BBC Greatest ODI XI

[sensible-indian]

He played in a poor team so had more ops to stand out. Answer my question.

What nonsense. Rankings are not calculated based on wickets or runs but on AVERAGES (batting and bowling) and ECONOMY and STRIKE RATE. Don't fluff an answer if you don't know it. As for experts rating Imran better than Kapil, it is true cos Imran was a far superior Test allrounder. And generally those who do well in tests get rated more. Case in point, Kallis's inclusion in WORLD CUP Xi even though his low SR has affected South Africa in many chases (and even SA fans criticize him for that).

[sweetaskandy]

not just tests. i linked to 20 odd teams [odi's] where experts picked khan or kallis or botham before dev. explain please.

[sensible-indian]

not just tests. i linked to 20 odd teams [odi's] where experts picked khan or kallis or botham before dev. explain please.

That's what I already said. When you do well in tests, you get picked more often. There is a bias for test performances among experts. Let me show you real examples. Lance Klusener deserved to be there more than Kallis. More dynamic, more clutch and has awesome stats when he did play in WCs. Flintoff was extremely dynamic too in his pomp. But hardly anyone picked them. Also hardly anyone picked Bevan (the top 2 finisher of all times). Guess why? Exactly.

[sensible-indian]

And no Dhoni wasn't picked by most too. So 2 of the greatest finishers were not picked by majority of experts. Why? Cos we all know why. They weren't great in Test cricket.

[sensible-indian]

Andrew Symonds too not picked by most. Guess why.

[sweetaskandy]

that is part of it - i accept. the other reason is that experts look at the side as a whole. does dev for instance add anything extra to an X1 Imran or Kallis wouldn't if they are selected ahead of him. the honest answer is no. but he is inferior to them in at least 1 core skill - if not both.

[sensible-indian]

that is part of it - i accept. the other reason is that experts look at the side as a whole. does dev for instance add anything extra to an X1 Imran or Kallis wouldn't if they are selected ahead of him. the honest answer is no. but he is inferior to them in at least 1 core skill - if not both.

Yes. Here's my reasoning. An ATG XI needs to cover all bases. So it will have 4 ATG bowlers. Now neither Imran nor Kapil is an ATG ODI bowler (in tests Imran is ATG bowler whereas Kapil is not an ATG bowler even there). So choosing among these 2 allrounders, we have to see 2 criterias: 1. They will be support bowlers who need better economy while maintaining a decent average 2. They will come lower down the order who need better SR while maintaining a decent average Now let's see how they fare: 1. Kapil has superior economy compared to Imran and he will be supporting the other 4 main ATG bowlers in the lineup. Both him and Imran average almost same in ODIs (but he has better economy). In WCs, Imran averages 18 while Kapil averages 30 BUT...Imran didn't bowl majority of the games in WC. Barring 1987 WC. 2. Kapil has superior SR compared to Imran. While Kapil averages just 23 and Imran averages 33 in ODIs, in WCs, Kapil averages 37 and Imran averages similar but Kapil's SR is 115 while Imran's is in the 60s. Yes, even if you remove the 175 and the whole of WC 1983, kapil's average is in 30s in WCs while SR increases if I am not wrong. So both criterias, Kapil wins. He will be more useful to an ATG team but for a Pakistan team Imran will be definitely more useful. If we ignore sample set, Lance Klusener deserves to be there instead of Kapil.

[sweetaskandy]

You are considering just WCs? ODI's overall was the initial selection pov.

[sensible-indian]

Pollock, Symonds, Klusener, Flintoff - All of them are dynamic and need to be considered.

[sensible-indian]

You are considering just WCs? ODI's overall was the initial selection pov.

No , it was a WC XI. Even if you take overall ODIs, my logic still holds. Both Imran and Kapil average the same in bowling while Imran averages more in batting (but with inferior SR). Now... 5th bowler (who is allrounder) needs to support main bowlers. Economy is important. He needs to smash a few at the end (needs SR). Even in that criteria, Kapil is more useful to an ATG XI than Imran. However for all weaker ODI teams, Imran is more useful.

[thongale]

So how was Kapil ICC's No 1 ODI allrounder for nearly a decade? How? How? How?

Don't you understand the term bowling AR and batting AR? BTW, Pollock played in a different era and was better than Kapil in almost every department of the game, and so was Flintoff, may be barring fielding.

[sensible-indian]

Here's another stat: Kapil averages 26, 24 and 21 in 6th, 7th and 8th position (SR around 95 each case). Imran averages 30, 28 and 15 in 6th, 7th and 8th position (SR 75, 81, and 98). Imran played quit a few games in the top and middle order where he averaged 38 with 73 SR. Kapil rarely got to bat up the order. The stats show that if Imran has to bat up the order, he is definitely more useful than Kapil (based on what stats says). But for an ATG XI, he will bat at No 7 at best. With all being said, I feel guys like Pollock, Symonds and Klusener get overlooked in these discussions which I think is a disservice to them. Symonds is a true game changer.

[sensible-indian]

Don't you understand the term bowling AR and batting AR? BTW, Pollock played in a different era and was better than Kapil in almost every department of the game, and so was Flintoff, may be barring fielding.

You rated Imran and Hadlee as better AR than Kapil in ODIs. But Kapil was No 1 when they were playing and he was No 1 for a decade. So I asked how? Comparison with Pollock and Flintoff is another matter I agree.

