Dhoni v Gilchrist

[Gob]

I've always wanted to have Ponting in the OD side because he was a big game player and can win a game on the field but resurgence of Kohli and DeVillers meant there was no room for him but Red changed my mind recently and now i roll with

Gilchrist
Tendulkar
Ponting
Richards
Kohli
DeVilliers
Flintoff
Wasim
Malinga
Murali
McGrath

Yeah i know Maling is the odd one overall but the bloke is literally unplayable at the death. I would bring him to the attack after 25 overs and bowl him to the end

 

[honestbharani]

Was the 2011 WC the first time Knuckle ball was introduced in international cricket?

 

[Spark]

Was the 2011 WC the first time Knuckle ball was introduced in international cricket?

I swear that Nathan Bracken and a few others had been experimenting with it throughout the 2000s. Not with the same efficacy though.

 

[honestbharani]

I swear that Nathan Bracken and a few others had been experimenting with it throughout the 2000s. Not with the same efficacy though.

I think many were trying various releases of slower balls and varieties of slower balls, like the 3 quarter pace and the really slower ball etc etc. But I do not recall that particular release being trialled.

 

[Jayro]

I must have missed a lot of cricket

Yes ;
Check - Trescothick , Nick Knight, Greame Smith, Gibbs, Chris Gayle, Sanath, Sehwag, Anwar, Gary Kirsten ---- in past there have been many very good openers( I am just recalling from the top of hat) - that was before Gilchrist -- like Desmond Haynes,
Now you might be swayed a lot by the fact that Gilchrist batting for a champion team which was inevitably winning alot would make you think Gilchrist alone was winning it.

There are many more batsmen at the top who were equally good in ODI's---- now to say it again at the risk of sounding like a broken record , Gilchrist; based on batting alone ( minus his wicketkeeping) - would not make it into an all time great Odi eleven --- he was what with an average of 35 ?

 

[Gob]

Yes ;
Check - Trescothick , Nick Knight, Greame Smith, Gibbs, Chris Gayle, Sanath, Sehwag, Anwar, Gary Kirsten ---- in past there have been many very good openers( I am just recalling from the top of hat) - that was before Gilchrist -- like Desmond Haynes,
Now you might be swayed a lot by the fact that Gilchrist batting for a champion team which was inevitably winning alot would make you think Gilchrist alone was winning it.

There are many more batsmen at the top who were equally good in ODI's---- now to say it again at the risk of sounding like a broken record , Gilchrist; based on batting alone ( minus his wicketkeeping) - would not make it into an all time great Odi eleven --- he was what with an average of 35 ?

No i certainly didn't think that and i'm struggling to think how "not single handedly winning it" should make him any lesser than what he was. Gilchrist played fair share of is OD cricket in the 90s when the scoring rates were lot slower and still ended up striking it at 96. You know what there is a better way to look at this



These are the openers from Gilchrist's period. Tendulkar aside, the ones who averages more than Gilchrist have significantly lower strike rates.

 

[sunilz]

Chris Gayle could have been more destructive than Gilchrist/Sehwag if he wanted. Maybe he batted responsibly in ODIs.

 

[Jack1]

No i certainly didn't think that and i'm struggling to think how "not single handedly winning it" should make him any lesser than what he was. Gilchrist played fair share of is OD cricket in the 90s when the scoring rates were lot slower and still ended up striking it at 96. You know what there is a better way to look at this

View attachment 29480

These are the openers from Gilchrist's period. Tendulkar aside, the ones who averages more than Gilchrist have significantly lower strike rates.

What does Gilchrist average, including strike rate, in this era at opener in your brain then? I am waiting for someone brave enough to put this down on paper. Whatever you (or I) guess is conjecture. Realise it's possible Gilchrist only averaged 36.5 in this era. It's possible he averaged less. The different parameters might have lowered Gilchrist's performance. Although it's unlikely we don't know for sure. This also means his strike rate might not have gone up either (no matter what he would have averaged)

There is no one here that's said Gilchrist isn't an ATG opener for his era. The issue is with overvaluing him compared to current openers, ODI cricket has evolved massively since then and there are different pressures. Gilchrist didn't average enough for that overvaluation despite the strike rate. It's proven by Bevan that Gilchrist shouldn't get bonus marks for being good in test cricket in that era - when people are undervaluing modern openers based on their test cricket - it's just illogical cherry picking. If he averaged 40.00+ then I would consider him the best ODI opener across eras, but he's 3.5 short of that.

 

[Nintendo]

What does Gilchrist average, including strike rate, in this era at opener in your brain then? I am waiting for someone brave enough to put this down on paper. Whatever you (or I) guess is conjecture. Realise it's possible Gilchrist only averaged 36.5 in this era. It's possible he averaged less. The different parameters might have lowered Gilchrist's performance. Although it's unlikely we don't know for sure. This also means his strike rate might not have gone up either (no matter what he would have averaged)

There is no one here that's said Gilchrist isn't an ATG opener for his era. The issue is with overvaluing him compared to current openers, ODI cricket has evolved massively since then and there are different pressures. Gilchrist didn't average enough for that overvaluation despite the strike rate. It's proven by Bevan that Gilchrist shouldn't get bonus marks for being good in test cricket in that era - when people are undervaluing modern openers based on their test cricket - it's just illogical cherry picking. If he averaged 40.00+ then I would consider him the best ODI opener across eras, but he's 3.5 short of that.

