*Official* Warne vs Murali Discussion

[ankitj]

I don't think anyone is disputing Viv is better than Gilchrist in ODIs.

It's the slogger part that has people up in arms.

And I am not in that camp ftr Only that there are a handful of better openers to be considered. Hope that clears it!

 

[Prince EWS]

gilchrist is a shoo-in as a competent 'keeper and a big-hitting middle order batsman in an all-time xi, an irresistible combination in a one day setting...it's just that most people have him as an one day opener opposite tendulkar and that is one of the most ridiculous selections ever...the guy is just the most overrated (not the worst just the most incredibly overhyped) one day opener there is...there are so many better odi openers when you consider all-time players it's not funny...mark waugh, gordon greenidge, des haynes, saurav ganguly, saeed anwar, matty hayden just to name a few...

Well Gilchrist isn't one of the best openers but he isn't one of the best middle order batsmen either. Fact of the matter is, though, you need to pick either him or Dhoni as someone needs to keep wickets. The selection of Gilchrist to open the batting in all-time teams isn't actually suggesting he was one of the best two openers any more than selecting McGrath would suggest he's the best #11 batsman. Pieter Erasmus has that covered, obviously.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Much of the reason that Gilchrist could afford to play the role that he did was because Australia could have a batting option at 7. The reason for that was Gilchrist in the first place.

 

[vcs]

Much of the reason that Gilchrist could afford to play the role that he did was because Australia could have a batting option at 7. The reason for that was Gilchrist in the first place.

Bingo.

 

[Migara]

Which totally misses the point that an all-time XI is not chosen to play a minnow but a top class opposition, perhaps a second XI. So they will be facing likes of Donald, Pollock, Warne, Ambrose. Other than sir Viv I don't expect any one to smash them into oblivion. Greenidge can be expected to stand solidly against them and Sachin to score intelligent hundreds.

TEC did change my view of Gilly a bit but even before that I would have considered a number of other openers before him. Batting averages do count for a bit after-all. Even Sehwag has a very comparable record (similar average and better SR) and has about the same credentials against quality bowling. But if Sehwag doesn't fall in the consideration set (rightly so) then why should Gilly?

Now Sir, the captain of this side is a very intelligent one. And he pulls out Murali / Saqlain to bowl to Greenidge. He never faced that situation and was not particularly flashy against spin. That's why you need very rounded off players. Being a insanely good player of pace and poor against spin won't make a good batsman against a thinking side.

And his average against Pakistan and Aussies shows he was not the best against top class pace either. So if you are picking a guy to play ATG fast bowling you cannot pick Greenidge either if you cannot pick Gilly, Jaya or Sehwag. Then better to pick a Saeed Anwar, who was classy and assured against top class pace.

 

[akilana]

mark waugh?

 

[Migara]

Has merit definietly.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Gilchrist is a slogger? Ffs.

Yeah, it's wrong to refer to him as a slogger. Was watching his innings against SA from a while back in one of the one-dayers and he played some lovely shots.

A 'slogger' is someone who only has one gear and not that wide an array of shots. Usually comes in at around 6 or 7 in your average Saturday league.

 

[Flem274*]

David Warner is a better example of a slogger.

 

[TumTum]

David Warner is a better example of a slogger.

Don't think so. Just because he can score quickly at T20s doesn't mean he is a slogger. In fact he has great technique in his strikes.

A better example of a slogger is Afridi, has wild swipes at balls that he is in no position to play.

 

[GotSpin]

Don't think so. Just because he can score quickly at T20s doesn't mean he is a slogger. In fact he has great technique in his strikes.

A better example of a slogger is Afridi, has wild swipes at balls that he is in no position to play.

Nah disagree. Warner is a case A slogger -

Afridi has some technique. Just no brains

 

[Furball]

Why is this such a preposterous argument? Knight averages a whole 5 runs ahead of Gilchrist in ODIs. Gilchrist is an overrated ODI player if you ask me, nothing more than a glorified slogger.

That difference in average is completely negated by the difference in their strike rates.

cbf statsguruing this to check, but I'm pretty sure in wins, when he's opened Gilchrist averages over 40, with a strike rate of over 100 (and if it's not over 100, it's 99.something.) No-one in the history of the game has scored as many runs as Gilchrist did, as quickly as Gilchrist did.

 

[Furball]

TBH, I'd take Tendulkar-Gilchrist over Tendulkar-Ganguly/Hayden. I sort of subscribe to Ian Chappell's philosophy that an all-time XI should have an attitude to match - a "go out and smash them into oblivion" attitude that Gilchrist epitomized perfectly.

tbf Tendulkar does that too.

Amongst openers, only 4 players in ODI history have scored their runs quicker than Tendulkar - Afridi, Sehwag, Gilchrist and Jayasuriya.

 

[Jono]

Yeah the rate Sachin scores at in ODIs is underestimated sometimes.

Ponting too I reckon.

 

[TumTum]

Nah disagree. Warner is a case A slogger -

Afridi has some technique. Just no brains

Completely disagree (except the brain part).

 

[vcs]

Sachin is superb at rotating in the middle overs (15-35) and even if he gets off to a Clarke-esque 10(25) start, he usually makes up for it later on.

 

[honestbharani]

Tbh, I dont rate Gilchrist very highly in the ODI game. I think he had the benefit of playing for a very strong ODI outfit that it was ok for him to go out there and bat like he didn't have a care in the world simply because the next 6 were greats and probably better players than him.

More often than not, he failed against attacks when they bowled really well and he took advantage of some pretty average bowling attacks. People talk about how brilliant his performance in the 2007 world cup final was but with the exception of that knock and a few slogs against the minnows, his record in all 3 world cups is piss poor.

I may have been harsh on Tendulkar in the past and possibly exaggerated his deficiencies but with Gilchrist I don't think I am. The guy benefited a ridiculous amount from playing for the best ODI side in the world and thats not a tack Im likely to change anytime soon.

But really, you could argue the other way as well.. That with the strength of the side, he was perhaps forced to play an ultra aggressive game which was detrimental to his own career stats.. I mean who knows what he would have achieved had he played the Tendulkar route of settling down after the first 15 and trying to play through.. He kept going for it at all times, didn't he?

 

[tooextracool]

But really, you could argue the other way as well.. That with the strength of the side, he was perhaps forced to play an ultra aggressive game which was detrimental to his own career stats.. I mean who knows what he would have achieved had he played the Tendulkar route of settling down after the first 15 and trying to play through.. He kept going for it at all times, didn't he?

I disagree with that. I don't think he was capable of playing any other way. That is the way he has played from debut onwards, Australia were only really head and shoulders the best ODI team from 2001 or so onwards. Until then, they were just a good side (SA were the better team even if they didn't perform in the big tournaments) and there were plenty of times that called for a more measured approach from him earlier on in his career but its hard to see when that ever happened.

Its not particularly surprising that he was considered to be a middling batsman up until about 2003 or so either.

 

[Anil]

I'm starting to agree with Flem's impression that it seems only Viv is allowed to demolish attacks without the quality of the opposition or difficulty of conditions being questioned on here.

of course not, but when you compare richards to gilchrist as a batsman,you are doing richards a huge disservice...gilchrist is not even remotely in the same class....

 

[vcs]

of course not, but when you compare richards to gilchrist as a batsman,you are doing richards a huge disservice...gilchrist is not even remotely in the same class....

Never did that, just get the feeling that modern-day attacking players (Sehwag, Gilchrist) come under a lot more scrutiny and every success gets written off as **** attack/flat wicket.