***Official*** Super Series

[Pratters]

which more and more people are stating...

over the performance of a single game.

 

[Adamc]

over the performance of a single game.

Is this about the Sehwag/Gayle thing? Because there were plenty of people saying Gayle should've been picked ahead of Sehwag well before this game.

 

[Pratters]

Is this about the Sehwag/Gayle thing? Because there were plenty of people saying Gayle should've been picked ahead of Sehwag well before this game.

Yeah and I still maintain that.

 

[Adamc]

Yeah and I still maintain that.

Maintain what?

 

[Pratters]

Maintain what?

That Sehwag is a better LOI player than Gayle.

 

[Adamc]

That Sehwag is a better LOI player than Gayle.

Okay, you can if you want, despite the considerable evidence to the contrary. The point Marc was making though was that people were criticising Sehwag's selection from the moment he was picked (i.e. some time ago), not just on the basis of one game, as you stated.

 

[Pratters]

people were criticising Sehwag's selection from the moment he was picked (i.e. some time ago), not just on the basis of one game, as you stated.

But based on what really. An average a bit higher but Sehwag has the much better strike rate which you need in a one day opener.

 

[Adamc]

But based on what really. An average a bit higher but Sehwag has the much better strike rate which you need in a one day opener.

7 is more than 'a bit' though. Would you consider Sehwag's average 'a bit' higher than Afridi's? Anyway, you're missing the point. The point is that criticism of Sehwag's selection hasn't been based on the last match (or two) alone, which you seemed to suggest in the post I responded to.

 

[Pratters]

The point is that criticism of Sehwag's selection hasn't been based on the last match (or two) alone, which you seemed to suggest in the post I responded to.

No one should say based on game 2 of the super series or some thing Gayle>Sehwag on indicate in that regard for an earlier belief of theirs that Gayle>Sehwag, if it has been done. If not then fine.

 

[social]

Sehwag is a substantially better player than Gayle.

A cameo or 2 from Gayle wont change that fact.

To change that opinion, Gayle needed to convert his start into a big 100 today.

Sehwag can do it but there is no evidence to suggest that Gayle is capable of the same.

 

[Adamc]

No one should say based on game 2 of the super series or some thing Gayle>Sehwag on indicate in that regard for an earlier belief of theirs that Gayle>Sehwag, if it has been done. If not then fine.

Well, I agree that this match shouldn't be used as exclusive proof that Gayle is better than Sehwag. But I don't see how someone who has claimed Gayle is better than Sehwag before the Super Series can't use this match to further substantiate their point. What are you going to use, if not performances?

 

[Pratters]

7 is more than 'a bit' though. Would you consider Sehwag's average 'a bit' higher than Afridi's? Anyway, you're missing the point. The point is that criticism of Sehwag's selection hasn't been based on the last match (or two) alone, which you seemed to suggest in the post I responded to.

Sehwag vs Gayle

Player Batting Avg Strike

Sehwag 31.9 95.7
Gayle 38.9 78.8

So a 15 points higher strike rate is not crucial in a one day match?

Gilchrist has a one day batting average of just around 36 and a strike rate around 95. In one day cricket strike rate is very crucial.

Sehwag is easily better than Gayle for me.

 

[Pratters]

Well, I agree that this match shouldn't be used as exclusive proof that Gayle is better than Sehwag. But I don't see how someone who has claimed Gayle is better than Sehwag before the Super Series can't use this match to further substantiate their point. What are you going to use, if not performances?

Yes I also have nothing against using performances but a game shouldnt be used, if/when used.

 

[Adamc]

Sehwag is a substantially better player than Gayle.

A cameo or 2 from Gayle wont change that fact.

To change that opinion, Gayle needed to convert his start into a big 100 today.

Sehwag can do it but there is no evidence to suggest that Gayle is capable of the same.

Umm, let's see.

Gayle's ODI centuries:
152
103
140
101
119
153*
112*
152*
132*
132
124

Sehwag's ODI centuries:
100
126
114*
108
112
130
108.

Tell me, how does that suggest Sehwag is capable of big centuries and Gayle isn't?

 

[Adamc]

Yes I also have nothing against using performances but a game shouldnt be used, if/when used.

