Best ODI fielder in this list

[Victor Ian]

Jonty Rhodes is such an overhyped turd.

At the time he was playing he was not more effective than any of a number of Aussie fielders. He fielded in the position most likely to look razzle dazzle and played a number of games for his spectacular efforts, but really, they were coming at a rate similar to ponting or symonds or any number of fielders for that matter. The only reason people think of him is because at the time, Australia were rare in having good fielders. It is a big part of what gave Australia a jump on other teams on the world stage in the 90's. Then SA joined the fray again and there was another player on the world stage that could field like an Aussie. Consequently, people came in their pants. Now most teams have realised that fielding is an essential part of cricket training.
As for Rhodes' anticipation...pfft. One ball he anticiaptes left and the ball goes left. The next he anticipates right and the ball goes left. It is confirmational bias.
Basically - I think Rhodes was a good fielder, but FMD is he overhyped. I wouldn't be surprised if he started the hype himself, because without it, he would not even have played international level. Ponting shits on and grows tomatoes in him. Look at Pontings greatest fielding hits on youtube. It goes for an hour. As for Rhodes, you get little clips of 4 minutes that are all repeats of him running into the stumps. What a klutz!


OK

 

[Sunil1z]

7/10 for the effort

 

[Victor Ian]

7/10 for the effort

You know I'm right.

Overhyped!

 

[Sunil1z]

Not sure about overhyped part but in late 90s and early 2000, every kid in my locality wanted to field like him . And the best fielder was given nick name of Johnty.

 

[ankitj]

Jonty's fielding is overhyped like Bradman's batting is.

 

[Victor Ian]

Not sure about overhyped part but in late 90s and early 2000, every kid in my locality wanted to field like him . And the best fielder was given nick name of Johnty.

That's because he has a name that is appealing to children. You could have wanted to field like Mark, or Ricky, or Andrew. They didn't need to anticipate, because they were in the right position to start with.
Seriously, though, Jonty ran through the stumps once, got aired on every tv channel doing it and his hype machine went into overdrive. I never once thought, 'wow - this guy is amazing' when watching games he played against Australia. But that was probably because I was used to seeing that kind of ****.
Catches win matches, is what they say. If Rhodes was really any good, he'd have been put where the catches went, such as happened to Waugh and Ponting. Instead, he was put where he could stop a few runs instead of taking a few catches.

 

[Flem274*]

90s fielders are overhyped in general.

The 00s Australian, New Zealand and South African units were a level above everyone else. People never talk about the likes of Lou Vincent and Hamish Marshall patrolling the ring but there were like 20 blokes through that period who were absolutely vicious.

It levelled up again in the 10s when a lot of quick bowlers became superb fielders and more sides joined the top 3 of the 00s.

 

[ankitj]

Yeah, fielding is one discipline that has definitely been getting better over time that too at fairly rapid pace.

 

[Prince EWS]

Jonty's fielding is overhyped like Bradman's batting is.

Yep, not unlike your face and your posts.

 

[Prince EWS]

That's because he has a name that is appealing to children. You could have wanted to field like Mark, or Ricky, or Andrew. They didn't need to anticipate, because they were in the right position to start with.
Seriously, though, Jonty ran through the stumps once, got aired on every tv channel doing it and his hype machine went into overdrive. I never once thought, 'wow - this guy is amazing' when watching games he played against Australia. But that was probably because I was used to seeing that kind of ****.
Catches win matches, is what they say. If Rhodes was really any good, he'd have been put where the catches went, such as happened to Waugh and Ponting. Instead, he was put where he could stop a few runs instead of taking a few catches.

I do kind of love this take. The best fielders in Tests field in slips. Saving a boundary here or there means **** all in Tests compared to taking all your catches.

Obviously very different in ODIs though (which is what the thread title says), especially with the amount of riskier singles taken and the pressure that can mount with dot balls.

 

[Sunil1z]

If this thread was about Test then Dravid, Mark Waugh , Kallis and Jayawardene would also have been option.

 

[Sunil1z]

@Fuller Pilch
Would have added Stephen Fleming also in option.

 

[Victor Ian]

I do kind of love this take. The best fielders in Tests field in slips. Saving a boundary here or there means **** all in Tests compared to taking all your catches.

Obviously very different in ODIs though (which is what the thread title says), especially with the amount of riskier singles taken and the pressure that can mount with dot balls.

I didn't mention slips, as I was aware this is ODI. Fact is that Jonty was not better at any aspect that Ponting or Waugh did in ODI's. It is all hype that is not based on numbers. Rhodes was great, maybe equal to Australia's best fielders of the time, or say that the other way if it makes you feel better - but he was not in a league of his own. He did not take more catches in his position than the others (not statistically significantly), nor is there anyway to measure if he cut off more runs. He just made it look like he was doing something because he flailed about rather than just stopping the ball languidly like Mark, or stopping it and running you out like Ponting.

 

[Migara]

Yeah but the other ones everyone else had already mentioned! (apart from Gary Pratt) (oh and apart from Fairbrother but he was also absolutely exceptional).

Have just watched a Mahanama medley and whilst there's a couple of stunnas in there but nothing to suggest he was anywhere near Fairbrother, Randall or Penney as a fielder.

Randall here:

Derek Randall - Great Fielding - YouTube

Way, way better than Fairbrother. He was equally good everywhere in the field, and easily the quickest mover I have seen. He averaged 29 with the bat even with a horrible technique, that good was his hand eye coordination.

 

[Sunil1z]

29 batting average is not that high ?

 

[Migara]

29 batting average is not that high ?

For a normal bat yes. But for that kind of technique it is phenomenal. If I had that technique, I'd struggle to average 2.9 runs per dig. Going towards off stump and playing across was his MO to score. Shows the right shoulder every time he drives. Other than for 89-93 period, where he was at his best with reflexes, would have struggled to make even current SL side. Even after slowing considerabley in mid and late 90s, he was right up there with elite of the era. In his pomp in early 90s, he was easily the best fielder in cricket.

 

[Brook's side]

Way, way better than Fairbrother. He was equally good everywhere in the field, and easily the quickest mover I have seen. He averaged 29 with the bat even with a horrible technique, that good was his hand eye coordination.

1. Rhodes
2. Randall
3. Penney

4. Collingwood
5. Harper
6. Ponting
7. Dilshan
8. M Waugh
9. Fairbrother

Fixed.

 

[CricAddict]

That's because he has a name that is appealing to children.

Not specific to Jonty topic but I actually do believe on this. If the player's name is attractive in some way, they get endeared more and their cricketing prowess is also spoken up more.

Eg. I do feel Hobbs-Sutcliffe doesn't give the same feel as Hobbs-Hutton and so we always prefer that opening pair as the best of all time.

 

[Brook's side]

Not specific to Jonty topic but I actually do believe on this. If the player's name is attractive in some way, they get endeared more and their cricketing prowess is also spoken up more.

Eg. I do feel Hobbs-Sutcliffe doesn't give the same feel as Hobbs-Hutton and so we always prefer that opening pair as the best of all time.

Hobbs didn't play with Hutton. You're probably aware of this, but just clarifying for the sake of the readers.

 

[Archer6K]

Not specific to Jonty topic but I actually do believe on this. If the player's name is attractive in some way, they get endeared more and their cricketing prowess is also spoken up more.

Eg. I do feel Hobbs-Sutcliffe doesn't give the same feel as Hobbs-Hutton and so we always prefer that opening pair as the best of all time.