram ahead of Waqar, Ambrose and Donald because he can bat. Warne ahead of Murali and Saqlain for the same reason. Garner and McG because batting depth is pretty irrelevant at this level in an ODI XI.

That was a post from about 11 months ago. I don't think I've changed my views.

 

[ankitj]

Gilchrist was a big match player who came up trumps and basically made it a cakewalk to win 3 WC finals.

I knew this will come later or sooner. In some shape or form...

 

[Cruxdude]

A top four of Sachin, Lara, Viv and Ponting would be so awesome. Surely one of those four will get you on any single day.

Probably would have this as my team

Lara
Sachin
Viv
Ponting
Bevan
Dhoni
Kapil
Akram
Garner
Warne
Murali

 

[weldone]

Anwar was a fantastic ODI opener.

I'm not denying that. But he was not as good as Lara.

Anwar wasn't unarguably world's best ODI batsman for a period of 5 continuous years. Lara was.

 

[smash84]

Saqlain was also unarguably best ODI off spinner for about 5 years, doesn't mean he gets into the side

 

[weldone]

Saqlain was also unarguably best ODI off spinner for about 5 years, doesn't mean he gets into the side

Being the best ODI off-spinner for 5 years doesn't equate to being the best ODI batsman for 5 years. We are not only talking about opening batsmen here, Lara was by far the best ODI batsman for 5 years.

Was Saqlain by far the best ODI bowler for 5 years?

 

[smash84]

Being the best ODI off-spinner for 5 years doesn't equate to being the best ODI batsman for 5 years. We are not only talking about opening batsmen here, Lara was by far the best ODI batsman for 5 years.

Was Saqlain by far the best ODI bowler for 5 years?

Your point still doesn't hold. It is like saying that since somebody was best at their peak hence they should be in the team. It ignores the remainder of their career.

And yes, for about a period of 5 years Saqlain was the best ODI bowler in the world.

 

[hendrix]

Your point still doesn't hold. It is like saying that since somebody was best at their peak hence they should be in the team. It ignores the remainder of their career.

I'm kinda torn on this.

On the one hand, I agree with this. On the other hand, there's little to seperate the two on stats over their whole career.

Another stat: In wins, Brian Lara averages 61 at a strike rate of 86. Anwar averages 51 at a strike rate of 84.

Honestly I thought it'd be the other way around.

 

[hendrix]

If we're talking openers, Chris Gayle even deserves a mention

 

[weldone]

Your point still doesn't hold. It is like saying that since somebody was best at their peak hence they should be in the team. It ignores the remainder of their career.

And yes, for about a period of 5 years Saqlain was the best ODI bowler in the world.

Regarding Lara's peak - My point is not that. My point is that whenever Lara played as a top order batsman he was world's best batsman by a mile. And that was for an extended period. What Lara did by the end of 1997 is good enough for me to make him the opening partner of Tendulkar. I won't judge Lara's opening batting by how he did playing at no. 5. And he played at the top order for a relatively long period - scored about 7000 runs at the top order with average of 45 and strike rate of 81. Nobody except Tendulkar has managed that till date. And I daresay that he faced better bowlers in that period than what Amla and Kohli are facing nowadays.

And Saqlain was not unarguably world's best ODI bowler for 5 continuous years, no. I'll give him 1998 - but that too not unarguably. After or before that, one or more of Wasim, Ambrose, Pollock, McGrath and Muralitharan were equal or better.