• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

What makes a good #7 in ODIs?

S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Pap Finn Keighl said:
Razzaq bowling was inferior, Kapil was a regular top 5 - 10 bowler in rankings.
Click to expand...
Was talking about his batting.

Pap Finn Keighl said:
Until 1988
Kapil played 115 matches, Imran 102
Both averaged 29 with bat.. Strike Rate difference was a Whopping 35..! In Kapil's favour.
Imran scored one century and five 50s until then, Kapil one 100 and thirteen 50s.

Its very clear, Imran's stats are skewed, because he was two different players in different phases of his career.

Also he scored only one fifty outside top 6.
65% of his 50+ scores came in top 5 batting positions.
Click to expand...
Agreed Imran had two different parts to his career.

So are you going to judge him until 88/89, at which point he averaged the same as Kapil with the bat but was a notably better bowler?

Or do you judge him by the entirety of his career, by which their bowling was close but he was a significantly better bat?

Either way, Imran was just obviously a better ODI allrounder than Kapil.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Pap Finn Keighl said:
Kapil was far better bowler.
And no one consider Klusner as a 41 avg quality batsman. If then he would have been competing Kohlis and ABDVs for a specialist bat spot in alltime 11s.
41 avg at 90 strike rate in 90s/early 00s is a premium atg batsman category.
Click to expand...
Klusener is a least as much better than Kapil with the bat, than Kapil is better with the ball, probably more.

But no.7 in most strong teams I would prefer a finisher like Klusener who can also bash the ball to a pinch-hitter like Kapil who is a better bowler.
 
Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
Fuller Pilch said:
Without going to statsguru, who has the best batting average at no 7 (minimum 1,000 runs)?

If no one has guessed by the time I will reveal the answer.
Click to expand...
I'll admit to going to Statsguru and that is a very amusing result. The very much maligned....

It's funny seeing Harris there with the most runs and a strike rate of just 67!!
 
Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Klusener is a least as much better than Kapil with the bat, than Kapil is better with the ball, probably more.

But no.7 in most strong teams I would prefer a finisher like Klusener who can also bash the ball to a pinch-hitter like Kapil who is a better bowler.
Click to expand...
Having looked at the top run scorers at Number 7, it becomes apparent that you have to go a long way down the list before you even find Klusener. Of his 171 ODI's, he only batted at seven 24 times.

It's perhaps ironic that the man being lauded as the near perfect Number 7 very rarely actually performed that role.
 
Kenneth Viljoen

Kenneth Viljoen

International Regular
Fearless , High Strike Rate , Three Dimesional Cricketer (Offers something with ball and in the field), Good Finisher/Batting with Lower order ..

So guys like Glenn Maxwell, Lance Klusener , Ravindra Jadeja , Andrew Flintoff .. I want X factor play at No.7
 
Molehill

Molehill

Cricketer Of The Year
Fuller Pilch said:
Without going to statsguru, who has the best batting average at no 7 (minimum 1,000 runs)?

If no one has guessed by the time I will reveal the answer.
Click to expand...
What's also interesting in the list of Number 7's with over 1,000 runs is the player with the lowest batting average (and by quite some margin too). Clearly, a spot too high for Wasim Akram.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Molehill said:
Having looked at the top run scorers at Number 7, it becomes apparent that you have to go a long way down the list before you even find Klusener. Of his 171 ODI's, he only batted at seven 24 times.

It's perhaps ironic that the man being lauded as the near perfect Number 7 very rarely actually performed that role.
Click to expand...
That is more due to SA's long batting lineup and other all-rounders like Pollock who batted ahead of Klusener who would finish the innings.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Something posters are missing is that ODI role are rarely so fixed by a single position.

So someone like Kapil, Imran or Klusener can be called up the order or down depending on how the innings goes or bat at no.8 too.
 
Nintendo

Nintendo

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
His bowling isnt good enough.
Click to expand...
Depends on team makeup. If it's an ATG team you can easily pick an opener like watson/jayasuriya and have a #7 who's bowling isn't as dynamic. Not saying you need to since an ATG team will have such a strong top #6 no matter the second opener, but there's flexibility in that.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Fuller Pilch said:
Without going to statsguru, who has the best batting average at no 7 (minimum 1,000 runs)?

If no one has guessed by the time I wake up I will reveal the answer.
Click to expand...
For those who are interested, it is actually Mahmudullah. He isn't much of a bowler, but it doesn't matter for Bangladesh when they have an ATG ODI allrounder (Shakib) and a world class keeper bat in M. Rahim ahead in the order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top