[sensible-indian]

Ok going to sleep. Will respond to posts tomorrow.

[thongale]

No , it was a WC XI. Even if you take overall ODIs, my logic still holds. Both Imran and Kapil average the same in bowling while Imran averages more in batting (but with inferior SR). Now... 5th bowler (who is allrounder) needs to support main bowlers. Economy is important. He needs to smash a few at the end (needs SR). Even in that criteria, Kapil is more useful to an ATG XI than Imran. However for all weaker ODI teams, Imran is more useful.

No it isn't. Steady batsman who is a great striker would make the opposing XI to reel in pressure. If your 5th bowler can turn up an run through sides for fun, you will definietly settle for a 20 runs less score. That's when a proper bowler at #7 may be important, like Flintoff who has a very good average. Kapil stood out in 70s and 80s in ODIs because three SAF all rounders were unable to play. Thy were deadly dangerous in ODIs. Clive Rice, Adrian Kuiper, Peter Kirsten and Mike Proctor. Rice was perhaps the best ODI allrounder dutring late 70s and early 80s.

[thongale]

You rated Imran and Hadlee as better AR than Kapil in ODIs. But Kapil was No 1 when they were playing and he was No 1 for a decade. So I asked how? Comparison with Pollock and Flintoff is another matter I agree.

I arted them as better bowling all rounders who will play at #8, not #7. Batting Ars will rather play in the top order. The list I gave are better #8s than Kapil, who are exceptional bowlers. The Second part gives #7s who will be better than Kapil with the bat.

[sweetaskandy]

Imran was not a 5th bowler nor ever would be. Is everyone here a kid? Imran was a proper fast bowler - and I mean fast. He would take the new ball if everyone is at their best in the stated X1s. Worst - 1st change.

[sensible-indian]

I arted them as better bowling all rounders who will play at #8' date=' not #7. Batting Ars will rather play in the top order. The list I gave are better #8s than Kapil, who are exceptional bowlers. The Second part gives #7s who will be better than Kapil with the bat.[/quote'] You have to decide based on playing XI. If you play an AR at No 8, then you need to play another AR above cos you need 5 bowlers to finish 50 overs. And you must NOT weaken the batting in doing so. So the question of them being compared for No 8 doesn't arise. Its all about whether X will make the team over Y if 1 spot is available. If Imran was an ATG ODI bowler, he would make the team as a bowler alone. But he isn't. There are other ATG ODI bowlers. So Imran can make it only on the AR slot which is No 7 cos the top 1-6 is filled with ATG ODI bats and ATG WK. If you say you want Kallis in top order and Imran/Hadlee at no 8, that's your call (but then based on your prev post, I would have to remind you that Kallis as a bowler won't run through lineups to make up for the runs lost due to his low SR). We are talking ODIs where Imran is not an ATG bowler (in tests he is). Someone has to be 1st change, 2nd change when everyone else is ATG. :giggle:

[sensible-indian]

Sounds like I didn't keep up my word. Really have to close it now.

[Muloghonto]

Klusener doesnt belong at #7 but Dev does? I cant believe this. Everyone is allowed his POV but blind nationalism is silly.

So is blind idiocy from you lot who are too young to comprehend the differences in the game today and 30 years ago and rely on nothing more than just numbers- which FYI, i have already demonstrated that Kapil has better than ANY ALLROUNDER for an ODI team as a #7. Imran does NOT make an ODI XI before Kapil. Kapil had two ATG skills,one in which no subcontinental bowler of his era or later surpassed him : the best economy rate for ANY subcontinental bowler, one of the best economy rates ever, surpassed only by a couple of West Indian greats who played in the 80s (and Ambrose). Imran does NOT have an ATG level of strike rate or economy or average as an ODI bowler. Neither does Botham , Klusener,Afridi or Kallis. Richard hadlee had it, but Hadlee bowled a lot less in his career than Kapil and ideal NZ pitches for fast medium seamers. Pollock has the Kapil-esque economy rate and containment bowler stats. So for ATG ODI allrounder, the bowling part, 3 players qualify: Kapil, Hadlee and Pollock. Kapil has ATG level of strike rate for a lower order bat, with an average in the 20s, which is what you need from a #7.He also demonstrated his ability to bat multiple times with scores being 20/5 or 40/5 and taking the team to a decent total. IE, a perfect lower order bat. In this category, Kapil has only two contenders : Afridi and Klusener. Klusener was a slightly better bat than Kapil for lower order scenarios, Afridi however, is not. He is too unreliable and is patently incapable of taking the side to a respectable total with the scores of 20/5 or 40/5. Kallis is easily the best bat in this list but he does not make the middle order ahead of Lara, Viv, ABDV, Bevan, Dhoni, Ponting, etc. as a batsman. As a fielder of this list, only two players are in the same category of Kapil the fielder: Kallis and Klusener. So its patently obvious that as far as ODIs go, Kapil is peerless, as he is the only player who successfully ticks the category of being an ATG bowler while also being an ATG lower order bat. PS: I don't have time for kids who number-crunch and have no inkling of what cricket was in the 80s, as far as actually watching the matches, the match situation, etc goes. Sorry Thongale or the other lankan kid, but you are talking outta your **** when you talk of 80s cricketers and you know it.