BBC Greatest ODI XI

[jusarrived]

I'm surprised you didn't want Sachin removed' date=' knowing how much you don't rate him? BTW, I have never rated Kallis one bit in ODI cricket, but Gilly and Lara were gem of ODI players.[/quote'] I dont rate him in comparison to Dhoni/Virat in ODIs & Dravid/ Laxman in Tests , but that dosent mean he would not be in my team . its all relative

[jusarrived]

Dhoni > Gilly is not my pick but ok, some logic exists. The other 2 are silly statements. Kallis was a proper top order batsman and would be a good 5th bowler. Lara is the best batsman of his era and the best overall since Viv.

Dhoni is the best finisher all time , Gilly is only good if you open with him . Kallis , cant think of one impact innings hes played in ODIs , neither is his bowliing effective . Lara again more personal stats than anything else , Virat is better

[zen]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cricket/30983202 Lara,Gayle & Kallis are debatable.

^ That's a good 11 :nice: ..... Below is my 11 with players who have played in the WC (not picking any Ind players to appear unbiased) * Rameer Raja * Gilly * Ponting * Lara * Viv * Crowe * Warne * Wasim * Garner * McGrath * Murali Have included Rameez Raja in spirit of picking players who could drive controversy :P

[HippoSucks]

stike rate is the prime benchmark of a lower order ODI player. I'd rather have an afridi, with an average of 20-something and strike rate of 100+ coming in at 45th over, over a Bevan, with 50+ average and 70-something strike rate. Given the fact that Kapil was on par with McGrath as an ODI bowler and is the perfect #7 batsman in an ODI team, he is far more deserving on an All-time ODI XI than any Aussie i can think of. The job of a #7 in ODIs is simple: 9 outta 10 times, its to bash a quickfire 20 off of 10 balls, 1 outta 10 times, its to dig in and bring in a big score at an acceptable strike rate. As a bowler, #7 must merit his place in the team as either a top level strike bowler or top level container. Kapil fulfills the batting job of an ODI #7 better than any other player in history of ODIs and is clearly one of the best containment ODI bowlers the world has ever seen, with an economy rate better than Imran Khan, Malcolm Marshall,Ian Botham, etc. despite bowling in much smaller grounds and far less responsive pitches.

Having any specialist batsman in your team who has an average of 20 is ridiculous. I don't care if he always gets those 20 runs in 5 balls. What will you do if your batting collapsed and he had to come before the 40th over (which happens pretty often). I like Kapil, but saying he is a better ODI bowler than McGrath or a better pick in some All Star XI than any Australian is ridiculous.

[sweetaskandy]

As i said before, find me one player who is better suited than Kapil to be slotted in at #7 of an ODI side. I can find a replacement for McGrath or Murali in ODIs, but for an alltime ODI list, there are 4 automatic picks : Sachin for opening, Viv for #3, Kapil for #7 and Akram as a bowler. Rest all are matter of opinion, the aboevmentioned 4 pick themselves fairly easily.

The mistake made is to assume the all rounder has to bat at #7. You can pick different all rounders who play in different places in the line-up and still offer a full bowling option. Kallis or Imran would bat at #4 and #6 respectively. Cairns or Klusener at 7 for instance. LK is far superior to Dev as a no.7 being as he is much more reliable as a batsman. Ave of 23 for a #7 is now amazing. :hysterical: Ok I never expect too see you people take digs at Afridi again as clearly ave 23 at #7 with high SR is unbeatable performance. :cantstop: We can as we dont think sloggers ave 23 are ATG #7s.

[HippoSucks]

The mistake made is to assume the all rounder has to bat at #7. You can pick different all rounders who play in different places in the line-up and still offer a full bowling option. Kallis or Imran would bat at #4 and #6 respectively. Cairns or Klusener at 7 for instance. LK is far superior to Dev as a no.7 being as he is much more reliable as a batsman. Ave of 23 for a #7 is now amazing. :hysterical: Ok I never expect too see you people take digs at Afridi again as clearly ave 23 at #7 with high SR is unbeatable performance. :cantstop: We can as we dont think sloggers ave 23 are ATG #7s.

An average of 23 is not enough for a specialist batsman at #7. However, an all rounder (who is one of the best fast bowlers of the country) having an average of 23 is still good. We call Ashwin and Kumar all-rounders and their average is similar to Kapil's. I would take Kapil over Kallis any day because of Kapil's bowling and some handy runs.

