Alltime ODI XI

[Matt79]

I've posted a team earlier, but I was thinking about my real alltime ODI team today and it is, for now:
Tendaulkar
Gilchrist
Ponting
Richards
Dean Jones
Bevan
Kapil Dev
Wasim
Waqar
Murali
McGrath

Four top drawer bowlers and one very good one. Great top six, and Dev for the slog overs. Tail might be slightly long but with the top six there, I doubt it would be a problem.

 

[tooextracool]

More often than not the best players bat higher up so that they can play maximum overs (positions 1-4).

Yes so what is the point of having Ponting at 5 then?
Ponting bats higher up because hes better batting higher up. But hes not better than Tendulkar, Lara, Richards or Bevan.

 

[tooextracool]

At six, seven you can use players who have been better excellent down (Bevan, Klusener) but if you have some one who player for his team at 4 but has to play at 5 in a world XI, it is not that big a deal.

Except that Bevan is not an 'excellent' player down the order, not batting first anyways. Infact more often than not he gets blamed for going too slowly at the end.
Also Ponting bats regularly at 3, putting him down 2 positions from his regular position simply because of his success at 3 in ODI cricket is bound to have a negative impact.

You can see this in switching from FC to test cricket as well. A player who batted high in FC cricket has to bat a bit lower down in test cricket because there are other players who have done a similar job in their own FC teams. It is really not that big a deal.

Except, and how many times does it have to be said, that test cricket is different from ODI cricket?
Every position from 2-7 is different from each other in ODI cricket, whereas in test cricket there really isnt much difference between any position from 4 downwards. As such youd find very few players in FC cricket that bat at 4 and have them opening the batting in test match cricket. Same way you dont pick someone(or you shouldnt) when he bats at 3 in list A cricket and have him bat at 5 or 6 in ODIs because he has to perform a completely different role.

 

[tooextracool]

No one is doing that. They are making minor adjustments which make the team stronger. Many have picked Ponting at 5 for example and not doing away with one of Lara, Richards and Ponting just because they weren't the rgeatest at x,y,z positions. Just going mechanically and picking the best player in each position historically in ODI's doesn't work..

Historically?! Im sorry what part of the history of ODI cricket disproves my argument? No there are far far more examples of the contrary with many many players struggling to bat outside of their regular positions. Tendulkar and Lara being the most obvious examples.

You compare your team with my team or some of the other teams people have put in. Flexibility in selections have to be there rather than following a mechanical approach. Sorry, I disagree with your logic.

Flexibility can only be there when the players are flexible enough. When you have someone whos averaging 60 at 4, you have another thats averaging 40 at 4 and another averaging 40 at 5, you pick the player averaging 60 at 4 and the player averaging 40 to bat at 5. you dont pick the player averaging 40 at 4 simply because he is a very good player. Theres already a better player in that position, simple as that.
If flexibility were the case then why dont you see players bat out of position every game then? Why dont players average similarly in different positions? fact is most players want to bat in the same position every game because they are used to it and they are more comfortable with it. Why on earth would you have Ponting bat at 5 for example when hes done so for all of 6 games in his entire career, with a HS of 18.

 

[tooextracool]

My statement essentially which you tried to contradict - A player who batted high in domestic one day cricket has to bat a bit lower down in one day international cricket because there are other players who have done a similar job in their own teams.

A bit lower doesn't mean the role changes in your words. 5 versus 4 for example.

5 versus 4 is quite different. At 5 you are less likely to play the new ball and you are required to be good at getting singles in the middle overs as well as scoring quickly at the death.However 3 and 4 may not be that different. Again by even your own logic the point of having Ponting whos played 220 odd Odis at 3 bat 2 positions down at 5 is what exactly?

 

[Pratters]

TEC - you have made your point and I have made mine. We don't agree obviously on this.

Cheers.