How many opener's averaged 40+ at the SR gilly went at in the 90's? Quick statsguru search says that only 6 openers averaged over 40 over a period of more than 50 innings in the 90's, and the only one of those to strike above 85, not to mention gilly's 90 was tendulkar, who frankly is a freak and basically universally aclaimed as the best ODI opener ever. 3 openers averaged 35+ at 80+ playing more then 50 innings in that era, it was anwar, tendulkar and gilly. Acting like gilly suddenly would have performed exactly the same in an era where 300+ is par to an era where 220-250 was par is absolutely insane, especially considering that opening went from one of the most challenging jobs in the format to the position everyone want's to bat in.

 

[Gob]

What does Gilchrist average, including strike rate, in this era at opener in your brain then? I am waiting for someone brave enough to put this down on paper. Whatever you (or I) guess is conjecture. Realise it's possible Gilchrist only averaged 36.5 in this era. It's possible he averaged less. The different parameters might have lowered Gilchrist's performance. Although it's unlikely we don't know for sure. This also means his strike rate might not have gone up either (no matter what he would have averaged)

There is no one here that's said Gilchrist isn't an ATG opener for his era. The issue is with overvaluing him compared to current openers, ODI cricket has evolved massively since then and there are different pressures. Gilchrist didn't average enough for that overvaluation despite the strike rate. It's proven by Bevan that Gilchrist shouldn't get bonus marks for being good in test cricket in that era - when people are undervaluing modern openers based on their test cricket - it's just illogical cherry picking. If he averaged 40.00+ then I would consider him the best ODI opener across eras, but he's 3.5 short of that.

Let me counter this question with another question. Where/how would you rate Sanath Jayasuriya?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

No i certainly didn't think that and i'm struggling to think how "not single handedly winning it" should make him any lesser than what he was. Gilchrist played fair share of is OD cricket in the 90s when the scoring rates were lot slower and still ended up striking it at 96. You know what there is a better way to look at this

View attachment 29480

These are the openers from Gilchrist's period. Tendulkar aside, the ones who averages more than Gilchrist have significantly lower strike rates.

Nice to see Romie Kaluwitharana on this list.

 

[Jack1]

Let me counter this question with another question. Where/how would you rate Sanath Jayasuriya?

It is conjecture that Gilchrist or Jayasuria are better than Roy, considering Roy's ODI and WC stats. That's without mentioning others.

Jayasuria is an ATG opener for ODIs

 

[stephen]

It is conjecture that Gilchrist or Jayasuria are better than Roy, considering Roy's ODI and WC stats. That's without mentioning others.

Jayasuria is an ATG opener for ODIs

Jayasuriya averaged less at a slower strike rate than Gilchrist BTW.

If we're going purely of the part world cup stats, maybe we should hold Carey up to be the greatest keeper/ bat of all time. I don't seriously put him in the same ball park as the real greats, but ODIs since around 2015 have been statistical cancer, particularly those played in England. There has been nothing at all resembling a balance between bat and ball and that has massively over inflated batting averages/ strike rates.

I did an era standardisation exercise previously and while I can't remember the exact numbers, Gilchrist would have struck at around 115 and averaged around 43 in today's era, all else being equal (these numbers could be a bit off, I haven't dug them up and am going based on memory).

Make of that what you will, but Gilchrist is an ATG opener even if you discount his keeping. Trying to deny that fact isn't the smartest thing to do.

 

[Jack1]

Jayasuriya averaged less at a slower strike rate than Gilchrist BTW.

If we're going purely of the part world cup stats, maybe we should hold Carey up to be the greatest keeper/ bat of all time. I don't seriously put him in the same ball park as the real greats, but ODIs since around 2015 have been statistical cancer, particularly those played in England. There has been nothing at all resembling a balance between bat and ball and that has massively over inflated batting averages/ strike rates.

I did an era standardisation exercise previously and while I can't remember the exact numbers, Gilchrist would have struck at around 115 and averaged around 43 in today's era, all else being equal (these numbers could be a bit off, I haven't dug them up and am going based on memory).

Make of that what you will, but Gilchrist is an ATG opener even if you discount his keeping. Trying to deny that fact isn't the smartest thing to do.

This post is weird. First line isn't relevant to anything and obvious. Conclusion line suggests I, or anyone else, said otherwise. Bairstow for example has better stats than your personal era standardisation for Gilchrist by the way. 50.91 average at 109.15 at opener are better than your predicted stats for Gilchrist. Bairstow is just one example.

