Greatest All Time ODI XI

[Bolo]

I can get behind this except for Bevan in place of Symonds.

I have just come to realize how good Imran was in ODIs too. Somehow always thought his batting was laboriously slow but that's not true.

Ditto on the Imran was slow impression. Can't shake it even though I know it's not really true. IDK, but I feel like I might have got the idea from WC 92. That SF innings was a grind that left his teammates in deep dwang. That was one of the most memorable matches ever. Might have imprinted on me, especially considering I hadn't followed him before.

Anyway, I want either 2 bowling ARs or a batting AR with the tail. I feel like Pollock/Imran would be a pretty big advantage with the ball over bowler/bat under a lot of conditions. Probably fancy the extra bat to score more runs, but I'm not sure to what extent.

Anyway, I'm not sure if Imran is the man for the job. His bowling stats bother me to some extent. So many from his era are a long way ahead. Especially Garner. Proportionally it's like comparing imran to a rubbish part timer. I feel like someone will make you feel this.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Sachin - Lara
Viv
Kohli
ABDV
Dhoni (c)
Kapil
Hadlee
Akram
Saqlain
Garner

2nd 11
Jayasoorya
Gilly
Abbas
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Klusner
Pollock
Murali
Donald
McGrath

Unlucky - Imran , Watson , Symonds, Flintoff

 

[harsh.ag]

Sachin, Viv, Kohli, ABdV, and Wasim are the only confirmed picks. Will find these 5 in every XI.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

You have an AT XI with one player (and he as an alternative only) from a side which has won five WCs and which went over a decade without losing a match in the biggest tournament there is? Itstl

Ok.Tom moody instead of Akram. Happy ?

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Ifs and buts...

Applicable to Viv and Dhawan too. Right ?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Ditto on the Imran was slow impression. Can't shake it even though I know it's not really true. IDK, but I feel like I might have got the idea from WC 92. That SF innings was a grind that left his teammates in deep dwang. That was one of the most memorable matches ever. Might have imprinted on me, especially considering I hadn't followed him before.

Imran's innings in the 92 World Cup Final was a crawl, especially at the beginning. He batted at three and they were something like 35-2 off 18 overs. It was the way the game was played then. Building an innings in tricky conditions and accelerating when set. It wouldn't happen today, but at the time it was a match winner (even though Akram got Man of the Match).

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

We have 6 better batsmen than Ponting and Beven in Sachin , Viv , abdv , kohli , dhoni and Lara .

A better wk batsman than Gilly

2 better spinners than Warne

Many comparable or better allrounders than Watson and Symonds.

And McGrath competes against Garner.

 

[Burner]

If Rohit Sharma continues this form in the WC, he might cement an opening spot alongside Tendulkar. For a long time I thought it was going to be Amla but unfortunately he's forever going to have the "never performed in the WCs" monkey on his back.

 

[Attitude]

If and buts applies to everyone, of course. Eventually, people are judged on what the numbers are and not what they could have been "if" X was different and but for Y. However, I will give you the different era argument for VIv for it was different era, rules completely different and their career are decades apart. Dhawan started 2 decades after Viv retired.

Sanga and Lara played 7 years of cricket together. How can you possibly say they are different era cricketers when Lara played 132 of his 299 (44%) ODIs after Sanga got his first SL ODIs cap? That is a substantial overlapping of careers. So the excuse that Lara and Sanga played in two completely different eras of cricket doesn't quite work.

 

[Bolo]

Imran's innings in the 92 World Cup Final was a crawl, especially at the beginning. He batted at three and they were something like 35-2 off 18 overs. It was the way the game was played then. Building an innings in tricky conditions and accelerating when set. It wouldn't happen today, but at the time it was a match winner (even though Akram got Man of the Match).

Ya. Great innings. But I don't really remember the final. The SF is the game of the early 90s because he screwed the pooch and inzi pulled a miracle.

 

[MrPrez]

I'd have:

Tendulkar
Rohit
Kohli
Richards
ABDV
Dhoni
Klusener
Akram
Garner
Murali
McGrath

 

[ankitj]

For comparison, Imran Khan's batting average and SR are both better than Allan Border. That's quite something.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

If and buts applies to everyone, of course. Eventually, people are judged on what the numbers are and not what they could have been "if" X was different and but for Y. However, I will give you the different era argument for VIv for it was different era, rules completely different and their career are decades apart. Dhawan started 2 decades after Viv retired.

Sanga and Lara played 7 years of cricket together. How can you possibly say they are different era cricketers when Lara played 132 of his 299 (44%) ODIs after Sanga got his first SL ODIs cap? That is a substantial overlapping of careers. So the excuse that Lara and Sanga played in two completely different eras of cricket doesn't quite work.

