that Virat Kohli

[Tom Flint]

Sachin
Ponting
Kohli
Viv
Bevan
ABDV
MSD (+)

Who needs an allrounder?

Who's going to be your 6th bowler should someone get injured or getting tapped...bevan?

 

[honestbharani]

Who's going to be your 6th bowler should someone get injured or getting tapped...bevan?

Sir Viv

And Sachin has won MOTM for his bowling in ODIs.

 

[91Jmay]

You've got every player to ever play ODI cricket and you decide to risk it with only 5 bowlers. Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Tom Flint]

Sir Viv

And Sachin has won MOTM for his bowling in ODIs.

I assumed viv was one of the 5 as he had keeper at 7 and all the other top order being purely batsmen bar possibly bevan.
Tendulkar winning motm with his bowling displays...in the same way Tino best has won motm for his batting displays!

 

[Gob]

Gilchrist
Tendulkar
Richards
Kohli
DeVilliers
Symonds
Flintoff
Wasim
Pollock
Lee
Murali

 

[harsh.ag]

So much lack of Garner in these teams.

 

[weldone]

On topic though, Kohli.. just continues to amaze in these situations. Seems like chasing a big total automatically makes him 20% better. You don't get that feeling from, say AB de Villers, as great a batsman as he is.

Yeah AB is clearly a better batsman overall but as a chaser in the top order, Kohli has very few if any equals.

Ya I think that's also because Kohli is an immensely strong character mentally, and he sees a big total as a big challenge. He plays for those challenges. That's also why he loves to be sledged by bowlers - he loves to be challenged.

 

[weldone]

Kohli is more of a planner of his innings whereas AB just comes in lower down than Kohli and is too freakish to contain so no matter the situation it looks like he's going beserk.

I'd probably take both in my ATG ODI XI now. Sorry Punter.

Yeah Virat-Viv-AB looks set now

So who are you dropping between Bevan and Dhoni?

 

[weldone]

not enough Klusener-love in this thread

Remember 1999 World Cup guys

 

[Grumpy]

No need for both Dhoni and Bevan in the same team.

Sachin Tendulkar
Hashim Amla
Virat Kholi
Viv Richards
AB Devilliers
MS Dhoni (+)
Lance Klusner
Wasim Akram
Saqlain Mushtaq / Mitchell Starc (depending on conditions/opposition)
Joel Garner
Muttiah Muraliathran

 

[Anil]

Gilchrist-Sachin opening pair is pretty much set, IMO. Hard to mess around with that. That combination sounds so good BTW.

No way...Gilchrist was just too inconsistent as a batsman to warrant admission into an all-time xi especially as a one day opener...one whirlwind innings every 10-15 or however many matches doesn't cut it...

 

[TheJediBrah]

No need for both Dhoni and Bevan in the same team.

Sachin Tendulkar
Hashim Amla
Virat Kholi
Viv Richards
AB Devilliers
MS Dhoni (+)
Lance Klusner
Wasim Akram
Saqlain Mushtaq / Mitchell Starc (depending on conditions/opposition)
Joel Garner
Muttiah Muraliathran

Not a bad team. Australian side of 2003-2007 World Cup would still destroy it.

No way...Gilchrist was just too inconsistent as a batsman to warrant admission into an all-time xi especially as a one day opener...one whirlwind innings every 10-15 or however many matches doesn't cut it...

similar to Kiwiviktor the Bevan argument, Gilchrist played most his games in a very different era, where an average of 30+ at a SR of 90 was largely unheard of

Prime Gilchrist in 2016 with modern bats, boundaries, rules etc. would be a different beast

 

[Stace]

Flintoff getting in more teams than I'd have thought but he was a superb ODI bowler. His economy rate for a strike bowler is great.

He batted most of his career at No.5 (48 innings) and averaged 46 with a SR of 94, that just incredible for someone with his bowling record. Maybe if they had just left him at 5 there wouldn't be a discussion which all-rounder gets in the ATG side he could have been a lock.

