The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[srbhkshk]

I kind of agree but don't you think the fact that their roles are so different has to be taken into account here. Rohit is a notoriously slow starter and Gilchrist was basically going for it from ball one. If you want an ultra attacking opener to pair with Tendulkar in an at xi and want him to provide a rapid start instead of steadily laying a platform, then Gilchrist is the superior choice.

Tendulkar should be the aggressor in this partnership - he was a better batsman when he played free flowing from ball one.

 

[Logan]

Among fast bowlers who have played over 100 ODIs.

Top 5 ODI averages
1. Holding
2. Hadlee
3. Donald
4. McGrath
5. Lee

Top 5 ODI SR
1. Lee
2. Waqar
3. Morkel
4. Johnson
5. Donald

 

[sunilz]

I kind of agree but don't you think the fact that their roles are so different has to be taken into account here. Rohit is a notoriously slow starter and Gilchrist was basically going for it from ball one. If you want an ultra attacking opener to pair with Tendulkar in an at xi and want him to provide a rapid start instead of steadily laying a platform, then Gilchrist is the superior choice.

I think Rohit can easily average 40 @100 if given permission from team management . Let's not forget he holds the record for hitting most 6s in a calendar for last 3 years
https://www.hindustantimes.com/cric...lender-year/story-UE77irFbfsq2hxoBfztwSM.html

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think Rohit can easily average 40 @100 if given permission from team management . Let's not forget he holds the record for hitting most 6s in a calendar for last 3 years
https://www.hindustantimes.com/cric...lender-year/story-UE77irFbfsq2hxoBfztwSM.html

He goes for the big ones and accelerates like crazy when he's set. But his first 20-30 runs are often quite slow by the era's standards. It doesn't show in his overall strike rate because he compensates later on. I'm just saying it's a difference of approach which needs to be acknowledged.

 

[sunilz]

No, because like every other piece of "analysis" you have, you don't fundamentally understand what had going on.

The best bowlers are still averaging the same because they are great. But the game favouring the batsmen means that the lesser bowlers have much higher averages.

The last decade has seen most of the best bowlers play minimal ODIs as well for workload management reasons. That has been inflating batting averages as well.

This is why Rohit was the top scorer in last WC and averages 62 whereas Gilchrist averages 40 in WC . So even in WC the difference in batting average is of 22.
Let's not forget Gilchrist never was in top 5 batting charts in any WC .

 

[Prince EWS]

Bevan was not as good as Dhoni as an ODI batsman. I wonder if the same posters will agree Zaheer Abbas was a better ODI batsman than Ricky Ponting.

I will.

 

[Logan]

Rohit scores a century every 6 innings as an opener.

Sachin scores a century every 7.5 innings as an opener.

Kohli scores a century every 5 innings at number 3.

Statistically, there isn’t a better Top 3 in a dream ODI eleven.

 

[stephen]

Not a single one of Sachin , Rohit , Viv , Kohli , ABD or Dhoni are "slow" scoring batsman by any measure. The only thing that was keeping Gilchrist in the ATG side was the absence of a clearly superior batsman - now that Rohit is there (and I presume at least one English opener would be there in some time) - there's no place for him. 20 runs difference in average is massive and no amount of trivia statistics are going to change that.

Lol "no amount of trivia statistics are going to change [trivia statistic]".

Going by the Indian posters in this thread, the greatest ODI side of all time has two Indian openers, two more Indian batsmen in the top 7 and probably one of the tall had also an Indian. It also contains one, maybe two Australian players including zero batsmen.

Fmd, India must have won 5 world cups in 4 different continents or something.

Rohit is one of the biggest examples of modern game statistics not telling the full story. He's nowhere near as good as his stats suggest, unless you're looking at his sub-20 average in South Africa.

The reality is that Roy is a better choice for an opener in an all time side than Rohit because when you have so much firepower in the sheds Rohit's relatively average strike rate is more of a liability. His average means he'd dramatically improve a rubbish side but his strike rate means he would weaken an AT side.

FTR, it's not like I'm against Indians in an AT XI (I have Tendulkar and Kohli as locks and Dhoni in Asia, since for ODIs your backup bowling options are important based on the location).

Outside Asia XI:

Tendulkar
Gilchrist+
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Bevan
Klusener
Akram
Warne
Garner
McGrath

Asia:

Tendulkar
Jayasuriya
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Dhoni+
Symonds
Akram
Saqlain
Garner
McGrath

 

[srbhkshk]

Lol "no amount of trivia statistics are going to change [trivia statistic]".

Going by the Indian posters in this thread, the greatest ODI side of all time has two Indian openers, two more Indian batsmen in the top 7 and probably one of the tall had also an Indian. It also contains one, maybe two Australian players including zero batsmen.

Stopped reading after this - I know you stephen and you know well enough that that's a bullcrap logic.

 

[stephen]

Rohit scores a century every 6 innings as an opener.

