You don't half spout some bollocks in the name of championing Australians. If someone is universally known as the second best batsman in ODI history they'd already be in the team.
Picking an ODI team isn't necessarily about picking the six best batsmen and four best bowlers though. There are a lot more considerations given to team balance and roles.
You need to pick openers. Through 40 years of experience we've found that the best combination is a high averaging opener and an explosive opener. The explosive guy is there to try and demoralise the opponents and take the game away from them during the initial power play. The other one is there to anchor the innings. There have been a number of explosive openers - Sehwag, Gilchrist, Jayasuria, Warner and de Kock to name a few. The high averaging openers to partner with them would be someone like Sharma, Amla, Tendulkar, Lara, Watson. The best of the high averaging openers was Tendulkar and by a fairly large margin. Of the explosive openers, there isn't a huge amount to separate them (the higher averages of Warner and de Kock is probably explained by the era in which they have played as much as anything else). De Kock, Gilchrist and Jayasuria all have a second string to their bow. De Kock will probably topple Gilchrist as the best keeper/bat opener in history by the time his career ends, but for now, Gilchrist is fractionally ahead of him. Jayasuria gives a genuine bowling option, especially in the subcontinent. Given his average/strike rate/bowling ability Watson could be considered in this role, though I don't like him as much as the other three. So that gives us:
Tendulkar
Gilchrist/Jayasuria
We then need to look at the other batsmen in the order. If we pick Gilchrist we need 10 overs from the numbers 3-7. If we pick Jayasuria we need a keeper from 3-7.
Viv is a lock in the order. He is the best ODI batsman in history. So we really have three picks left.
Most of the top quality sides have had a specialist chaser. The batsman who was there at the finish to chase down the winning runs. There have been many but the best candidates are Bevan, Dhoni, Hussey, Inzi, and Kohli. You only need one of these guys and their strike rate is relatively unimportant. It's there job to ensure you win. The best of these is Bevan. The second best is Dhoni (the gap is wider outside the subcontinent).
So we have Bevan/Dhoni.
If we've picked Gilchrist, we still need to pick up 10 overs between our last three picks. If we've picked Jayasuria we still need a keeper. Since Dhoni is the next best keeping option anyway, there's no point picking Bevan if we've already got Dhoni, because their batting role in the team is the same. If we've picked Dhoni there's no point picking Gilchrist because we then have two keepers, we're better off picking Jayasuria. Picking both Bevan and Dhoni is overkill for the same reason that picking Gilchrist and Dhoni is overkill.
So we now have:
Tendulkar
Gilchrist/Jayasuria
Viv
Bevan/Dhoni
-
-
-
Now the best number 5 in the history of the game is ABDV, so he slots in there.
Which leaves #6 and #7. With Gilchrist/Bevan we need 10 overs from one of these two. The best bowler who batted #6 or #7 was Klusener, who bats #7 Kohli can slot in at 4 and push Bevan down to 6, where he spent half his career anyway.
With Jaya/Dhoni we need power and maybe a bowler who we could get 3-5 overs from if Jaya is getting tonked. In that case the best option is Symonds who can offer a handy 3-5 overs, is a gun fielder and averaged 39 at a strike rate of 90. Kohli can bat 4 and Dhoni can slide down one place. Leaving the two lineups looking like:
Tendulkar
Gilchrist
Viv
Kohli
ABDV
Bevan
Klusener
and
Tendulkar
Jayasuria
Viv
Kohli
ABDV
Dhoni
Symonds
The bowlers is an interesting one. Assuming we are going for a standard 3 fast/1 spin option.
We could start by looking at the spin options. Saqlain, Warne and Murali. All three bowlers were excellent in ODIs and all have their strengths and weaknesses as bowlers. Warne was a better bat than Saqlain who was better than Murali. If Murali can bat 11, then it doesn't matter. Saqlain can realistically bat 9 and no higher. Warne is just good enough to fill in as a #8.
The fast bowlers give us a few options. It's almost universally agreed that Garner is the #1 ODI fast bowler of all time. McGrath and Wasim numbers 2 and 3 (the order of these two depends on who you talk to - some will talk up McGrath's WC exploits, some will talk up Wasim's ability to do magic with the ball). Hadlee is an option for his batting. Realistically though, Garner, McGrath and Wasim are the three best ODI fast bowlers of all time and should be picked. This means that we need Warne to bat 8.
Giving a final XI of:
Tendulkar
Gilchrist/Jayasuria
Viv
Kohli
ABDV
Bevan/Dhoni
Klusener/Symonds
Warne
Akram
Garner
McGrath
I tend to think that the gap is so small between those two possibilities that I'd pick the Jaya/Dhoni/Symonds team in the subcontinent or where spin is favoured and Gilchrist/Bevan/Klusener outside the continent or where pace is favoured.
I know that was a long answer as to why the second best bat in ODI history is not an automatic pick in an ODI XI but there you go. If de Kock keeps going the way he's going and ends up eclipsing both Gilly and Dhoni then Bevan becomes an automatic pick.
The second XI I haven't thought about but could be:
Watson/Amla/Warner/Greenidge/Abbas
Gilchrist/Jaya
Ponting
Sangakkara
Bevan/Dhoni
Hussey
Klusener/Symonds
Hadlee
Saqlain
Holding
Donald
For what it's worth, the second XI would give the first XI a run for its money, though I'd expect the first XI to win probably 70% of the time.
