BBC Greatest ODI XI

[MCGGG]

Faulkner could be a special player, he's probably the most feared lower order bat in the world, and he can bowl.

[bulbul]

Faulkner could be a special player' date=' he's probably the most feared lower order bat in the world, and he can bowl.[/quote'] :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[BlueBee]

[MCGGG]

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

Not sure what's funny, have you seen the man bat? Here's a hint, if he bats for 5+ overs Australia will win. Indian fans in denial as usual.

[bulbul]

Not sure what's funny' date=' [b']have you seen the man bat? Here's a hint, if he bats for 5+ overs Australia will win. Indian fans in denial as usual.

I have seen last 2 matches ..he got out for single digit :cantstop:

[Muloghonto]

Not sure what's funny, have you seen the man bat? Here's a hint, if he bats for 5+ overs Australia will win. Indian fans in denial as usual.

The same is true for afridi...infact, I cant remember last time afridi faced 30 balls and pakistan lost...so I guess now afridi is the best a/r ever. Aussies are to allrounders what poms are to batsmen. They are so starved of one that a guy who's not even a fixture for 3 years is a great. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

[putrevus]

Strange that they bring in Afridi's averages for comparison with Kapil. As if the averages of the 80s and noughties have the same weightage. Afridi is complete hack as a batsman, which is why he did not take to test cricket and dropped out within the first few years. Kapil's ODI batting average is not high, but we know that he a class test batsman because he averaged 31 in the era of bowlers with a S/R of 81 - something equivalent to average of 40 and S/R of 120 in tests today. That is one hell of a batsman by today's standards. In ODIs, Kapil played way too fast and often lost his wickets to loose deliveries - he had the potential to average 30 with a S/R of 80 in that era (which would have made him a bigger match winner with the bat), but Kapil sacrificed the amount of runs for the scoring rate. Something like Sehwag. I think very few guys here realize the true implication of a S/R of 95 in the 80s. They think he was Afridi like by comparing the averages of different eras.:haha:

No it is not the question of sacrificing average for SR in case of Kapil Dev, He was forced to take that role due to slow batting of his other batsmen especially for that ERA. I will give just one example in in 1985 world championship in Australia , in semis India was just chasing 200 to win in 50 overs which should have been a cake walk except that the batsmen like Shastri and co were so slow in batting, it required Kapil dev to score 50 of 30 balls for India to win the match going away. India never scored 300 in his ERA , there is a reason for it, top order batsmen had no clue how to score huge totals in odis, chasing 230 plus was monumental task for those teams. No one is saying he was Don Bradman with bat but compared to Imran Khan or Ian Botham or Hadlee of his Era he was best Odi batsmen at his position it was not even close. Comparing to Flintoffs and Afridis of the world is foolish. Herath has almost same wickets than Bedi but he is not even in same stratosphere with Bedi, if Bedi had LBW rules like today he would have had 600 wickets. For batsmen batting at no6 and lower , Batsman with 24 avg with 100 SR is always greater than Batsman with 33 Avg and 70 SR.

[mishra]

When it comes to odi cricket I think English judgement is no better than Afghan cricket greats.

[Marut]

No it is not the question of sacrificing average for SR in case of Kapil Dev, He was forced to take that role due to slow batting of his other batsmen especially for that ERA. I will give just one example in in 1985 world championship in Australia , in semis India was just chasing 200 to win in 50 overs which should have been a cake walk except that the batsmen like Shastri and co were so slow in batting, it required Kapil dev to score 50 of 30 balls for India to win the match going away. India never scored 300 in his ERA , there is a reason for it, top order batsmen had no clue how to score huge totals in odis, chasing 230 plus was monumental task for those teams. No one is saying he was Don Bradman with bat but compared to Imran Khan or Ian Botham or Hadlee of his Era he was best Odi batsmen at his position it was not even close. Comparing to Flintoffs and Afridis of the world is foolish. Herath has almost same wickets than Bedi but he is not even in same stratosphere with Bedi, if Bedi had LBW rules like today he would have had 600 wickets. For batsmen batting at no6 and lower , Batsman with 24 avg with 100 SR is always greater than Batsman with 33 Avg and 70 SR.

