CW decides the greatest ODI batsman ever (submit your own top 20 list)

[h_hurricane]

He's got you there hurricane

Not really, it is difficult to judge Most of the cricket played in Australia has been tri nation tournaments. Roughly 30% of the matches played in Australia has been not involving the home team.
On the other hand it would be a lot less in India.
So Ambrose owning Shastri or Razzaq getting the better of Tendulkar has nothing to do with Bevan. It will be interesting to see how Bevan did purely against great quicks of his era (from the strike rate perspective), lets say Ambrose, Akram or Donald.

 

[stephen]

Stephen and PFK are long lost twins

No the way that PFK analyses stats is not my MO at all. I like to put context around stats rather than blanket era adjustments.

Heck, my AT ODI XI is different based on whether the team is playing in Asia or elsewhere.

 

[mr_mister]

Not easy is it?


Virat Kohli
Viv Richards
AB de Villiers
Brian Lara
Greg Chappell
Rohit Sharma
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Kevin Pietersen
Michael Bevan
Aravinda de Silva
Kumar Sangakarra
Marcus Trescothick
Saurav Ganguly
Saeed Anwar
Herschelle Gibbs
Neil Fairbrother
Kapil Dev
Inzaman Ul Haq
Sanath Jayasuriya

Good stuff. Cheers for that





Might get the countdown thread up this week. Will be slow going til the ashes is done, but we've got nearly 50 names to get through so no harm in getting things underway

 

[mr_mister]

I didn't vote but am interested in the result. ODI ranking are much less clear cut than test rankings since there are a lot more roles to fill in an ODI side. To me, balance is more important than anything else in an ODI side.

If you wanted to submit one I could leave it open a couple more days. Just let me know if you can be bothered. I've tallied everything except Fred's list so 2 instead of 1 extra one isn't too difficult for me to incorporate

 

[stephen]

Not really, it is difficult to judge Most of the cricket played in Australia has been tri nation tournaments. Roughly 30% of the matches played in Australia has been not involving the home team.
On the other hand it would be a lot less in India.
So Ambrose owning Shastri or Razzaq getting the better of Tendulkar has nothing to do with Bevan. It will be interesting to see how Bevan did purely against great quicks of his era (from the strike rate perspective), lets say Ambrose, Akram or Donald.

Not really interested in a Bevan vs Tendulkar discussion. Two very different batsmen with very different roles. The way Bevan batted even makes looking at his overall strike rate a bit silly anyway - you need to look at it based in whether Australia batted first or second.

My only point was that there is an element of where batsmen play that has a not insignificant effect on their stats. Indian batsmen get boosted slightly by their home conditions and Australian batsmen get penalised. The effect on batsmen from other countries varies from country to country - those two are at the extremes.

 

[h_hurricane]

I did a quick check on Bevan's record at home against Pak, SA or WI. He averaged 45 at a strike rate of 67 in those matches. When at home not playing these teams , he averages 67 striking at 75. That pretty much settles it I believe.

Admittedly, I have not filtered his record just against Akram, Ambrose or Donald, but the chances are that it would look worse.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[stephen]

If you wanted to submit one I could leave it open a couple more days. Just let me know if you can be bothered. I've tallied everything except Fred's list so 2 instead of 1 extra one isn't too difficult for me to incorporate

Nah all good. As I said earlier, I find everything too situational in ODI cricket. Bevan would be one of my first picked batsmen against an AT bowling attack but I'd probably pick Hussey over him against a standard Bangladesh attack (For example).

 

[mr_mister]

Fair enough mate

 

[h_hurricane]

Not really interested in a Bevan vs Tendulkar discussion. Two very different batsmen with very different roles. The way Bevan batted even makes looking at his overall strike rate a bit silly anyway - you need to look at it based in whether Australia batted first or second.

My only point was that there is an element of where batsmen play that has a not insignificant effect on their stats. Indian batsmen get boosted slightly by their home conditions and Australian batsmen get penalised. The effect on batsmen from other countries varies from country to country - those two are at the extremes.

When Tendulkar strikes at 88 at home and 85 otherwise, how is this the case ? You may have a point on some of the lesser Indian batsmen. One thing I agree with you is that he faced less of Ambrose, Akram, Donald etc at home as compared to Bevan, and in all likelihood his home record would not have been as impressive if he had played them( and also the away bowling record of these greats) but that is something left to speculation, we never know. But this is down to the quality of attacks he played not batting friendly tracks. He clearly has not taken advantage of home conditions like you mentioned.

 

[stephen]

I did a quick check on Bevan's record at home against Pak, SA or WI. He averaged 45 at a strike rate of 67 in those matches. When at home not playing these teams , he averages 67 striking at 75. That pretty much settles it I believe.

Admittedly, I have not filtered his record just against Akram, Ambrose or Donald, but the chances are that it would look worse.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Settles what exactly?

Batting first he averaged 50 at a strike rate of 82 against those sides. Batting second he averaged 39 at a strike rate of 57 against those sides. That's a huge disparity brought about by his role in chases.

Expand that to include his away/neutral stats against the same sides and he's averaging 51.4 @ 73.

First innings he averages 54@80 vs those sides and second innings 47@64.

So what we can establish from looking at this is that a) in the first innings Bevan struck at a very good strike rate for the era; b) Bevan had a very healthy first and second innings average both home and away against the best attacks of his era; and c) that Bevan found scoring easier overseas against the best bowling attacks than he did at home, particularly chasing.

 

[trundler]

Can we not instead

 

[h_hurricane]

Settles what exactly?

