Rohit Sharma V/S ABDV the awesome.

[BeautifulGame]

I agree mate. De Villiers should come up the order. For some reason, SA want him down the order. That is a strategy issue. I agree he should come up the order but for some reason SA want him down the order. Whenever there is a crucial game, they push him down. I wouldn't be surprised with him getting easily influenced by others (cos as a captain I get the feeling he isn't a great strategic expert). Very harsh point bro. I disagree. Mahela has been begging SL board for an opening spot for ages (I think he averages 44 with 85 SR there) but SL board is not giving him the spot saying they want him in the middle order. And he along with Sanga are two of the most powerful players in SL. De Villiers is sent down NOT because SA considers him not good enough for top order but they think he would give more output for the team's cause in the lower order. That's the thinking whether its right or wrong. [ Dhoni in IPL used to say the same about Albie Morkel who at one point was damn good with the bat.

Well Mahela at best is an average batsman and is mostly a FTB.Natural Lanka borad had reservations about him opening in Aus conditions .Morkel even at his best is nothing better than a good slogger.De Villiers is hyped as best of his generation. And if SA mgmt want to push him down or he want to hide at 5(either way it doesnt matter) why would anyone consider him the best of the generation or among the greats As i earlier said if we want to consider him one of the best he should be compared with Sachin Ponting Waugh or Lara.U cant play the role of lower order hitter in the team and then be considered along side the best of our times.

[BeautifulGame]

In WC semifinal, I guess they simply got scared of De Villiers getting out to a peach in the tricky situation. So they sent Roussouw to face the tricky situation cos De Villiers was more precious and they wanted him to give the rocket fire thrust at the end. Of course, we can say he chickened out but a guy who hasn't looked like he was troubled by any bowler for the last 4 years...the odds are unlikely. Its just a case of fear factor by the team and nothing else. More than anything, Amla's failure messed up the whole thing. Even if the top order had played SOMEWHAT okayish, this thing wouldn't look so stupid. Its a strategy issue bro. Whether its a good strategy is another question.

That doesnt exactly sould great confidence in De Villier's technique from team management does it? Do u see Viv or Ponting being held back in a world cup final because conditions are tough? And as i earlier said it wasnt an one off.He did the same in T20 world cup semi final in Bangladesh http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-t20/engine/current/match/682963.html What tough conditions he had there to chicken out honestly?

[sensible-indian]

I totally get what Hippo Sucks and Beautiful Game are trying to say. De Villiers should play at No 4 at the max. Come up the order and control the game. The question here is: Does De Villiers intentionally stay back or is he made to stay back? ODIs have evolved. Teams these days don't think like "best batsman" should play in so and so spot. They think like what is the spot a batsman will give the team the most output? Dhoni would have STILL played at No 5 or No 6 even if we didn't have Kohli. Once De villiers finishes his career we will know where to rate him. But whatever slots Devilliers has played in till now, he has excelled and looks simply unbeatable (as of now).

[HippoSucks]

In WC semifinal, I guess they simply got scared of De Villiers getting out to a peach in the tricky situation. So they sent Roussouw to face the tricky situation cos De Villiers was more precious and they wanted him to give the rocket fire thrust at the end. Of course, we can say he chickened out but a guy who hasn't looked like he was troubled by any bowler for the last 4 years...the odds are unlikely. Its just a case of fear factor by the team and nothing else. More than anything, Amla's failure messed up the whole thing. Even if the top order had played SOMEWHAT okayish, this thing wouldn't look so stupid. Its a strategy issue bro. Whether its a good strategy is another question.

No one is saying that he was scared of the bowlers. But effectively, it shows that he isn't able to handle pressure. And de Villiers is a proper batsman, not a lower order slogger. Russouw can slog very well at the end of an innings and Miller can do it even better. Having de Villiers negotiate the difficult conditions and then have Russouw/Miller accelerate at the end is the obvious thing to do. If the strategy was based on the assumption that Amla wouldn't fail, then why wouldn't you change the strategy if Amla does fail? If you make a strategy of bowling short to batsman, and then you are getting hit for sixes off them, wouldn't you change the strategy? That makes me think that sending de Villiers down the order wasn't a strategy that relied on Amla performing. Fair enough, if it was a strategy that had nothing to do with de Villiers' inability to handle pressure, then we can't conclude anything from it.

[sensible-indian]

Well Mahela at best is an average batsman and is mostly a FTB.Natural Lanka borad had reservations about him opening in Aus conditions .Morkel even at his best is nothing better than a good slogger.De Villiers is hyped as best of his generation. And if SA mgmt want to push him down or he want to hide at 5(either way it doesnt matter) why would anyone consider him the best of the generation or among the greats As i earlier said if we want to consider him one of the best he should be compared with Sachin Ponting Waugh or Lara.U cant play the role of lower order hitter in the team and then be considered along side the best of our times.

That is weak argument bro cos Mahela doesn't get to open anywhere these days irrespective of his performance. In Australia, Mahela averages 41. In England, he averages 77. In SL, he averages 34. Even that is higher than his career average. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;type=allround

And as i earlier said it wasnt an one off.He did the same in T20 world cup semi final in Bangladesh http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-t20/engine/current/match/682963.html What tough conditions he had there to chicken out honestly?