Agreed, some times Kapil was required to play a very attacking innings. We had too many sluggish batsmen in the side. But this was not required of him all the time. For example, consider the WC final in 1983. Kapil walked in to bat with India on 92/4 after 30 overs. This was surely no time for slogging but Kapil creamed three fours and walked back to the pavilion after two overs, leaving India reeling at 110/5 after 32. In a 60 over match, there was enough time to build an innings - for example a Kapil 30 off 50 balls would have been far more valuable than 15(8) that he scored in the WC final and it would have allowed India to reach 220. India won that match, but the point I am making should be clear. I can show at least a dozen knocks Kapil played without much responsibility. If Kapil had cut down his S/R by a few points, his averaged would have soared by many points. India would have won many more matches with a Kapil who averaged 30 with a somewhat lesser strike rate. Kapil was a not a slogger. He definitely had the technique to construct an innings, a batsman with eight test centuries in the 80s is certainly no ordinary batsman. He could have achieved much more.

[rtmohanlal]

My position on couple of points being discussed here. 1. McGrath has been far superior bowler than Kapil both in test and ODIs 2. In tests, Kapil probably wouldn't be counted in top all-rounders because of his bowling numbers are not really goof enough and he didn't make his batting talent count. 3. In ODI's, I would put him right in the top bracket as all-rounder. Definitely ahead of Imran Khan. I probably would pick him for the all-rounder slot in all time ODI XI.

w.r.t point 2 .... the problem of just taking numbers with out the context

[Marut]

My position on couple of points being discussed here. 1. McGrath has been far superior bowler than Kapil both in test and ODIs 2. In tests, Kapil probably wouldn't be counted in top all-rounders because of his bowling numbers are not really goof enough and he didn't make his batting talent count. 3. In ODI's, I would put him right in the top bracket as all-rounder. Definitely ahead of Imran Khan. I probably would pick him for the all-rounder slot in all time ODI XI.

If you are a pacer from the subcontinent, have no decent support bowlers, play as the frontline bowler in every match in every format that your team plays and do not tamper the ball, you are going to run out of luck making the bowling numbers.

[rtmohanlal]

Agreed, some times Kapil was required to play a very attacking innings. We had too many sluggish batsmen in the side. But this was not required of him all the time. For example, consider the WC final in 1983. Kapil walked in to bat with India on 92/4 after 30 overs. This was surely no time for slogging but Kapil creamed three fours and walked back to the pavilion after two overs, leaving India reeling at 110/5 after 32. In a 60 over match, there was enough time to build an innings - for example a Kapil 30 off 50 balls would have been far more valuable than 15(8) that he scored in the WC final and it would have allowed India to reach 220. India won that match, but the point I am making should be clear. I can show at least a dozen knocks Kapil played without much responsibility. If Kapil had cut down his S/R by a few points, his averaged would have soared by many points. India would have won many more matches with a Kapil who averaged 30 with a somewhat lesser strike rate. Kapil was a not a slogger. He definitely had the technique to construct an innings, a batsman with eight test centuries in the 80s is certainly no ordinary batsman. He could have achieved much more.

in that world cup inns Kapil could have been much responsible. But based on the end target, we can see that 15 of 8 balls enabled the likes of Binny & others to consume lot more balls and put on the score card what they can.from that point, we can see that Kapil's rapid knock had its advantage too.so, all in all had Kapil played a 30(50) that time, he could have contributed a little bit more, but not by much. My point is ,we can't expect the Kapils ,Sehwags & Gilchrists to play in different gears all the time based on the situation. May be... you are true that Kapil would have avg :ed more by cutting down a little in str: rate... but not by much, especially because of his multidimensional responsibilities

