Top Ten ODI cricketers of All Time

[stephen]

Kohli has scored more ODI tons than the 3 of them combined.

That's exactly my point. Batting has gotten far easier over the last decade or so. What would have been a match winning 72* in the 90s against Donald and Pollock would now be a 105 against Rabada and Morris.

 

[honestbharani]

Also, how the hell did Lillee get in there? Are we sure we are talking ODIs here?

 

[stephen]

Was he any more 'unequaled' than AB and Kohli? You said that Dhoni, Hussey, Amla have comparable records to AB, but then, Viv, Zaheer Abbas, Haynes, Greenidge all have very comparable records to Jones.

You're pulling players from times that just overlapped with Jones. Greenidge, Abbas and Richards played the bulk of their careers before him (and Greenidge at a much lower S/R). Haynes averaged a lot less at a lot lower strike rate. Whereas the players I've listed have all played the bulk of their careers at the same time.

 

[stephen]

Also, how the hell did Lillee get in there? Are we sure we are talking ODIs here?

A 9 year career taking wickets at a sub-21 average striking at under 35 isn't good enough for you? And then there are his WSC exploits...

 

[harsh.ag]

If you break down "batting has become easier", it essentially comes down to how vastly the pace at which ODIs are played nowadays has increased. Regardless of people judging Kohli in his prime, his prime has been so incredibly extraordinary that he would get in the ATG ODI XI even if he retired from ODIs right now. With Kohli, it's not a question of awestruck thinking about how much he will still get done by virtue of the fact that he is only 28. It's about what he's already done. No batsman, not Viv nor Sachin, came close to what he's done. No one in this generation of easy batting has come even remotely close. ABdV is the closest.

 

[honestbharani]

Kholi is overrated. That doesn't mean he's bad. Symonds is underrated. Especially away from home where he averaged 50 @ 93. How many other players have ever averaged over 50 away?

And that offsets a home average in the 20s over a much larger sample size? And I cbf to look up stats but I am bloody sure AB has better numbers even in that regard.

My arguments for Symonds are as an all round player. His batting alone doesn't get him over the line. It's him as the complete package. As a fielder he bullied the batsmen. As a bowler he could be relied on to bowl 10 tidy overs. As a batsman he could rescue an innings or bludgeon in the late overs. He was probably the game's most versatile ODI cricketer and was always in the game, even without bat or ball in hand.

As a fielder, he was very good but you are over rating him soo sooo much here. No one bulllied batsmen as a fielder except Jonty Rhodes. Symonds wishes he was that good. For a man who says Kohli has not finished his career, you seem pretty intent to pick Symonds, who is nowhere near the top 25 ODI cricketers of all time, and Dennis Lillee, who is in the same boat, based on a sample size much smaller than the ones you say are over rated. There is just no good reason to pick either of them except they are Aussies, and you wanna pick them. They have no business being in an ODI ATG Top 25 list. And yes, your Jones argument falls flat on its head too coz as much as you wanna make it seem like he was the messiah of modern ODI batting, he was not. The King Viv was, and Jones has been bettered at what he does by his very own countrymen in Bevan and Hussey.


Now those are two aussies who deserve to be in the top 25 ODI cricketers of all time, not Symonds and Lillee.

 

[honestbharani]

A 9 year career taking wickets at a sub-21 average striking at under 35 isn't good enough for you? And then there are his WSC exploits...

Well, the same 9 years over 100s of more games does not seem to be enough to convince you about Virat, so yes, I would need more convincing before you tell me someone who picked 100 odd wickets in 60 odd games is an ATG in that format. Also, if batting was harder int hat era, does it not mean Lillee's figures are more comparable to folks averaging 25 today? I mean I would sooner have the almighty AA in there than Lillee

 

[Red]

Lol @Kohli being called over rated by someone who then picks Symonds in the top 25 ODI cricketers of all time.

What the hell are you talking about?

Averaged 40 in ODIs at a SR of 92.

Handy bowler who could be the fifth bowler, share fifth bowler duties, or be relied upon if needed.

Probably the best inner ring fielder ever, along with Ponting, Rhodes and Viv.

He's not overrated, people like you just underrate him.

 

[watson]

Something to add from the previous pages's discussion.

IS KOHLI THE GREATEST ODI CHASER OF ALL TIME?

With Virat Kohli seemingly set to rewrite the ODI record books, James Marsh asks whether he’s already the greatest chaser the game has ever seen......