Batting first he averaged 50 at a strike rate of 82 against those sides. Batting second he averaged 39 at a strike rate of 57 against those sides. That's a huge disparity brought about by his role in chases.

Expand that to include his away/neutral stats against the same sides and he's averaging 51.4 @ 73.

First innings he averages 54@80 vs those sides and second innings 47@64.

So what we can establish from looking at this is that a) in the first innings Bevan struck at a very good strike rate for the era; b) Bevan had a very healthy first and second innings average both home and away against the best attacks of his era; and c) that Bevan found scoring easier overseas against the best bowling attacks than he did at home, particularly chasing.

My point is that you see a a natural rise in the batting strike rates of Bevan (and Tendulkar when not in SA and Aus) when up against lesser quality attacks. This clearly illustrates that the quality of opposition attack has a major role to play in determining the batting strike rates. Great bowlers have played lesser cricket in India compared to Australia, so you can't take the economy rate of 4.66 and 5.14 on face value and compare with each other.

 

[stephen]

When Tendulkar strikes at 88 at home and 85 otherwise, how is this the case ? You may have a point on some of the lesser Indian batsmen. One thing I agree with you is that he faced less of Ambrose, Akram, Donald etc at home as compared to Bevan, and in all likelihood his home record would not have been as impressive if he had played them( and also the away bowling record of these greats) but that is something left to speculation, we never know. But this is down to the quality of attacks he played not batting friendly tracks. He clearly has not taken advantage of home conditions like you mentioned.

Forget about Bevan. I'm not comparing him to Tendulkar.

Tendulkar was an amazing batsman who did well everywhere around the world. However his stats in Australia are 35@75. This isn't bad by any stretch of the imagination, but if he played half his matches there instead of 10%, even though his average/ strike rate in Australia would be better than it is, his overall record would be worse.

My point is not that Tendulkar doesn't deserve to have accolades thrown his way (because he absolutely does) but that stats can't be looked at in isolation. It is easier to score in certain countries than others, with Australian conditions being the most challenging on average over a long timeframe (in ODIs) and Indian conditions being the easiest for batting.

The fact that Tendulkar had such a great record outside India should be being lauded more than his great home record or even his great overall record.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Settles what exactly?

Batting first he averaged 50 at a strike rate of 82 against those sides. Batting second he averaged 39 at a strike rate of 57 against those sides. That's a huge disparity brought about by his role in chases.

Expand that to include his away/neutral stats against the same sides and he's averaging 51.4 @ 73.

First innings he averages 54@80 vs those sides and second innings 47@64.

So what we can establish from looking at this is that a) in the first innings Bevan struck at a very good strike rate for the era; b) Bevan had a very healthy first and second innings average both home and away against the best attacks of his era; and c) that Bevan found scoring easier overseas against the best bowling attacks than he did at home, particularly chasing.

He's got you there too. If anything that supports his point that batting in Australia was harder for Bevan than overseas against those bowlers.

stephen punching above his weight here

 

[vcs]

TBH, Tendulkar's ODI batting in Australia wasn't that great. He was good in WC '92, but didn't do that well in the ODI triangulars until the final in 2008. His Test batting over there was brilliant though.

 

[stephen]

My point is that you see a a natural rise in the batting strike rates of Bevan (and Tendulkar when not in SA and Aus) when up against lesser quality attacks. This clearly illustrates that the quality of opposition attack has a major role to play in determining the batting strike rates. Great bowlers have played lesser cricket in India compared to Australia, so you can't take the economy rate of 4.66 and 5.14 on face value and compare with each other.

What you say is absolutely true.

But looking at Bevan's results against those same attacks in their home conditions brings his average and strike rate back up to very close to his overall average.

My point was as much "Batting is harder in Australia" as it was "Batting is easier in India". Every stat posted in this thread has verified that.

But just for comparison's sake, here are some Australian batsmen who average more away/neutral than at home:

Ponting (39@79 home, 43@80 overall)
M Waugh (37@75 home, 39@77 overall)
Clarke (39@80 home, 45@79 overall)
S Waugh (30@72 home, 33@76 overall)
Border (29@69 home, 31@71 overall)
Hayden (39@74 home, 44@79 overall)
Boon (36@62 home, 37@65 overall)

7 out of the top 10 Australian run scorers have better away/ neutral records than home records (the exceptions being Gilchrist, Bevan and Jones).

 

[vcs]

TBH, Tendulkar's ODI batting in Australia wasn't that great. He was good in WC '92, but didn't do that well in the ODI triangulars until the final in 2008. His Test batting over there was brilliant though.

Wild theory, but maybe the intensity of a long preceding Test series left him without much gas in the tank. Also, if you look at Kohli, he smashed it in the Tests in 2014, but had a poor ODI leg. Rohit has historically had the best record over there out of the Indian batsmen and he doesn't play Tests.

 

[stephen]

Here is the list of Australian batsmen sorted by away/ neutral averages (min 1000 runs).

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Some players with noticeable improvements to their record by excluding home games:

Clarke 50@78
Symonds 49@92
Khawaja 47@88
Hayden 47@82
G Marsh 47@58

 

[stephen]

Wild theory, but maybe the intensity of a long preceding Test series left him without much gas in the tank. Also, if you look at Kohli, he smashed it in the Tests in 2014, but had a poor ODI leg. Rohit has historically had the best record over there out of the Indian batsmen and he doesn't play Tests.

You're probably partially right. There was nothing in Tendulkar's game to suggest he should struggle in Australian conditions. If 35@75 can be considered struggling.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I think stephen wins this tbh