-
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.
Hashim Amla- the most misleading odi stats ever
- Thread starter RK_123
- Start date
Greendige
Jayasuriya
Gilchrist
Anwar
Waugh
Lara
Yuvraj
Abbas
Miandad
Aravinda
And many more are ahead of him. Amla is nothing more tham just a very good odi batsmen who at peak of his career, was a massive bilateral bully but this is where it ends all.
Incidentally, WI are minnows in Amla's era.
Victor Ian
International Coach
I do
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nah,, Waugh, Yuvraj, Miandad, Greenidge, Jayasuriya were not quite as good as Amla.
Jayasuriya was a revelation, no doubt, but he averaged 30, almost half of what Amla does and at the same SR. Obviously Jaya's SR was better considering the era he played, but still the difference in their averages is massive.
The interesting thing about Amla's record is it's almost identical to Dhoni's with the only difference being due to batting at no.3 he has far fewer not-outs than Dhoni and they played in pretty much the same era. Yet everyone wants to rate Dhoni is a top 10 ODI bat of all-time. And really aside from his innings in the 2011 home final in India, he never did that much in tournaments did he? Some very selective memories some have.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Also, re the point about Amla averaging 45 when you strip the minnows out, umm this is what you'd expect of any batsman who averages about 50 isn't it? You wouldn't usually expect them to average more when you take out the weaker bowling attacks they faced would you?
Seems a redundant point.
Seems a redundant point.
srbhkshk
International Captain
The general idea would be that your average against non-minnow nations should be fine by itself, someone could theoretically average 50 by averaging 150 against minnows and 35 against the stronger teams. I haven't checked OP's calculations, but 44@85 in the current era would be good numbers, not great.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
One of the great moments in cricketing history was watching McGrath nonchalantly walk down the pitch to catch supposed player of the 2003 WC and laughably labelled greatest odi opener of all time Sachin Tendulkar after he spooned a top edge in the first over of the match where his side needed him to step up the most.
It was just inevitable he’d fail when it mattered most. McGrath lined him up all week and he couldn’t take it. You could see it coming a mile away - the sweat on the upper lip, the tension in his face, the downcast mien as he walked out to bat knowing he wasn’t good enough. He was a marked man and couldn’t handle it.
That’s why blokes who perform in clutch situations in WC finals should be thought of more highly than spuds who feast in the prelims or during meaningless series in between. Your hero falls into the latter category.
akilana
International 12th Man
What is a great average in this era against top teams?
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Against the top 8 teams Amla averages 48 @ 88, that is great by itself & that average is only 1 less than his career against all sides, and is streets away from your theoretical 50 & 35.
I know there's exceptions, but let's not pretend almost all the great batsmen's records - across Tests & ODIs - don't deflate when you exclude the weaker bowling attacks, so it's only worth arguing in extreme examples. Amla's is not that.
Last edited:
Bijed
International Regular
Tbf minnow/non-minnow averages are only half the argument against Amla, there is the point about his tournament record too. I do rate Amla highly as an ODI batsmen, but like I said above I don't think it's unreasonable to say his career hasn't been as good as his numbers would suggest.
Putting Amla aside, and thinking about player's reputations being made or broken by tournament records: I know this is contrived, but what would people think on here of someone who was consistently a gun in knockout (and effective knockout) games and often single-handedly got their team through to the final, but always choked under the additional pressure of the final and was invariably wretched in them?
Last edited:
Niall
International Coach
Disagree.
The fact that he has failed constantly in knock out events disqualifies him from any such talk. Dhawan for example does not have his numbers but at least he contributed hugely to India winning an actual trophy.
An immense test player, but ultimately the fact he constantly bottles knock out matches sullies his reputation in limited overs cricket.
Last edited:
Gilchrist averaged less than 36, and only 40+ v one non-minnow country (Sri Lanka). Where does that leave him? His record v England, SA, NZ, West Indies looks woeful on record, albeit strike rates are good. But OK, 2003 and 2007 World Cup finals.
It's all subjective.
It's all subjective.
Last edited:
I might've edited my post just as you made yours.
So Adam Gilchrist is a great ODI player because of two knocks? And Amla can't be considered great (not your words) because he failed in World Cups - which really is reflective of his country as a whole?
As I said, it's very subjective. Amla still averaging 48 v the top 8 nations, to me, makes him a great ODI player. Perhaps not a legend or a clutch performer, but still great. 48 is pretty bloody good.