Which goes to PROVE my point bro. If De Villiers was a coward who wanted easy conditions, he SHOULD HAVE come up the order in WC T20. But he didn't. Cos it was the team strategy and De Villiers would have nodded his head. The first 2 wickets fell there in 5 overs. SA wanted him for the final 10.

[sensible-indian]

No one is saying that he was scared of the bowlers. But effectively, it shows that he isn't able to handle pressure. And de Villiers is a proper batsman, not a lower order slogger. Russouw can slog very well at the end of an innings and Miller can do it even better. Having de Villiers negotiate the difficult conditions and then have Russouw/Miller accelerate at the end is the obvious thing to do. If the strategy was based on the assumption that Amla wouldn't fail, then why wouldn't you change the strategy if Amla does fail? If you make a strategy of bowling short to batsman, and then you are getting hit for sixes off them, wouldn't you change the strategy? That makes me think that sending de Villiers down the order wasn't a strategy that relied on Amla performing. Fair enough, if it was a strategy that had nothing to do with de Villiers' inability to handle pressure, then we can't conclude anything from it.

Yes, De Villiers COULD HAVE played the tricky part better than Roussow but the odds of him getting a unplayable peach was also high which is what would have scared SA team management. Why do we have nightwatchman in Test cricket? Not because he can play better than regular bats. It is to sacrifice him for the peach balls if they arrive. Here Rousoow is not the nightwatchman but you get the idea. As for change in strategy based on Amla's non performance, you are bang on. That's why SA is a phattu team in tournaments. They just take action that ends up harming themselves.

[BeautifulGame]

That is weak argument bro cos Mahela doesn't get to open anywhere these days. In Australia, Mahela averages 41. In England, he averages 77. In SL, he averages 34. Even that is higher than his career average. Way higher than his career average. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;type=allround

Fair enough surprising stats.Even then Mahela too came at no lower than no.4 . And here De Villiers came at 4 all world cup and suddenly in Semi final tough situation hides at 5

Gave you Mahela's stats. Still management doesn't allow Mahela.

Even if it was team mgmt why would anyone consider him the best of the generation or among the greats if his role is middle order slogger?

Which goes to PROVE my point bro. If De Villiers was a coward who wanted easy conditions, he SHOULD HAVE come up the order in WC T20. But he didn't. Cos it was the team strategy and De Villiers would have nodded his head.

[HippoSucks]

That is weak argument bro cos Mahela doesn't get to open anywhere these days. In Australia, Mahela averages 41. In England, he averages 77. In SL, he averages 34. Even that is higher than his career average. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/49289.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=default;template=results;type=allround Which goes to PROVE my point bro. If De Villiers was a coward who wanted easy conditions, he SHOULD HAVE come up the order in WC T20. But he didn't. Cos it was the team strategy and De Villiers would have nodded his head.

I think we all can agree that de Villiers isn't one to not bat just because the conditions are difficult. However, it is certainly possible that de Villiers didn't come up the order because of the high pressure in a semifinal of a T20 World Cup. http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerPositions_T20.asp?PlayerID=3241 He almost always bats at #3 or 4 in T20s, yet in this particular match he came down the order. On the other hand, Kohli (who averaged 70 chasing in T20s at that time) came at #3 chasing a rather large total (South Africa had never lost defending more than 166 in T20s ever before) in a T20 World Cup semifinal and made a match winning 72. Let's say the management asked de Villiers to come down the order and it wasn't de Villiers' choice (because he is unable to handle pressure). What would be the reasoning behind that? For the ODI World Cup semifinal you said it could be due to de Villiers potentially getting out to a good delivery. What about in the T20 World Cup? Will you preserve de Villiers in every high pressure match just because he can potentially get out to a good ball?

[sensible-indian]

How will that justify holding him back in the world T20.Unless u are saying Team mgmt were scared of De Villiers chocking and cant handle pressure of building an innings?

Cos they wanted him for the final 10 overs. 2 wickets of SA fell around 5th over. SA always has had the trend of conserving ABD in all knockouts.

[sensible-indian]

I think we all can agree that de Villiers isn't one to not bat just because the conditions are difficult. However' date= it is certainly possible that de Villiers didn't come up the order because of the high pressure in a semifinal of a T20 World Cup. http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerPositions_T20.asp?PlayerID=3241 He almost always bats at #3 or 4 in T20s, yet in this particular match he came down the order. On the other hand, Kohli (who averaged 70 chasing in T20s at that time) came at #3 chasing a rather large total (South Africa had never lost defending more than 166 in T20s ever before) in a T20 World Cup semifinal and made a match winning 72. Let's say the management asked de Villiers to come down the order and it wasn't de Villiers' choice (because he is unable to handle pressure). What would be the reasoning behind that? For the ODI World Cup semifinal you said it could be due to de Villiers potentially getting out to a good delivery. What about in the T20 World Cup? Will you preserve de Villiers in every high pressure match just because he can potentially get out to a good ball?

