ODI Batting Poll - Discussions

[Cricket Bliss]

Taylor and Aravinda were voted in I think.

Inzi, Bairstow, Pietersen, Dilshan, Gayle, Dhawan definitely unlucky. Dhawan was better than Ganguly who imo is way too high.

Ganguly wins easily to his longevity

 

[ankitj]

Two world cup finals, player of the tournament in 2019 , longevity , second fastest batsmen to 7000 odi runs ever @ average just under 50 , averages 60+ in World Cups , he's always been a batsmen that can play the situation well . A worthy top 30 bat

But also highest ICC career rating of 799, highest rank of "only" #3. Never heard anyone say Williamson is among the best ODI batsmen in the world at any point during his career.

 

[capt_Luffy]

But also highest ICC career rating of 799, highest rank of "only" #3. Never heard anyone say Williamson is among the best ODI batsmen in the world at any point during his career.

Please no ICC Rankings

 

[Silver Silva]

But also highest ICC career rating of 799, highest rank of "only" #3. Never heard anyone say Williamson is among the best ODI batsmen in the world at any point during his career.

I don't really think those ICC ratings are a fair reflection of ODI cricket ..Even Geoff Marsh has a higher rating than Williamson which is BS .

Being among the top 3 is difficult because
from the time Williamson started till now his career has overlapped with maybe 10-12 bats who have already been voted in the top 27 ATG odi bats

 

[ankitj]

Please no ICC Rankings

I don't really think those ICC ratings are a fair reflection of ODI cricket ..Even Geoff Marsh has a higher rating than Williamson which is BS .

Being among the top 3 is difficult because
from the time Williamson started till now his career has overlapped with maybe 10-12 bats who have already been voted in the top 27 ATG odi bats

Yeah if you ignore his poor SR, ignore ICC ratings (ok I partially agree with the objection) and ignore that he has never at any point been mentioned among the best in the world, then yes his votes are justified.

 

[ankitj]

Ok that's it. Debate on rating KW in top 30 is not worth more of my time.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah if you ignore his poor SR, ignore ICC ratings (ok I partially agree with the objection) and ignore that he has never at any point been mentioned among the best in the world, then yes his votes are justified.

So like SR, ICC ratings and peer ratings; later two of which both sucks. FTR I don't have him in top 30, but you overrate SR over Average way too much imo.

 

[Line and Length]

Chiming in late on the KW debate, I'm not denying his worthiness of a Top 30 position but, when compared to another current player in Joe Root, the voting seems somewhat skewed. Both are of the same era and still playing and KW has a 1.9 advantage over Root in batting average. Conversely, Root has a 5.05 superior SR yet Williamson almost doubled Root's vote in the last round.

I also believe that, while an admirable quality, longevity appears to be a big factor influencing some voters. A quick glance at recent inclusions and players receiving votes in the latest round reveals 300+ ODI games has impressed a number of CW members more than their actual performances over time (ie averages & SR).

 

[ankitj]

Root > KW

 

[Cricket Bliss]

guess Glenn Tuner > Quinton de Kock
the only limitation both has is lack of longevity...but Turner atleast played until 36.
Turner also average 47 (equivalent to Richards)... a good SR of 68...and an average near 50 as an opener... good World Cup record too

Also Sangakkara...played 2.5 times more matches than de Kock

 

[Line and Length]

Also Sangakkara...played 2.5 times more matches than de Kock

A case of longevity (404 games v 155) but QdK has it all over Sanga when it comes to both average (45.74 v 41.99) ans Strike Rate (96.65 v 78.86).

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sanga's SR is really bad considering the era he played in. Very lop-sided record too, in that he was genuinely amazing for the last 5 years of his career (averared 50+), but he was a very poor ODI batsman for the first decade, where he averaged 36 @ a SR of 74 in a very flat era of batting.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sanga's SR is really bad considering the era he played in. Very lop-sided record too, in that he was genuinely amazing for the last 5 years of his career (averared 50+), but he was a very poor ODI batsman for the first decade, where he averaged 36 @ a SR of 74 in a very flat era of batting.

2015 WC was ATG stuff. You know I used to rate him in top 20 as I specifically got to watch just the last 5 years or so (from 2011 WC precisely)

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Root > KW

Nah.

Re their strike rates, both play important roles in their teams but follow a template.

Root plays for a team that picks sloggers to 10/11 who aren't very good bowlers, so they target 350. They all have to bat aggressively. As a result, Root has a higher s/r.

Williamson is in a team that bats to 8, but has vastly superior bowlers to England. Thus 240-280 is often a winning score. The openers (Baz/ Guptill/Ryder/Munro/Ravindra/Conway etc.) try to get a decent run rate, then the 3/4/5 (KW, Taylor/Mitchell, and Elliott/Latham) build a strong base for the 6-8 (Anderson/Neesham/Phillips, Ronchi/CDG/Bracewell, N McCullum/Vettori/Santner) to finish the innings aggressively.

They follow what the team needs.

Williamson was actually scoring really quickly in the game v SA thus week, but after the loss of a couple of wickets slowed down to guarantee the win.

 

[ankitj]

Sangakkara in 2015 world cup and Dravid in 1999 world cup are reminders of how ordinary players can randomly have great World cups.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Great WC>>>>>>feasting on JAMODIs.
90s and 2000s were still alright, but now when no one really sents a full team for bilaterals anymore, and really only care for the WC re ODIs, it's the thing that matters way more than them. By stats, Gill already is Great. But I find it funny he had huge year averaging a **** ton in 2023, but was our 5th best batsman in the World Cup.

 

[ankitj]

Yeah since arrival of IPL, ODI cricket has not been the same.

However Kohli scoring beast mode hundreds chasing 330+ scores in non world cup matches against full strength teams still tells your more about his ODI greatness than Sangakkara randomly scoring 4 hundreds in world cup 2015.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah since arrival of IPL, ODI cricket has not been the same.

However Kohli scoring beast mode hundreds chasing 330+ scores in non world cup matches against full strength teams still tells your more about this ODI greatness than Sangakkara randomly scoring 4 hundreds in world cup 2015.

Agreed. But that's not the norm but exception. Kohli still did Great in WCs as well, without which he just couldn't be placed alongside SRT

 

[MasterBlaster24]

To be honest, I don't know why people overrate ODI batters from the 2000s who had poor sr.

 

[Cricket Bliss]

A case of longevity (404 games v 155) but QdK has it all over Sanga when it comes to both average (45.74 v 41.99) ans Strike Rate (96.65 v 78.86).

de Kock also has his stats better than Ponting despite playing the difficult home conditions and opening... but this man ended his career at the age of 31....that is too young... Sangakkara peak began only after that age...guy was successful enough to play 400 ODI and 14000 runs