ODI ATG XIs

[weldone]

Boult in for Mills now, surely?

The problem is who takes the new ball? Boult and Hadlee followed by Bond for me.

Both Bairstow (48 @ 105) and Buttler (39 @ 117) make England's greatest ODI side, even based on their relatively short careers.

Sehwag in ODI ATG team really? When you've got Rohit sitting out? Pull the other one

These teams were made from my ODI rankings last updated 1.5 years back.

 

[marc71178]

Kapil is the best Indian ODi batsman of 1980s based on rankings .

A sad indictment on every other Indian batsman of the decade.

 

[h_hurricane]

A sad indictment on every other Indian batsman of the decade.

Our batsmen before 1990s were stuck in the old school mentality, see off the new ball at 2 runs an over,consolidate at 3 runs an over in the middle overs and then rely on Kapil to score quickly in the end overs. Srikanth and Sandeep Patil(during his short career) were exceptions. Gavaskar (though he improved towards the end), Shastri and Vengsarkar used to eat up most of the overs and we were highly reliant on our bowlers to come to party to win anything. It was still a good decade though, winning 1983 world cup and 1985 World Championship of cricket meant that we over achieved in that decade.

 

[stephen]

Surprised to see , no one considering Lara as opener in ODis , he was the greatest opener ever , before Tendulkar taking that position .

I can think of two other West Indian batsmen who were up there with Lara as ODI bats. But really the reason most don't pick him in their team is because they want a secondary skill from their other opener in an AT team. Either keeping from Gilchrist, spin from Jayasuriya or Waugh or pace from Watson.

 

[stephen]

I mean Haynes, Greenidge, Lara, Hayden, Amla, Dilshan, Dhawan all have excellent records as opener but Tendulkar did what they all did but better. And none of those guys had a second skill, which is important in ODI cricket.

 

[CricAddict]

I mean Haynes, Greenidge, Lara, Hayden, Amla, Dilshan, Dhawan all have excellent records as opener but Tendulkar did what they all did but better. And none of those guys had a second skill, which is important in ODI cricket.

I agree on what you said above, with a minor correction. Dilshan was both an useful bowler and keeper. But, as a batsman, he is a level below ATG XI openers.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

I can think of two other West Indian batsmen who were up there with Lara as ODI bats. But really the reason most don't pick him in their team is because they want a secondary skill from their other opener in an AT team. Either keeping from Gilchrist, spin from Jayasuriya or Waugh or pace from Watson.

Dhoni is there to keep wickets.

Sachin and Viv were decent part time bowlers.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

A sad indictment on every other Indian batsman of the decade.

1982 - 29 at 123
1983 - 38 at 106
1984 - 25 at 94
1985 - 29 at 100
1986 - 27 at 103
1987 - 37 at 113

Kapil Dev was jayasuryaesque in this 6 years.

 

[marc71178]

You say Jayasuriya, I’d say Afridi. As I alluded to, he wasn't actually that good and I cannot see why people rate him at 7 in an ATG side.

 

[harsh.ag]

You say Jayasuriya, I’d say Afridi. As I alluded to, he wasn't actually that good and I cannot see why people rate him at 7 in an ATG side.

He was the best finisher of his era. Can't really ask anymore from someone.

 

[Victor Ian]

He was the best finisher of his era. Can't really ask anymore from someone.

50% of the time (actually 44, but 50 makes my point better) he failed to make it to 10. In every other ten run bracket he is below dhoni and bevan and klusener. He was not a finisher. As marc said, he is Afridi. Still not bad for a number 7, but he is not all that crash hot. It just looks that way because India were incredibly **** back then. How the **** did they win the world cup in 83! If you say, 'yeah, but the times' then his bowling wont be up to standard required.

To his credit, he didn't waste time getting out when that was his thing. But Dev has an awesomely strong jawline. That's worth something.

edit: actually, I lie. He is thereabouts with the three for 20 and 30 runs, then falls behind big time.

 

[stephen]

Nothing wrong with picking Kapil at 7 in an AT side. I'd argue Klusener or even possibly Flintoff should be ahead of him as the "bowler who can bat well enough for #7".

 

[Bolo]

When you cherry pick stats and come up with two years where he averaged in the 30s and 4 years in the 20s, it means he is unreliable as hell. Matchwinner, yes, but hes not a number 7. Klusenar averaged more career than kapils best year and he's a dubious number 7.

 

[harsh.ag]

By a finisher, I didn't mean in the Dhoni-Bevan mould of course, but in the Afridi mould. Agree with the unreliability of his batting and wouldn't pick him at #7 unless Pollock was at 8 and Wasim at 9. But everyone's kidding themselves if they think he wasn't special. An SR if 95 in that era is insane. He would be striking at 140 odd today.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Any takers on the greatest 'super-sub' to play the game?

 

[CricAddict]

Any takers on the greatest 'super-sub' to play the game?

Raina was almost always the super-sub for India when it was in place. No idea who his competition is.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Shane Bond was supersub against India one game, and took 6-for

 

[Victor Ian]

So who do we choose as the finisher in the ATG world 11? Bevan, Dhoni or Ponting.

I'm still hung up on Bolo's comment and it makes a lot of sense. There is no doubt that Ponting is a better batsman than either of the other two, so why is he not in the running for that spot?

 

[TheJediBrah]

So who do we choose as the finisher in the ATG world 11? Bevan, Dhoni or Ponting.

I'm still hung up on Bolo's comment and it makes a lot of sense. There is no doubt that Ponting is a better batsman than either of the other two, so why is he not in the running for that spot?

You can choose Ponting if you want. There's every chance he'd have done just as good or better a job down the order, but it's hard to know. That's why most people would pick someone who has proven themselves in the role.

I'd definitely choose Bevan or Dhoni over Ponting to bat 6.

You raise a classic quandary though. Given that the best players will generally bat top 3, it would make sense to fill your team with top-3 batsmen.

 

[stephen]

So who do we choose as the finisher in the ATG world 11? Bevan, Dhoni or Ponting.

I'm still hung up on Bolo's comment and it makes a lot of sense. There is no doubt that Ponting is a better batsman than either of the other two, so why is he not in the running for that spot?

It's debatable that Ponting is a better batsman than either of the other two down the order. He was a top order batsman, suited to facing a hard ball and building an innings. Bevan and Dhoni were much more suited to coming in during the middle overs and anchoring the team. Clarke played a closer role to Bevan and Dhoni than Ponting.