Sachin scores a century every 7.5 innings as an opener.

Kohli scores a century every 5 innings at number 3.

Statistically, there isn’t a better Top 3 in a dream ODI eleven.

There are lies, damned lies and one eyed Indian supporters.

Choosing a multi-generational side based on a few statistics that are biased towards players who play more meaningless ODIs on tiny fields with flat decks is very poor reasoning, even by your standards.

 

[sunilz]

Lol "no amount of trivia statistics are going to change [trivia statistic]".

Going by the Indian posters in this thread, the greatest ODI side of all time has two Indian openers, two more Indian batsmen in the top 7 and probably one of the tall had also an Indian. It also contains one, maybe two Australian players including zero batsmen.

Fmd, India must have won 5 world cups in 4 different continents or something.

Rohit is one of the biggest examples of modern game statistics not telling the full story. He's nowhere near as good as his stats suggest, unless you're looking at his sub-20 average in South Africa.

The reality is that Roy is a better choice for an opener in an all time side than Rohit because when you have so much firepower in the sheds Rohit's relatively average strike rate is more of a liability. His average means he'd dramatically improve a rubbish side but his strike rate means he would weaken an AT side.

FTR, it's not like I'm against Indians in an AT XI (I have Tendulkar and Kohli as locks and Dhoni in Asia, since for ODIs your backup bowling options are important based on the location).

Outside Asia XI:

Tendulkar
Gilchrist+
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Bevan
Klusener
Akram
Warne
Garner
McGrath

Asia:

Tendulkar
Jayasuriya
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Dhoni+
Symonds
Akram
Saqlain
Garner
McGrath

But you can have 5 Aus cricketers in AT Test XI , 2 of whom have never won a test series in Asia ( Bradman, Smith ) and 3rd ( Gilchrist ) averages 33 in test in Asia.

So here is my AT XI for test

Asia
Sehwag
Gavaskar
Lara
Sachin
Sangakkara
Younis khan
Dhoni
Imran
Akram
Marshall
Murali

Outside Asia
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Smith
Tendulkar
Sobers
Gilchrist
Mcgrath
Marshall
Steyn
Warne

 

[sunilz]

Smith can't win a test series in Bangladesh but he is better than Sachin according to stephen But Rohit can't be better than Gilchrist despite top scoring in WC and averaging 21 more as opener .

 

[stephen]

Stopped reading after this - I know you stephen and you know well enough that that's a bullcrap logic.

You stopped reading after the truth was pointed out?

Tendulkar
Rohit
Kohli
Dhoni

Are 4 of the top 7 in an all time ODI side if the last page of this thread is to be believed, with two more of the top 7 to be filled in by Viv and de Villiers.

With arguments for Kapil in the tail as well.

It's garbage posting is what it is.

 

[marc71178]

Close number of balls but that’s not exactly the point.

When a player play fewer number of tests, he can run in all day and bowl and then rest for a longer period of time.

Say if Kallis was skipping tests and only played 93 tests, he could have bowled more. The fact is Kallis bowled fewer overs per tests but he played more tests which means he was still bowling more often. They take a toll on the body.

Kallis also played tons of ODIs to go with the 166 tests.

Relatively speaking, it's not actually that close in terms of balls bowled and yet you have decided that Sobers bowled more because he played fewer Tests? How on earth does that equate to Kallis bowling more often?

Sobers actually bowled more because he was a front line bowler for his team and averaged just shy of 40 overs per Test against roughly 20 a Test for Kallis.

 

[vcs]

Except that you're the one dismissing Sharma as an "overrated, modern stat padding flat track bully" while refusing to consider that Gilchrist may also have had technical weaknesses, just because he played in a previous era in a side that won World Cups.

EDIT : @Stephen

 

[marc71178]

Few apart from Australian fans from Bevan's era would think this is categorically true.

To be fair, the 2 are fairly close but I'd still pick Dhoni over Bevan, partly because his keeping means that you have more flexibility to pick better openers.

 

[Logan]

I don’t think no Aussie cricketer except with the possible exception of McGrath deserves a spot in a ATG ODI eleven.

Rohit > Gilchrist as an opener

Kohli > Ponting as middle order batsman

Dhoni > Bevan as finisher

Kapil > Symonds as all round option

Saqlain and Murali > Warne as a spinner

 

[Logan]

Only someone who has a personal bias will say someone averaging 36 as an opener is better than someone averaging 57 as an opener.

 

[sunilz]

Except that you're the one dismissing Sharma as an "overrated, modern stat padding flat track bully" while refusing to consider that Gilchrist may also have had technical weaknesses, just because he played in a previous era in a side that won World Cups.

EDIT : @Stephen

Gilchrist has 2 centuries in Asia in 55 games . He simply wasn't good enough to be even flat track bully .

 

[Logan]

Gilchrist isn’t even Australia’s best ODI opener and some people he think he should open alongside Sachin in ATG ODI eleven.