I'm not sure what you mean here. How can you use a performance but not a game? Surely a performance would have to come in a game.

 

[Pratters]

I'm not sure what you mean here. How can you use a performance but not a game? Surely a performance would have to come in a game.

Okay use performances but not performance in a sole game.

 

[greg]

It's Boucher, I think. It should have been Sangakkara IMO as well. Interesting to see how Boucher goes against two spinners on a (presumably) turning SCG pitch...

In commentary Mark Nicholas was claiming that Atherton told him there was a bit of a split among the selectors about the wicket-keeper and that doubts were expressed about Sanga because he had (one!) poor series vs New Zealand.

If this was typical of what went on with the selection panel it's hardly surprising that they got some of the selections badly wrong.

 

[howardj]

In commentary Mark Nicholas was claiming that Atherton told him there was a bit of a split among the selectors about the wicket-keeper and that doubts were expressed about Sanga because he had (one!) poor series vs New Zealand.

If this was typical of what went on with the selection panel it's hardly surprising that they got some of the selections badly wrong.

Yeah, I think that's what could be termed as the selectors over-analysing things. Sangakarra, even way before these last two ODI games, was the standout candidate for the SuperTest. They should have just exercised their common sense and not become too bogged down with analysis.

 

[Adamc]

Sehwag vs Gayle

Player Batting Avg Strike

Sehwag 31.9 95.7
Gayle 38.9 78.8

So a 15 points higher strike rate is not crucial in a one day match?

Gilchrist has a one day batting average of just around 36 and a strike rate around 95. In one day cricket strike rate is very crucial.

Sehwag is easily better than Gayle for me.

Look, you're quite right that strike rates are significant in ODIs, but to suggest that a strike rate 15 points superior surmounts an average 7 points inferior is simply speculation. Sehwag and Gayle play different roles in different teams despite both being openers.

It's not as simple as 'if Sehwag scored slower his average would be better than Gayle's' (or vice-versa) - Sehwag bats in a particularly aggressive style which I imagine wouldn't be easy for him to curtail. Likewise Gayle bats at a pace comfortable to him and wouldn't necessarily average a great deal more if he were to slow down. I find it difficult to comprehend how someone who averages 7 less can be considered 'easily better', even taking into account his superior strike rate. And this is without comparing their bowling and fielding, either.

 

[Jono]

I just got back from the game, I had so much fun with all my mates but I'm absolutely shattered that Sunday's game will be a dead rubber. I have tickets to that too but after seeing the first two live with the series on the line, it just won't be the same knowing the series is already over.

Gilchrist was absolutely magnificent for Australia, and after Australia's innings the ROW's odds for a win went up to $3.50. Obviously I had a punt (especially with McGrath out and Clark in), and I swear with Gayle (OMG wasn't he absolutely phenomenal?) and Sangakkara going crazy it looked like the World winning was a certainty considering what batting was to come. Then... despite being one of my favourite players, Jaques Kallis doesn't sacrifice his wicket. Granted Sanga's call was poor, but come on, he was hitting the ball beautifully. That was clearly the turning point. Then came Lara's shocking dismissal (Seriously same fielder off the same bowler playing the same shot... come on!) and Dravid running out Kallis hurt because Kallis did nothing but waste balls. I don't like saying negatives about one of my favourite players, but he really disappointed me tonight.

Australia are an amazing ODI team, absolutely amazing. Symonds is such a good ODI player, and Ponting continues to prove why he's one of the best fielders of the modern era.

Regarding the ROW bowling, seriously what happened? All the pacers were poor. Freddy really disappointed me today, and Akhtar was shocking too.

Anyway, had a great time at the game but I really wish ROW won to make Sunday a thriller. They just can't play well as a team. Kudos to Australia however, for they most certainly can.

And in regards to the Sehwag/Gayle debate, In ODIs I'd take Gayle over Sehwag. As I've said before, Sehwag is merely a dangerous ODI player without being very good. Gayle on the other hand is overall a better batsman, and with his bowling ability clearly the better player. That's coming from an Indian. Tests is a totally different story however with Sehwag vastly superior.