Yet , batting avgs and strike rates improved substantially in 00s .

Among batsmen scored 2500 runs or more

1990-99
45 plus avg - 1
85 plus SR - 2

2000-2009
45 plus avg - 8
85 plus SR - 18

2010-15 ( min 1500 runs )
45 plus avg - 11
85 plus SR - 32

Lara is a top 6 batsman all-time
Sanga probably top 50 all-time

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

From Sanga Debut to Lara Retirement

Sanga 36.2 AVG 74.5 SR , 6 100s from 198 matches

Lara 37.9 AVG 79.5 SR , 6 100s from 132 matches

Lara AVG almost 2 points better
SR 5 points better
And much better century ratio too.

 

[stephen]

Sachin - Lara
Viv
Kohli
ABDV
Dhoni (c)
Kapil
Hadlee
Akram
Saqlain
Garner

2nd 11
Jayasoorya
Gilly
Abbas
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Klusner
Pollock
Murali
Donald
McGrath

Unlucky - Imran , Watson , Symonds, Flintoff

Your first XI has the longest tail - longer than I've seen in any ODI side. If Donald, McGrath, Pollock and Murali take a few wickets 5-150 could easily become 200 AO.

Much as I love Lara as a batsman, he's a waste of an opener spot in an AT XI. By playing an all rounder in the spot you can drop Kapil and pick another batsman. I'd rather Jaya + Symonds than Lara + Kapil. Alternatively, you could pick Gilchrist, drop Dhoni and pick Bevan to shepherd that ridiculously long tail. Also, how does Hadlee deserve a spot over McGrath? He doesn't unless you're trying to cover for the lack of batting in your side.

Your second XI would actually win a fair percentage of games against your first XI because it's better balanced and sacrifices nothing in the bowling attack.

If I was to pick an ODI side without Australian players, I'd take something like:

Tendulkar
Lara
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Dhoni+
Klusener
Akram
Pollock
Garner
Murali

Of course they'd be facing:

Waugh
Gilchrist+
Ponting
Jones
Symonds
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Starc
Lillee
McGrath

Who while slightly weaker in the batting and fifth bowler departments would still be highly competitive.

 

[Logan]

Sachin, Viv, Kohli, ABdV, and Wasim are the only confirmed picks. Will find these 5 in every XI.

I would pick McGrath ahead of Akram. Better average, better economy rate, Better Strike Rate and performed better in World Cups as well.

 

[harsh.ag]

I would pick McGrath ahead of Akram. Better average, better economy rate, Better Strike Rate and performed better in World Cups as well.

Do you not have Wasim in your XI?

 

[trundler]

Wasim is the most iconic ODI bowler though. Won a lot of those tri series and other tournaments for Pakistan. Plus he has over 500 wickets. I'd have him for his variety and death bowling alone.

 

[harsh.ag]

Wasim is the most iconic ODI bowler though. Won a lot of those tri series and other tournaments for Pakistan. Plus he has over 500 wickets. I'd have him for his variety and death bowling alone.

My point was that even people who rate McGrath or Garner (or someone else) higher than Wasim invariably have Wasim in their XI as well.

Whilst McGrath or Garner aren't guaranteed a place. Some people pick just one of them. Some neither (but that's very rare).

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Your first XI has the longest tail - longer than I've seen in any ODI side. If Donald, McGrath, Pollock and Murali take a few wickets 5-150 could easily become 200 AO.

Much as I love Lara as a batsman, he's a waste of an opener spot in an AT XI. By playing an all rounder in the spot you can drop Kapil and pick another batsman. I'd rather Jaya + Symonds than Lara + Kapil. Alternatively, you could pick Gilchrist, drop Dhoni and pick Bevan to shepherd that ridiculously long tail. Also, how does Hadlee deserve a spot over McGrath? He doesn't unless you're trying to cover for the lack of batting in your side.

Your second XI would actually win a fair percentage of games against your first XI because it's better balanced and sacrifices nothing in the bowling attack.

If I was to pick an ODI side without Australian players, I'd take something like:

Tendulkar
Lara
Richards
Kohli
De Villiers
Dhoni+
Klusener
Akram
Pollock
Garner
Murali

Of course they'd be facing:

Waugh
Gilchrist+
Ponting
Jones
Symonds
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Starc
Lillee
McGrath

Who while slightly weaker in the batting and fifth bowler departments would still be highly competitive.

Hadlee at 8 , Akram at 9 no reason to worry about batting depth

Jaya + Symonds Inferior in both batting and bowling compared to Lara + Kapil

Gilly + Beven above Lara + Dhoni ? No way.

Akram bats above Pollock ??