[Muloghonto]

Having any specialist batsman in your team who has an average of 20 is ridiculous. I don't care if he always gets those 20 runs in 5 balls. What will you do if your batting collapsed and he had to come before the 40th over (which happens pretty often). I like Kapil, but saying he is a better ODI bowler than McGrath or a better pick in some All Star XI than any Australian is ridiculous.

the job of a #7 in ODIs is NOT that of a specialist batsman. As i noted earlier, the average point where the #7 comes in to bat, is around the 42nd to 43rd over. That means, he is to face roughly 20-25 balls, assuming he faces 50% of the deliveries left. As such, what is required from a #7, is a quickfire 20-25 runs off of 15-20 balls. Its more important for a #7 to get 20 off of 15 balls and get dismissed than score 20 not out off of 20 balls. In the former case, the strike rate would be higher, the average lower and vice versa in the latter case. We all agree that the former case is what a #7 has to do. Occasionally, the #7 has to come in earlier due to batting collapses and has to have the ability to construct long innings. In this regard, as i noted earlier, Kapil has proven himself better than any #7 in history. He's played some of the best ODI knocks in history in terms of constructing an innings after a collapse and he's routinely scored a blazing 15-20 runs off of 10-12 deliveries. IMO, the job of a #7 batsman is to score 15-20 runs at greater than the innings run-rate ( late order boost) 90% of the time and score a big one 1 outta 10 times when he is thrust in midst of a batting collapse. By that benchmark, there are only two contenders to #8 batting spot: Kapil Dev and Lance Klusener. Given that Kapil was more consistent throughout his career ( Lance's career numbers are greater as a lower order bat, but thats mostly due to an unbelievable 2 years, where he almost never got dismissed in the late 90s) and that Kapil was a far greater bowler than Lance, its an automatic lock for Kapil at #7. Players like Kallis, Botham, Imran, etc. do not belong in the #7 spot: Kallis and Imran were too slow to be #7 bats, Kapil was a superior ODI bowler than Imran or Botham too. Instead of debating the merits/demerits of Kapil the overall player, lets stick to the OP, which is ONE DAY CRICKET and lets see who else is a better fit at #7.

[zen]

The mistake made is to assume the all rounder has to bat at #7. You can pick different all rounders who play in different places in the line-up and still offer a full bowling option. Kallis or Imran would bat at #4 and #6 respectively. Cairns or Klusener at 7 for instance. LK is far superior to Dev as a no.7 being as he is much more reliable as a batsman. Ave of 23 for a #7 is now amazing. :hysterical: Ok I never expect too see you people take digs at Afridi again as clearly ave 23 at #7 with high SR is unbeatable performance. :cantstop: We can as we dont think sloggers ave 23 are ATG #7s.

Pls note that a batsman's performance should be measured relative to the era he played in. In the 80s, when Dev played most of his cricket at his peak, 260 was a great total. You could use cricinfo to see what the avg. run rate was in that period vs. what it is now .... Putting that in to context, Kapil avg close to 27 in the 80s. Among those who played close to 100 ODIs in the 80s for Ind - Vensarker avg 36, Gavaskar 35, Azhar 31, Srikant 29, etc. In that period, Kapil was also Ind's top wkt taker with 168 wkts If I am not wrong, field restrictions in the first 15 overs were introduced in the 90s. Earlier, it was probably experimented in ODIs in Aus PS Look at Viv Richards numbers as a batsmen esp. in relation to scores and SR in that era. Would you argue that Amla is better based on looking at just numbers (w/o context)? No wonder, Viv is the among the first choices in any ATG ODI 11 :nice:

[Muloghonto]

The mistake made is to assume the all rounder has to bat at #7. You can pick different all rounders who play in different places in the line-up and still offer a full bowling option. Kallis or Imran would bat at #4 and #6 respectively. Cairns or Klusener at 7 for instance. LK is far superior to Dev as a no.7 being as he is much more reliable as a batsman. Ave of 23 for a #7 is now amazing. :hysterical: Ok I never expect too see you people take digs at Afridi again as clearly ave 23 at #7 with high SR is unbeatable performance. :cantstop: We can as we dont think sloggers ave 23 are ATG #7s.

Strike rate of 90+ in an era where the average strike rate was 65-70 is whats amazing. For a #7, quickfire runs are more important than average. This is ODI cricket, where average AND strike rate matters and lower down the order you go, the more important strike rate becomes. Neither Cairns or Klusener were in Kapil's category as a #7 batsman in explosiveness, Kapil and Richards were THE MOST explosive batsmen in ODIs, as they had strike rate in the 90s when the average strike rate was less than 70. To contrast that with today, where the average strike rate is around 85-90, we'd require a batman who's strike rate is 125-130 to give the same amount of last minute impetus as Kapil did to the innings. In that sense, Kapil and Richards were more explosive than Sehwag or Afridi are/were. Also, #7 cannot be a specialist bat, #7 has to be a bowler as well. In that regard, Kapil was a far, far greater bowler than Lance or Chris Cairns. Afridi would be a consideration for #7 spot, except that Afridi is a little behind Kapil as a finisher ( Kapil always had good numbers against the best, Afridi does not) but Kapil was a far greater bowler than Afridi. Afridi and Klusener make a decent case for all-time B and C teams for ODIs, at the #7 spot, along with Richard Hadlee, but Kapil is easily a better #7 choice as nobody combines the job of quickfire runs, ability to construct an innings AND be a frontline great bowler in the format better than Kapil.

