Yeah this. Gilchrist wins easily taking all formats into consideration and Dhoni wins it easily if it's ODIs alone. Don't think it's as close as what other people are suggesting in ODIs.
Comparison is not asking Ganguly V Dhoni though. And Dhoni had to transition out of the great side too and the fact that he handled it meant it went less pear shaped than it could have gone otherwise. If Ganguly gets credit for the side Dhoni inherited, Dhoni gets credit for the side Kohli inherited.
Other than Tendulkar, name a single ODI opener from Gilchrist's time who was better or equally good?
More, I meant players make great captain's more than the other way. If Gilly had been made captain, rather than Ponting there would be no debate.Comparison is not asking Ganguly V Dhoni though. And Dhoni had to transition out of the great side too and the fact that he handled it meant it went less pear shaped than it could have gone otherwise. If Ganguly gets credit for the side Dhoni inherited, Dhoni gets credit for the side Kohli inherited.
I dont believe either, btw.
None who were better. Some who could be arguably as good. Saeed Anwar, Jayasuriya, Mark Waugh, Hayden, Ganguly.
We'd have taken him in a heartbeat.
Well yes, when the choice is between TOTAB or Graeme Wood, I'd be inclined to take Border as well. But this is not that contest. Dhoni here is more like Brearley or Taylor in his slump when we're talking about his record away. It ain't great tbh. Like i said, wold take him over Gilly as an ODI player, but overall I wouldn't want to build a side around a bloke who's averaging 32 away.Having seen 80s Australia, you, of all people, would know this is actually the best way to build a side.
Fairly certain that if you translate over era's bevan's sr is very comparable to dhoni's. Bevan could hit boundaries and clear the fench with ease, you don't make a 150 sr 180 against an attack of murali, wasim, kumble and vaas if you can't clear the fence, it was more that his era required him to rely on 1's and 2's with the occasional boundary. Take bevan in a modern context and he would have no trouble adapting.
yeah but finishers of that standard are as rare as hen's teeth when you look at the history of the game. There just aren't that many around. The fact Bevan was nearly/ arguably as good as Dhoni in that role doesn't detract from the latter's greatness at it.
*You, singular
100% agree, dhoni was a freak. Post was more about giving bevan a bit more credit then anil was giving him.
I am not saying he is some great batsman but you have to understand he was often batting with absolute #11s too. I dont think he was gonna be a big player outside of SC and Windies. But that is already 6 of the 12 test playing nations. And he could do a job on the roadier surfaces in Australia if he had better support. Most importantly though, for me, the ability to build a side means an ability to identify talents, captain reasonably well and leave the side in a better position than when you took over and MSD ticks these boxes.
hey he’s rated by the aussies. He made two fifties in Australia back then
Dhoni was a thoroughly average test captain wasn't he? Can't think of any players who got given chances under him who went on to be superstars or won series. Kohli is the same in LOI's.
Nah you misunderstood my point. I was trying to highlight how Bevan and Dhoni take the game away in their own fashion and how they are different in their own ways.
Pre-Bevan, sure, but after that #5 and #6 increasingly became specialist spots with unique and specific demands, not just "5th or 6th best batsman".
Ok my bad then, thought it was a dhoni>bevan type thing. Side note, what would an odi AT11 look like with both bevan and dhoni look like, I've never considered that kind of lineup because Kohli, viv, ab at 3 4 5 has always been too alluring.