The debate is about those claiming Gilchrist plays in an ODI ATG type XI without the gloves, not if Gilchrist is an ATG level ODI batsman. This stemmed from a claim he would get in any ODI team in history without the gloves - he wouldn't.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yes ;
Check - Trescothick , Nick Knight, Greame Smith, Gibbs, Chris Gayle, Sanath, Sehwag, Anwar, Gary Kirsten ---- in past there have been many very good openers( I am just recalling from the top of hat) - that was before Gilchrist -- like Desmond Haynes,
Now you might be swayed a lot by the fact that Gilchrist batting for a champion team which was inevitably winning alot would make you think Gilchrist alone was winning it.

There are many more batsmen at the top who were equally good in ODI's---- now to say it again at the risk of sounding like a broken record , Gilchrist; based on batting alone ( minus his wicketkeeping) - would not make it into an all time great Odi eleven --- he was what with an average of 35 ?

Most of these are well below Gilchrist even on batting alone. Trescothick, Knight, Kirsten and Smith? Really? This is why you need to watch and understand cricket, not just read numbers on a screen

The debate is about those claiming Gilchrist plays in an ODI ATG type XI without the gloves, not if Gilchrist is an ATG level ODI batsman. This stemmed from a claim he would get in any ODI team in history without the gloves - he wouldn't.

I don't know if he plays in an ATG XI without the gloves, maybe not. But I can't name 1 other than Sachin that is clearly better than him. Can definitely see a Jayasuriya (who was not a better bat than Gilchrist by any metric) being as opener instead of him as an all-rounder depending on team balance.

Will also pointlessly reiterate how massively you are overrating current ODI openers. If you're playing your ATG team against a second-string national attack on a highway with 60 meter boundaries, 2 new balls that remain hard but don't move off the straight - sure go play with your Roy and Bairstow lol

 

[Burgey]

What does Gilchrist average, including strike rate, in this era at opener in your brain then? I am waiting for someone brave enough to put this down on paper. Whatever you (or I) guess is conjecture.

By the same token how do you know what Dhoni would average in the 90s/ early 00s?

If there's no conjecture these threads wouldn't exist. Which, of course, would be awesome. But still.

 

[Burgey]

Most of these are well below Gilchrist even on batting alone. Trescothick, Knight, Kirsten and Smith? Really? This is why you need to watch and understand cricket, not just read numbers on a screen

I don't know if he plays in an ATG XI without the gloves, maybe not. But I can't name 1 other than Sachin that is clearly better than him. Can definitely see a Jayasuriya (who was not a better bat than Gilchrist by any metric) being as opener instead of him as an all-rounder depending on team balance.

Will also pointlessly reiterate how massively you are overrating current ODI openers. If you're playing your ATG team against a second-string national attack on a highway with 60 meter boundaries, 2 new balls that remain hard but don't move off the straight - sure go play with your Roy and Bairstow lol

Whenever I hear Nick Knight regarded as a very good player in any format of the game, I have a little vommy in my mouth. Bloke was cod ordinary.

 

[Jack1]

I don't know if he plays in an ATG XI without the gloves, maybe not. But I can't name 1 other than Sachin that is clearly better than him. Can definitely see a Jayasuriya (who was not a better bat than Gilchrist by any metric) being as opener instead of him as an all-rounder depending on team balance.

Will also pointlessly reiterate how massively you are overrating current ODI openers. If you're playing your ATG team against a second-string national attack on a highway with 60 meter boundaries, 2 new balls that remain hard but don't move off the straight - sure go play with your Roy and Bairstow lol

You are massively underrating current openers with zero logical substance for it. I am not overrating anyone buddy, you're the one with the issue with recent ATG level ODI openers. An ATG opener in any era is any ATG level opener in every era, it is complete and utter nonsense logically to reason otherwise.

After accepting this (you seem to have extreme difficulty being fair to some of the greatest ODI batsmen in history) you standardise for a different era however you wish to do so. Liking Stephen's post - who in fact doesn't/didn't realise he's agreeing with me (considering his era standardisation on Gilchrist vs Bairstow) is certainly an interesting and desperate take. You can cry as much as you want about Roy and Bairstow - both have incredibly strong ODI and ODI WC stats - there is no where to go for you mathematically and logically. You are reducing things to pure conjecture and emotion.

 

[Burgey]

buddy

He's not your buddy.

 

[TheJediBrah]

You are massively underrating current openers with zero logical substance for it. I am not overrating anyone buddy, you're the one with the issue with recent ATG level ODI openers. An ATG opener in any era is any ATG level opener in every era, it is complete and utter nonsense logically to reason otherwise.

After accepting this (you seem to have extreme difficulty being fair to some of the greatest ODI batsmen in history) you standardise for a different era however you wish to do so. Liking Stephen's post - who in fact doesn't/didn't realise he's agreeing with me (considering his era standardisation on Gilchrist vs Bairstow) is certainly an interesting and desperate take. You can cry as much as you want about Roy and Bairstow - both have incredibly strong ODI and ODI WC stats - there is no where to go for you mathematically and logically. You are reducing things to pure conjecture and emotion.

yeah I'm the emotional one

yikes