Is Virat Kohli The Greatest ODI Chaser Ever? | All Out Cricket

Low-risk Kohli a master of run-chases

Virat Kohli's hard-running and gap-picking skills have helped him accumulate a fine record in limited-overs run-chases......

Low-risk Kohli a master of run-chases | cricket.com.au

Virat Kohli a better chaser than MS Dhoni and Michael Bevan, already. The numbers prove it

Virat Kohli, after only eight years in international cricket, has proved to be a finisher par excellence and achieved unprecedented feats, making him the greatest ODI chaser.

Virat Kohli a better chaser than MS Dhoni and Michael Bevan, already. The numbers prove it : Cricket, News - India Today

 

[Daemon]

Here we go again

 

[stephen]

Symonds starts were not as good at home as they were away. But which all rounders do you have ahead of him? Jayasuria and Klusener have good arguments. Pollock was more of a bowler, as was Dev (who was also unlucky not to make my list). So at worst he was the 5th best ODI all rounder in history (unless you count wicket keepers). I don't see how that doesn't qualify you for the top 25 in ODIs, given the importance of part time bowling.

 

[a spambot]

That's exactly my point. Batting has gotten far easier over the last decade or so. What would have been a match winning 72* in the 90s against Donald and Pollock would now be a 105 against Rabada and Morris.

I just looked up the stats for this, and over the course of Michael Bevan's career, teams averaged a combined 423.79 runs per ODI. Since Kohli debuted, teams have averaged 448.04. That's only a 5.72% increase.

Also, I was surprised to find Dean Jones actually had a below average strike rate for his era.

 

[harsh.ag]

Shane Watson I find to be incredibly underrated as an ODI player. Gun. Did everything well. Good outfielder too. Incredible value to the team.

 

[Shri]

Okay I am going to do a top 25 and I know Symonds won't be in it, objectively. Here goes:

Tendulkar
Viv
Kohli
Bevan
Abdv
Greenidge
Hussey
Abbas
Amla


Muralitharan
McGrath
Akram
Garner
Roberts
Starc
Lee
Saqlain
Donald


Dhoni
Gilchrist


L Klusener
A Flintoff
S Watson
S Pollock
J Kallis

 

[stephen]

I just looked up the stats for this, and over the course of Michael Bevan's career, teams averaged a combined 423.79 runs per ODI. Since Kohli debuted, teams have averaged 448.04. That's only a 5.72% increase.

Also, I was surprised to find Dean Jones actually had a below average strike rate for his era.

I find this very difficult to believe. Can you double check your figures (are you excluding minnows)? I hardly think sides are averaging 224 per innings in the modern era.

And I'm certain Dean Jones had an above average strike rate for his era.

 

[stephen]

Kallis over Symonds? You obviously don't value strike rate in ODIs.

 

[Shri]

Kallis over Symonds? You obviously don't value strike rate in ODIs.

Depends on positions. Kallis is good enough to play as a specialist middle order bat. If I need a hitter down the order, I'll take Klusener instead.

 

[a spambot]

I find this very difficult to believe. Can you double check your figures (are you excluding minnows)? I hardly think sides are averaging 224 per innings in the modern era.

And I'm certain Dean Jones had an above average strike rate for his era.

Alright, since Kohli debuted, ODI's between test playing nations have seen an average of 454.4 runs per match, vs 423.69 during Bevan's career. so 7.24%. Still nowhere near the 45% increase suggested by your comparison.

As for Jones, it's true. An average strike rate of 73.49, vs Jones' SR of 72.56.

 

[honestbharani]

What the hell are you talking about?

Averaged 40 in ODIs at a SR of 92.

Handy bowler who could be the fifth bowler, share fifth bowler duties, or be relied upon if needed.

Probably the best inner ring fielder ever, along with Ponting, Rhodes and Viv.

He's not overrated, people like you just underrate him.

Dude, read the last few pages on the debate about him. He was only passable as a bowler and his batting is over rated coz there are better options than him as batsmen and as bowlers. Carl Hooper, had almost comparable stats in ODIs and he did that in the 90s, not the 00s like Symonds did. And his peak was about a 4-5 year window, which means you can find any number of players who had such wonderful peak periods at various points in ODI history. He is extremely​ over rated.


His bowling is comparable to Sachin and in an ATG side, he can only play either as the 7th batsman or the 6th bowler and given that there are MUCH better options for either he is not near the ATG XI either and he is surely not in the top 25 ODI cricketers of all time.

 

[OverratedSanity]

[/I]His bowling is comparable to Sachin

Come on, hb. Saying this over and over will not make it true.