Top Ten ODI cricketers of All Time

[TestMatch]

Dhoni averages 27 in SA, 35 in Aus, 37 in England. His high ODI average is mostly due to Subcon runs.

 

[Zinzan]

Dhoni averages 27 in SA, 35 in Aus, 37 in England. His high ODI average is mostly due to Subcon runs.

Shhhh, don't give it away.

 

[Zinzan]

Also, most sensible people view Dhoni/Bevan etc as a separate category. .

Lol. there's no better way to articulate ones personal preference better than this.

I might use this argument myself when justifying my fav players. You agree with my choices, or you're stupid.

 

[Chrish]

You may as well leave Hobbs/ Hutton out of test xi for Cook due to "personal preference"

But that would be considered your favorite xi not all time xi

Majority of selections are based on personal taste but certain things just aren't subjective

 

[Shri]

Dhoni averages 27 in SA, 35 in Aus, 37 in England. His high ODI average is mostly due to Subcon runs.

How about NZ, WI, SL, etc?

 

[Zinzan]

You may as well leave Hobbs/ Hutton out of test xi for Cook due to "personal preference"

Well quite.

Although I would say Cook being selected in Tests over Hutton or Hobbs is slightly more outrageous than someone who wanted Gilchrist as their ATG ODI keeper and not Dhoni, or wanted Hadlee, Garner, Ambrose & Donald as their 4 pace bowlers instead McGrath, Pollock, Starc & Wasim.

 

[honestbharani]

Lol.. Ponting is not in any ATG XI coz there s no same reason to keep out Richards or Kohli from those sides and if he ain't batting 3 or 4, he can't be in the side. Jones has an argument for 5 but with Bevan, Hussey, MSD and the real AB there, he can't get in ahead of these guys. Sorry Vic Ian, ODI batting positions are lot more specialist than tests, so you can't just shoot guys up and down just because they are your favorites.

 

[Chrish]

Well quite.

Although I would say Cook being selected in Tests over Hutton or Hobbs is slightly more outrageous than someone who wanted Gilchrist as their ATG ODI keeper and not Dhoni, or wanted Hadlee, Garner, Ambrose & Donald as their 4 pace bowlers instead McGrath, Pollock, Starc & Wasim.

Would have no issues if someone wants Gilly over Dhoni. Personal preference as you say

Selecting any other opener in ODI over Sachin or any strike bowler over Mcgrath/ Wasim also in ODI would be just as outrageous as the above scenario however.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Lol. there's no better way to articulate ones personal preference better than this.

I might use this argument myself when justifying my fav players. You agree with my choices, or you're stupid.

Only stupid people attempt to make an apples to apples comparison between Bevan and Ponting's averages, yes.

 

[Zinzan]

Would have no issues if someone wants Gilly over Dhoni. Personal preference as you say

Selecting any other opener in ODI over Sachin or any strike bowler over Mcgrath/ Wasim also in ODI would be just as outrageous as the above scenario however.

Only in your opinion based on your personal preference. None of those 3 have entitled rights to those sides. Neither does Joel Garner, who many experts still say is the greatest ODI bowler of all-time.

I would say Viv, AB and Kohli should be entitled to be in everyone's ODI XI, but I'm sure once again my personal preference is a factor in me saying that.

 

[Zinzan]

Lol.. Ponting is not in any ATG XI.

To some he might be, I'd personally have both he and Tendulkar behind Viv, Kohli & AB, but others could see it differently.

I'll never forget what Ponting did in the 2003 final in the biggest possible stage, leading from the from & making that final his own & essentially putting the match beyond doubt before India had even batted - Legendary !

 

[srbhkshk]

Selecting Gilly over dhoni because you think Gilly is better than Dhoni is stupid, however you might want Bevan instead of Dhoni in which case a slot opens for Gilly, so a reasonable team with Gilly and without Dhoni exists.

There is no equally reasonable team you can make if you leave Sachin out, Bevan is a comparable player to Dhoni, no other ODI opener is even close to Sachin, his slot is a lock.

 

[Red]

Selecting Gilly over dhoni because you think Gilly is better than Dhoni is stupid, however you might want Bevan instead of Dhoni in which case a slot opens for Gilly, so a reasonable team with Gilly and without Dhoni exists.