[zen]

In the 80s, if I am not wrong, as a fielder, Kapil was in the top league too

[Muloghonto]

Before the advent of the 2000s generation of Indian cricketers, where the likes of Yuvraj, Kaif, etc. made legitimate case for being world class fielders, only three Indians I've seen would make a 'fielders top XI' or be considered for it: Dravid, for his excellent catching and above average ground fielding, Azharuddin for his excellent ground fielding inside the circle and Kapil for being one of the best, if not the best outfielder I've seen before the 'dive happy' era. Kapil had serious speed, a rifle of an arm- bloody quick and flat returns to top of stump and one of the safest catching hands in the outfield.

[sweetaskandy]

Kapil always had good numbers against the best' date=' Afridi does not [/quote'] Kapil's batting stats against the best teams of his era - WI and Pak are: WI- ave: 24.05 Pak - ave: 15. 28 Aus - ave: 20.46 Good numbers? :giggle: You are hyping him as a #7 finisher/booster. Not with those numbers with any consistency.

[Muloghonto]

Kapil's batting stats against the best teams of his era - WI and Pak are: WI- ave: 24.05 Pak - ave: 15. 28 Aus - ave: 20.46 Good numbers? :giggle: You are hyping him as a #7 finisher/booster. Not with those numbers with any consistency.

A finisher at #7 does not need a higher than 20something average. He needs a high strike rate. As I said, at #7, a 15 off 10 balls is more important than 20 off 25 balls not out. Kapil scoring at 20 average against wi with a strike rate of 90+ in an era of average strike rate of 65-70 is perfect for a # 7.

[zen]

You are hyping him as a #7 finisher/booster. Not with those numbers with any consistency.

Based on your reasoning and grasp of numbers, I guess, you would rank your countryman Jayasuriya (a legend in SL and even Ind) in the same league as Md Hafeez PS And I believe you would further go on to suggest that with a career avg of 32, how could Jayasuriya have made an impact in PP :dontknow:

[sweetaskandy]

20 and 15 are crap ave for a all rounder. Even at 7 he will come in when the 5th wkt falls - he may typically bat 10 overs or so. They are rubbish returns esp v Pak/Aus.

[sweetaskandy]

Based on your reasoning and grasp of number' date=' I guess, you would rank your countryman Jayasuriya (a legend in SL and even Ind) in the same league as Md Hafeez [/quote'] = Opening with success and a huge SR for 400 + games and batting at 7 with 1 ton v minnows are the same now? :hysterical: Jayasuriya revolutionised batting. He won many games alone with his bat. Forget hundreds of wkts. Hafeez is an honest trier not a match winner. World of difference. JS is a far superior ODI player to Dev. Miles better. What do you want the world to say - Dev is #1? All those experts ignoring him are bias. :giggle: Pathetic blind nationalism, man.

[zen]

= Opening with success and a huge SR for 400 + games and batting at 7 with 1 ton v minnows are the same now? :hysterical: Jayasuriya revolutionised batting. He won many games alone with his bat. Forget hundreds of wkts. Hafeez is an honest trier not a match winner. World of difference. JS is a far superior ODI player to Dev. Miles better. What do you want the world to say - Dev is #1? All those experts ignoring him are bias. :giggle: Pathetic blind nationalism, man.

Thanks, so all of a sudden numbers are not important when it comes to Jayasuriya whose numbers are similar to Hafeez :hysterical: Not many in their right frame of mind would suggest that Jayasuriya is miles better than Kapil (let alone rank him higer than Kapil), so we can all see where the blind nationalism lies :P

[sweetaskandy]

Rather Jaya is recognised as a revolutionary player. Dev is not the best of his type, not even top few of his type. Do you think opening and batting #7 are the same? Hafeez is not a game winning batsman - Jaya was. Simple as that. Dev was not a game winning batsman or bowler with any consistency. He was a slogger and a medium pace trundler. He ranks 4/4 for all sane people amongst his AR peers and yet you guys hype him. :hysterical:

[zen]

Rather Jaya is recognised as a revolutionary player. Dev is not the best of his type, not even top few of his type. Do you think opening and batting #7 are the same? Hafeez is not a game winning batsman - Jaya was. Simple as that. Dev was not a game winning batsman or bowler with any consistency. He was a slogger and a medium pace trundler. He ranks 4/4 for all sane people amongst his AR peers and yet you guys hype him. :hysterical:

We are comparing Jayasuriya with Hafeez just like you are comparing Kapil to Afridi for their respective roles. Because if you believe that Jayasuriya > Hafeez despite both of them having similar numbers, you shouldn't have to focus on numbers all when it comes to Kapil vs. whoever FYI, Kapil is ranked amongst the best all-rounders of AT (i have no problems with how he is ranked amongst his peers as many rank him at the top as well), while Jauasuriya is amongst the SL players :winky: .... On one hand, you howl as if someone put his feet over your tail when it comes to Jayasuriya, but you have no problems barking against one of the greatest all rounders of AT :P

[sweetaskandy]

Also I didnt pick JS in my ODI X1. I picked Gilly and SRT to open. I am an honest cricket fan - not blind idiot. You guys just pick Indians to blow smoke amongst yourselves. As if the world hasn't seen these guys.