 

[TheJediBrah]

He batted most of his career at No.5 (48 innings) and averaged 46 with a SR of 94, that just incredible for someone with his bowling record. Maybe if they had just left him at 5 there wouldn't be a discussion which all-rounder gets in the ATG side he could have been a lock.

probably more to do with the fact that he was in the form of his life when he was batting at 5, not he was just a lot better because he was batting at 5

 

[91Jmay]

probably more to do with the fact that he was in the form of his life when he was batting at 5, not he was just a lot better because he was batting at 5

48 innings is 40% of his career, bit of a stretch to say that was form of his life.

 

[TheJediBrah]

48 innings is 40% of his career, bit of a stretch to say that was form of his life.

not at all

Ponting was in the "form of his life" for ~70% of his career. I don't think what I'm saying means what you think it means.

 

[Anil]

similar to Kiwiviktor the Bevan argument, Gilchrist played most his games in a very different era, where an average of 30+ at a SR of 90 was largely unheard of

Prime Gilchrist in 2016 with modern bats, boundaries, rules etc. would be a different beast

so hypotheticals are what you decide an all-time xi on...? there were several players who had good-to-great strike rates at a significantly higher average (and strike rate is such an overrated stat if not accompanied by consistent output, see afridi for another occasional hit wonder in the same mould albeit in weaker teams)...he claimed his spot in a fantastic aussie team as a competent wicket keeper and a free-wheeling batsman. The batting was loaded with riches and they had so many terrific one day all rounders in that era that they didn't need him to succeed at a consistent rate...they could afford to carry him (as a batsman) based on his occasional powerhouse innings and never even feel his failures...doesn't exactly qualify him as a great one day batsman, forget an all-time great opener...

there are enough aussie openers in the 50 over version who are significantly better than him and have had more accomplished careers and we certainly have a list of openers in other countries who are more qualified in that spot...it would be a better argument if he was considered in contention as a late middle order batsman and a good to very good wicket keeper in an all-time xi...as an opener, he doesn't even begin to qualify...

now bevan was actually an outstanding one day batsman and there is no comparison between him and gilchrist in terms of one day utility and success, bevan was light years better and would be an automatic pick in most all-time xis...

 

[TheJediBrah]

so hypotheticals are what you decide an all-time xi on...? there were several players who had good-to-great strike rates at a significantly higher average (and strike rate is such an overrated stat if not accompanied by consistent output, see afridi for another occasional hit wonder in the same mould albeit in weaker teams)...he claimed his spot in a fantastic aussie team as a competent wicket keeper and a free-wheeling batsman. The batting was loaded with riches and they had so many terrific one day all rounders in that era that they didn't need him to succeed at a consistent rate...they could afford to carry him (as a batsman) based on his occasional powerhouse innings and never even feel his failures...doesn't exactly qualify him as a great one day batsman, forget an all-time great opener...

there are enough aussie openers in the 50 over version who are significantly better than him and have had more accomplished careers and we certainly have a list of openers in other countries who are more qualified in that spot...it would be a better argument if he was considered in contention as a late middle order batsman and a good to very good wicket keeper in an all-time xi...as an opener, he doesn't even begin to qualify...

now bevan was actually an outstanding one day batsman and there is no comparison between him and gilchrist in terms of one day utility and success, bevan was light years better and would be an automatic pick in most all-time xis...

I thought it was obvious that he was a wicket keeper

 

[Anil]

I thought it was obvious that he was a wicket keeper

did you even read the post i was responding to? vcs was extolling his virtues as an opener in an all-time xi along with sachin and i was disagreeing with that point...

 

[TheJediBrah]

did you even read the post i was responding to? vcs was extolling his virtues as an opener in an all-time xi along with sachin and i was disagreeing with that point...

nah I didn't read it

you got to think about team balance though. You need a wk, Gilchrist as opener is great because even if he ****s up he doesn't waste time and when he scores its quick. Amla has been more prolific (slightly different era though) but he's more likely to make a 30 (50) and you don't necessarily need rock-solid 130* (150) batsman all through the order when you're looking at such a strong team.