There is no equally reasonable team you can make if you leave Sachin out, Bevan is a comparable player to Dhoni, no other ODI opener is even close to Sachin, his slot is a lock.

Are you Indian?

 

[Victor Ian]

Being not out kind of matters when you're a finisher though. Bevan's job is to finish the innings off, whether that's smashing the last few overs to set a target, rebuilding an innings to guide his team to a target or doing what needs to be done to successfully chase a target. Criticising him for staying not out is like criticising McGrath for bolstering his average by taking wickets.

Not quite. I am saying that all Bevan was, was a finisher. His average is irrelevant to the discussion. He was a finisher because he was not good enough to be a batsman proper. I'd bank on a real batsman to finish things better than Bevan any day of the year. Imagine if we left Ponting at 6 for the whole of his career. But Australia couldn't because they needed their best batsman at 3. It needs to also be considered that on average, a finisher can only 'finish' the games where you are batting second. So many games did i scream at the tv when Australia batted first and Bevan got to bat. Finisher is the name you give to your shittier batsman who is better at staying in and not getting bogged down than your other shittier batsmen.
The not out part happens as a consequence of the dynamics of a game. You can't blame him for that, but you shouldn't reward him either. He is the last recognised batsman before the lower order, so by way of coming in necessarily closer to the end and having partners that are more likely to get out makes you not-out and inflates your average. See what Red wrote, about average innings runs. Short summary....If a finisher was that good, they would bat 3-5. It's as if people think a real batsmen throws away his wicket just to get the finisher in!

 

[Shri]

ODI XIs are fluid depending on your approach to the game imo. If you want to guarantee a safe and middling total on the board over a chance for a massive total I would go:

S Tendulkar[Post op/2000s]
H Amla
V Richards
J Kallis
M Hussey
M Bevan


If I wanted a riskier side that has a chance at putting a massive total on the table:

S Tendulkar[late 90s]
A Gilchrist
R Ponting
V Kohli
M Dhoni
A de Villiers

 

[smash84]

ODI XIs are fluid depending on your approach to the game imo. If you want to guarantee a safe and middling total on the board over a chance for a massive total I would go:

S Tendulkar[Post op/2000s]
H Amla
V Richards
J Kallis
M Hussey
M Bevan


If I wanted a riskier side that has a chance at putting a massive total on the table:

S Tendulkar[late 90s]
A Gilchrist
R Ponting
V Kohli
M Dhoni
A de Villiers

Viv would make both sides though, he was a beast. His SR is higher than Dhoni's and almost equal to Kohli's

 

[Shri]

Viv would make both sides though, he was a beast. His SR is higher than Dhoni's and almost equal to Kohli's

Yeah. Will probably replace Ponting. His amazing test feats make me overrate Ponting in ODIs.

 

[OverratedSanity]

If I were picking an all time 11, I would not have a spot for Dhoni, nor Bevan, or any other finisher. With Viv, Tendulkar, Ponting, Jones, Kholi, DeVilliers and some other opener I would not need a finisher. It seem odd that a team puts its best (or 2nd) best batsman mid order. All those guys I just mentioned would finish innings off better than so called finishers because they are better batsman. Think about it - the finishing argument is bogus.

I rate both Dhoni and Bevan, but you actually have a decent point. In a team full of rock-stars like Kohli, Viv, & AB, and with strong hitters like Kapil, Flintoff, Kluesener or Symonds, you probably don't need those 'not-out' finishes playing calculated relatively low risk at the end.

Bevan played in a lineup that had several ATGs batting ahead of him and the team still needed him to rescue them so many times. There is no reason why it'd be different in an all time XI.

 

[Victor Ian]

Bevan played in a lineup that had several ATGs batting ahead of him and the team still needed him to rescue them so many times. There is no reason why it'd be different in an all time XI.

Imagine you had that same Aussie team and could put Viv or Kholi in at 6/7 instead of Bevan. I don't know how you could go past Viv. I don't know how this is even a discussion.

 

[srbhkshk]

Are you Indian?

Is that a question or a remark?