ODI ATG XIs

[marc71178]

Clive Rice
13 with bat
57 with ball

Fixed your post.

 

[h_hurricane]

Fixed your post.

He was well past it when he played those 3 matches though.

 

[marc71178]

He was well past it when he played those 3 matches though.

Problem is, that's all we actually have to go on for him. There's no guarantee he'd have performed as well (or even 80% as well) as he did in domestic.

 

[Bolo]

I dont think you can solve things by moving kallis to 5. He needed to build an innings- his sr actually drops the lower he bats. Assuming the list a players arent available and the extra backbone in the batting is needed, i would play him in a bit of a floating role. Bat him at 3 in horrible conditions and when chasing low totals. Or at 4/5 if there has been a collapse. Drop him down the order if quick runs are needed. Bat him below everyone other than the specialist bowlers if balls remaining are more of an issue than wickets.

But if you are trading the batting of (eg.) Rhodes and morkel for Pollock and Proctor the batting becomes reliable enough that i just wouldn't play kallis.

 

[harsh.ag]

A without Kallis version:

Gibbs
Amla
Pollock
ABdv
Rossouw
QdK +
Klusener
Pollock
Procter
Tahir
Donald

Tbh someone like Rossouw would have been a perfect fit. Fantastic ODI batsman before the unfortunate signaway. Miller obviously not a bad choice at 5 either but can't handle much pressure.

This is very much a current England esque batting line-up with some better batsmen.

 

[Bolo]

Rossouw very talented. Probably the most damaging kolpack loss for Rsa. And he would be a good fit here.

But its hard to make a case for sticking him in here. He's effectively less proven than guys like Rice and Barry, and doesn't have the same upside potential.

 

[h_hurricane]

Smith
Gibbs
Amla
Kallis
ABD
De Kock
Klusener
Pollock
Ntini
Tahir
Donald

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ya, needs rice. Kallis can go. He would be a liability with the bat in a team with that much firepower.

Maybe drop Donald for van der bijl as well. I dont think that much of Donald, although some disagree. Adds to the batting as well.

So much bowling there. Rice as a 5th and klusenar as a 6th is a big advantage. And the Pollock-AB double punch will win a lot of games.

Kallis Batting is a liability most of the times for any good team, especially if he is not the 5th bowler

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

There's absolutely no chance either of those changes should be made.

A team with that much firepower would benefit from Kallis as an anchor.

Donald is in the discussion for ATG teams; there's no way he is kicked out of the side for van der Bijl.

Why do we need anchors in ODis ? Especially in a batting lineup this deep ?

Anchoring is something Dhonis or Bevens do , Kallis or Dravids destroys the purpose.. they do anchor deeper and heavier than needed.

 

[Andy1993]

Kallis and Dravid served the purpose of 50 over cricket 5-10 years ago, but game's moved on so quickly, now there's no place for them really in white ball cricket....their importance 5-10 years ago however cant be under estimated..

 

[weldone]

You're looking at 70 runs on average from that 5th bowling combo of Waugh and Symonds though.

That's a wrong spelling of 90.

 

[_00_deathscar]

I love it when all time ODI lists exclude players from the side that has won the world cup more than any other side. It's quite amusing.

Pollock, for example, was a very good ODI bowler but was nowhere near McGrath in matches that counted.

Bevan, despite being a better batsman than any other to have batted at number 6, against better bowlers with worse bats, seems to get left out for Dhoni

Mark Waugh is forgotten about despite having a much better batting record as Jayasuriya.

Gilchrist gets overlooked for Dhoni because Gilchrist only averaged 37 as an opener, despite being deliberately aggressive so that his ATG side had a good start more often than not.

The fact is that Australian batsmen are at a statistical disadvantage because they largely play on grounds that are larger than a postage stamp.

I'd wager:

Gilchrist
M Waugh 6
Ponting
Jones
Symonds 5
Bevan
Hussey
Warne 4
Starc 2
Bracken 3
McGrath 1

Reserves: Lee, Lillee, G Chappell, Hayden, Watson

Would be consistently competitive against:

Tendulkar 6
Jayasuriya
Richards 7
Kohli
De Villiers
Dhoni
Klusener 5
Pollock 3
Akram 1
Garner 2
Murali 4

Reserves: Flintoff, Buttler, Kapil, Waqar, Ambrose

Gilchrist and Waugh to set up the match, Ponting and Jones to pile on the consistently big scores, Bevan and Symonds to rescue when necessary. Symonds and Hussey to brutalize in the final overs.

