Yeah, this is where I am too.Of the 3, the soonest I’d leave out is Bevan. An ODI great, obviously, but someone like Dhoni can fill his batting slot just as well. Plus you could argue that since an ATG XI is gonna have stacked batting anyway you can afford to pick players with higher strike rates in the middle order even if they average a touch less than Bevan.
Next is harder, but I’d perhaps leave out Sachin, even though I think he is the GOAT opener in ODIs. There are other gun options you can pick there, like Lara or Rohit as specialists or you could push Kohli up to open (Viv at 3) or you could use the slot to fit in a great allrounder like Gilchrist, Jayasuriya or Watson.
I don’t think there are quite as many options to replace the combination of reliability and explosiveness in batting, plus top tier fielding that de Villiers adds. But hard to say whether the gap between him and e.g. Ponting is greater than between Sachin and e.g. Lara.
Tendulkar. ATG batsman, useful bowler, good fieldsman.If you were to have only one of these three in your all time Odi eleven, who would you choose and why?
Bevan is easily at the same level as the other two. His strike rate, adjusted for era would be in the 90s today and his era adjusted average would be 70. He was miles ahead of his contemporaries in the 90s.If the idea is to have the player in an ODI all time XI, then it's Tendulkar - he's simply the best ODI opener and no one else is even close. My personal favourite is ABdV and I think he's probably the best ODI batsman of the three but you can argue that there are other options you can have in the middle order that will compensate for his absence and you can leave him out without it resulting in a very big drop in quality. Bevan is not at the same level as the other two although he was one of my favourites when watching cricket in the 90s.
My memory is tainted by instances when he could have scored faster and chose not to.Bevan is easily at the same level as the other two. His strike rate, adjusted for era would be in the 90s today and his era adjusted average would be 70. He was miles ahead of his contemporaries in the 90s.
Oh, that means Tendulkar's Avg and SR should get adjusted up more.Bevan is easily at the same level as the other two. His strike rate, adjusted for era would be in the 90s today and his era adjusted average would be 70. He was miles ahead of his contemporaries in the 90s.
Not really. It should be adjusted upwards similarly though. But Tendulkar played a few years before Bevan and many years after him (with the bigger bats etc...).Oh, that means Tendulkar's Avg and SR should get adjusted up more.
Blasphemy. One place where I would say eyes, not spreadsheets. Although spreadsheets also show how extra-ordinary he was.AB Devilliers was devastating but I think his record flatters him a bit.