[Marut]

in that world cup inns Kapil could have been much responsible. But based on the end target, we can see that 15 of 8 balls enabled the likes of Binny & others to consume lot more balls and put on the score card what they can.from that point, we can see that Kapil's rapid knock had its advantage too.so, all in all had Kapil played a 30(50) that time, he could have contributed a little bit more, but not by much. My point is ,we can't expect the Kapils ,Sehwags & Gilchrists to play in different gears all the time based on the situation. May be... you are true that Kapil would have avg :ed more by cutting down a little in str: rate... but not by much, especially because of his multidimensional responsibilities

A 30(50) by Kapil would have allowed for a 50+ run partnership between Kapil and Sandeep Patil. You think a cameo is what is expected of a #6 when you have 30 overs to play out?

[rtmohanlal]

A 30(50) by Kapil would have allowed for a 50+ run partnership between Kapil and Sandeep Patil. You think a cameo is what is expected of a #6 when you have 30 overs to play out?

the main point is not ' Kapil should have' but whether he was capable of doing the anchoring role especially against that strong WI bowling unit.

[sweetaskandy]

20 opinions are statistically insignificant. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

All expert testimony when no alternative has been provided from your side. Show me just 5 experts who choose Dev in their AT ODI x1. Just 3, even.

[rtmohanlal]

If you are a pacer from the subcontinent' date=' have no decent support bowlers, play as the frontline bowler in every match in every format that your team plays and do not tamper the ball, you are going to run out of luck making the bowling numbers.[/quote'] my take on this is that we have to evaluate the bowler based on these factors. to be more precise ... not just take the numbers with out the context. but unfortunately this is the case with most of the analysts... even ex players.

[rtmohanlal]

All expert testimony when no alternative has been provided from your side. Show me just 5 experts who choose Dev in their AT ODI x1. Just 3, even.

had there not been a player named 'Imran' , then BBC would have selected Botham in there all time list.at least Imran had a bat avg: better than that of Kapil.Such is England cricket fraternity's attitude to onedayers in general. Their thinking is that just because Botham was brilliant in the ashes, that would make him an automatic choice even for an one day eleven.

[express bowling]

How can Dhoni be left out of an all time ODI 11 ? He is one of the best ODI bstsmen ever and surely the best finisher ever. Kallis as an alrounder at no.7 ? Bad selection. He is no slogger. Kapil or Imran would be far better choices. Gayle is a T20 great, not an ODI one. I would open with Gilchrist, replace Gayle with Dhoni and Lara with Ponting. Gilchrist Tendulkar Ponting Richards ABDV Dhoni Kapil / Imran Wasim Warne Lee McGrath / Garner Kohli and Amla should qualify in a couple of years.

[Marut]

my take on this is that we have to evaluate the bowler based on these factors. to be more precise ... not just take the numbers with out the context. but unfortunately this is the case with most of the analysts... even ex players.