The RoW team is probably a bit better with the ball (Klusener > Symonds with the ball) and has a fractionally better top order. Australia with the better middle order. If Symonds with the ball proved to be a weakness, Waugh could sub out for Watson.

I do agree it’s bizarre, but we’re picking the best XI players here rather than the best team.

Australia were an amazing team - that had quite a few world class/GOAT level players, often playing at the same time, but you can see an argument being made for not picking any Australian because there were better players in those positions from another 6-7 or so nations across the last 40 or so years.

Ponting is a great example really - world class player, in the discussion for greatest of all time for his position in ODIs but Viv and Kohli are just better (though obviously Ponting has proved his mettle in World Cups).

This level has basically played out across 11 positions - I think the only Australian lock should be McGrath.

The rest are all up for debate/bias based on whose helicopter shot you liked better.

 

[Red]

Kallis and Dravid served the purpose of 50 over cricket 5-10 years ago, but game's moved on so quickly, now there's no place for them really in white ball cricket....their importance 5-10 years ago however cant be under estimated..

Might be true, but it's still good to acknowledge they were good. FWIW if I was picking a SA ODI XI (and not including GPollock and Procter) Kallis would make it every time. Legit fifth bowler who balances the side. You just float the order a bit. Just create the situation that sees Kallis in early if early wickets fall, or AB in anytime after 25 overs.


DeKock +
Smith *
Amla
Kallis
DeVilliers
Rhodes
Klusener
Pollock
Steyn
Tahir
Donald

 

[NZTailender]

Kallis and Dravid served the purpose of 50 over cricket 5-10 years ago, but game's moved on so quickly, now there's no place for them really in white ball cricket....their importance 5-10 years ago however cant be under estimated..

Great, let's rule out anyone who played before 5-10 years ago then.

 

[mr_mister]

Dhoni must be just about close to playing himself out of ATG XI contention, specially if he bombs in this year's WC


If you try to argue that we should ignore his last 3 years then that's problematic too. Plenty of players in cricket would be rated a lot higher if we lopped off the last 3 years of their career

 

[stephen]

I do agree it’s bizarre, but we’re picking the best XI players here rather than the best team.

Australia were an amazing team - that had quite a few world class/GOAT level players, often playing at the same time, but you can see an argument being made for not picking any Australian because there were better players in those positions from another 6-7 or so nations across the last 40 or so years.

Ponting is a great example really - world class player, in the discussion for greatest of all time for his position in ODIs but Viv and Kohli are just better (though obviously Ponting has proved his mettle in World Cups).

This level has basically played out across 11 positions - I think the only Australian lock should be McGrath.

The rest are all up for debate/bias based on whose helicopter shot you liked better.

A large part of my point was that Australian batsmen in particular are underrated because Australian grounds are much bigger than anywhere else in the world. People look at raw stats to compare players. Andrew Symonds is a great example. How would he be perceived if he toured Australia once every 4 years and played all of his home ODIs in a country like England or the West Indies? Australia was by far his statistically weakest country. (Average 29 at home vs 43 away vs 66 neutral).

 

[smash84]

Dhoni must be just about close to playing himself out of ATG XI contention, specially if he bombs in this year's WC


If you try to argue that we should ignore his last 3 years then that's problematic too. Plenty of players in cricket would be rated a lot higher if we lopped off the last 3 years of their career

but plenty enough are rated highly enough despite having bad later years in careers. Viv being prime example

 

[NZTailender]

but plenty enough are rated highly enough despite having bad later years in careers. Viv being prime example

Those players careers are long over. We're thinking ill of Dhoni because his declining years are happening now.

In ten years time people on CW will be making ODI ATG XIs still and he'll be a lock in most peoples sides.

 

[Flem274*]

careers can be ended for many random, often uncontrollable reasons. players don't diminish in my eyes for playing on too long provided they've had a proper career.

 

[mr_mister]

Plenty are rated 'highly enough' yes, but were talking all time XIs here.Viv and Sachin would be neck a neck for the number 2 spot after Bradman imo instead of a 10 way tie with other greats if we take away their final 3 years.

And Ponting would be heads and shoulders clear of Border, Waugh and Chappell as Australia's number 2 if we forget his final 3 years

I think Dhoni has dropped enough for Bevan to be considered a better ODI bat. The thing with Dhoni is he's Bevan and Gilchrist combined which helps his cause.

But if he continues to strike at 70 for 20-30 more matches I'd say he's played himself out of contention