Those who have seen Kapil bowl (outside of stats) know that he was extremely brilliant. However, he was not a complete pace bowler because 1. He lacked genuine pace (140kph+) to be able to trouble all kinds of batsmen under all conditions. He was close to genuine pace between 1978-1983 but since 1984 he would bowl mostly between 130-135kph and because of this he sometimes found himself exposed against great batsmen or against batsmen who knew their home conditions well. 2. Kapil had one of the best outswingers ever and bowled very accurately. But he did not have a world class inswinger, so he sometimes had difficulty getting rid of batsmen who were not adventurous. In some test matches, Kapil went for a lot of runs (some times economy of 5+) because of this limitation. In England, Kapil wasn't very successful because he got prodigious swing there which batsmen would leave safely and when the batsmen had a go at him the ball used to miss the bat by miles, while lesser bowlers like Binny got a lot of wickets at the other end because swung less to catch an edge!! - a potent inswinger would have made Kapil a feared bowler in England. 3. Kapil found himself bowling alongside bowlers who were mediocre at best - his support bowlers were usually Binny, Madanlal, Chetan Sharma, Prabhakar and in the last two years an inexperienced Srinath. All these bowlers were pretty much useless when bowling on wickets without much assistance. Even very good test bowlers struggle to take wickets when they don't have decent support bowlers. McGrath would not have been so good without bowlers like Warne and Gillespie applying tremendous pressure at the other end. Fast bowlers like to hunt in pairs and Kapil was quite unlucky in this respect. As Kapil was not a tearaway fast bowler, the lack of support made his job much more difficult. To make up for these limitations, Kapil had a lions' heart. He was willing to bowl very long and frequent spells and even though he was the fastest Indian bowler he often bowled more overs than other bowlers. This affected his bowling figures. Kapil would never make it to a Test XI as a bowler, because there are better bowlers even if we account for context. Kapil needed more pace and better armoury (like inswing) to rank along with the best bowlers the world has seen. Imran was definitely a better test bowler because he had more pace and could move the ball both ways.

[rtmohanlal]

Those who have seen Kapil bowl (outside of stats) know that he was extremely brilliant. However, he was not a complete pace bowler because 1. He lacked genuine pace (140kph+) to be able to trouble all kinds of batsmen under all conditions. He was close to genuine pace between 1978-1983 but since 1984 he would bowl mostly between 130-135kph and because of this he sometimes found himself exposed against great batsmen or against batsmen who knew their home conditions well. 2. Kapil had one of the best outswingers ever and bowled very accurately. But he did not have a world class inswinger, so he sometimes had difficulty getting rid of batsmen who were not adventurous. In some test matches, Kapil went for a lot of runs (some times economy of 5+) because of this limitation. In England, Kapil wasn't very successful because he got prodigious swing there which batsmen would leave safely and when the batsmen had a go at him the ball used to miss the bat by miles, while lesser bowlers like Binny got a lot of wickets at the other end because swung less to catch an edge!! - a potent inswinger would have made Kapil a feared bowler in England. 3. Kapil found himself bowling alongside bowlers who were mediocre at best - his support bowlers were usually Binny, Madanlal, Chetan Sharma, Prabhakar and in the last two years an inexperienced Srinath. All these bowlers were pretty much useless when bowling on wickets without much assistance. Even very good test bowlers struggle to take wickets when they don't have decent support bowlers. McGrath would not have been so good without bowlers like Warne and Gillespie applying tremendous pressure at the other end. Fast bowlers like to hunt in pairs and Kapil was quite unlucky in this respect. As Kapil was not a tearaway fast bowler, the lack of support made his job much more difficult. To make up for these limitations, Kapil had a lions' heart. He was willing to bowl very long and frequent spells and even though he was the fastest Indian bowler he often bowled more overs than other bowlers. This affected his bowling figures. Kapil would never make it to a Test XI as a bowler, because there are better bowlers even if we account for context. Kapil needed more pace and better armoury (like inswing) to rank along with the best bowlers the world has seen. Imran was definitely a better test bowler because he had more pace and could move the ball both ways.

agreed with all points you said except w.r.t luck/unluck part.to put things in perspecvtive let us take Laxman & Mahela. Mahela scored some 3000 runs more & avg:ed around 4 more than Laxman too.But most of us would know that Laxman was a convincingly better test batsman than Mahela because of his impact knocks and performance abroad especially AUS.The basis of what I said is that in this example people would just neglect Mahela's superior avg: and other things and put Laxman in front for sure. to be more precise they take the context too into account. in Kapil's case too so called luck factor should not be taken into account . it is just that in Kapil's case 'he belonged to a bowling wise weak team and played much longer with huge work load when compared to his contemporary all rounders' is the context. so based on this factor I feels he is a much better bowler and is lot closer to Imran than what people think . no 'luck' or 'unluck' factor. pure and simple.