That is possible technically but its more likely to do with the fact that they wanted ABD for the final 10 overs as 2 wickets had fell in 5 overs. In RCB too, ABD batted lower down the order all these yars (mainly for the final 10) before moving up this year. But that SF match ABD bottled it by getting out to a long hop.

[HippoSucks]

That is possible technically but its more likely to do with the fact that they wanted ABD for the final 10 overs as 2 wickets had fell in 5 overs. In RCB too, ABD batted lower down the order all these yars (mainly for the final 10) before moving up this year.

I've always had the impression that in the last 10 overs you have people like Maxwell who are lower order hitters to bat. Not proper batsman like de Villiers. If team managers consider him to be a better lower order slogger than a proper middle order batsman, how can he even be in contention for being the greatest of all time ODI batsman? Also over his IPL career for 72% of the matches de Villiers has batted at #3/4 (http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/IPL/PlayerPositions.asp?PlayerID=3241).

[BeautifulGame]

Cos they wanted him for the final 10 overs. 2 wickets of SA fell around 5th over. SA always has had the trend of conserving ABD in all knockouts.

So why would anyone consider him the best of the generation or among the greats if his role is middle order slogger? And to conclude for me he is a similar ODI player to Symonds who is ATG in ODIs..Obviously not as good as Symonds who was staggering player under pressure. And no one would consider or rate Symonds alongside Sachin or Viv or Pointing etc Its clearly overhyping when people say he is the best of his generation or is a modern day great like Viv or Sachin

[sensible-indian]

So why would anyone consider him the best of the generation or among the greats if his role is middle order slogger? And to conclude for me he is a similar ODI player to Symonds who is ATG in ODIs..Obviously not as good as Symonds who was staggering player under pressure. And no one would consider or rate Symonds alongside Sachin or Viv or Pointing etc Its clearly overhyping when people say he is the best of his generation or is a modern day great like Viv or Sachin

Because he is UNREAL at his job there. Does Symonds (who was damn good) have his stats or aura? ABD has stats PLUS viewing wise he looks a GOAT. See the way he plays bowlers. No one even remotely troubles him. ABD is CLEARLY a potential GOAT (maybe ATG if he fails in the next WC) but I guess your view is different. Dhoni is considered one of the greatest ODI bats and he played in the middle to lower middle order. These days the rule that the best batsman must play at the top isn't followed. Its all about who gives the team the best output at what slot.

[sensible-indian]

I've always had the impression that in the last 10 overs you have people like Maxwell who are lower order hitters to bat. Not proper batsman like de Villiers. If team managers consider him to be a better lower order slogger than a proper middle order batsman' date= how can he even be in contention for being the greatest of all time ODI batsman? Also over his IPL career for 72% of the matches de Villiers has batted at #3/4 (http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/IPL/PlayerPositions.asp?PlayerID=3241).

Last 10 overs for T20 is DIFFERENT from ODIs. Last 10 overs for T20 is like middle order in ODI (25th over). In ODIs, ABD plays in middle order but gets pushed behind at times. He is rated one of the greatest due to his outputs at whatever slot he plays. If we are only going to rate top orders greater than lower orders, then we might as well rate Sanga to be a better ODI batsman than ABD and Dilshan (the opener) to be a better batsman than Dhoni. It doesn't work that way. You see player's output. Ease of play. Aura. Stats. ABD is just unreal in that. He may or may not be greater than Sachin/Viv in ODIs but in the last 5 years, the craze he has is completely justified. As for IPL, position doesn't matter. When he comes out to bat matters. If RCB is 2 down at 10th or 12th over, OBVIOUSLY ABD would come out to bat.

[HippoSucks]

Last 10 overs for T20 is DIFFERENT from ODIs. Last 10 overs for T20 is like middle order in ODI (25th over). In ODIs, ABD plays in middle order but gets pushed behind at times. He is rated one of the greatest due to his outputs at whatever slot he plays. If we are only going to rate top orders greater than lower orders, then we might as well rate Sanga to be a better ODI batsman than ABD and Dilshan (the opener) to be a better batsman than Dhoni. It doesn't work that way. You see player's output. Ease of play. Aura. Stats. ABD is just unreal in that. He may or may not be greater than Sachin/Viv in ODIs but in the last 5 years, the craze he has is completely justified. As for IPL, position doesn't matter. When he comes out to bat matters. If RCB is 2 down at 10th or 12th over, OBVIOUSLY ABD would come out to bat.

Because he is UNREAL at his job there. Does Symonds (who was damn good) have his stats or aura? ABD has stats PLUS viewing wise he looks a GOAT. See the way he plays bowlers. No one even remotely troubles him. ABD is CLEARLY a potential GOAT (maybe ATG if he fails in the next WC) but I guess your view is different. Dhoni is considered one of the greatest ODI bats and he played in the middle to lower middle order. These days the rule that the best batsman must play at the top isn't followed. Its all about who gives the team the best output at what slot.

Statistics are obviously inflated considering the ridiculous rules in place nowadays. That makes it ridiculous to compare him with players from past generations who played in much more difficult conditions. But that deviates the discussion from his pressure handling capabilities. I don't think aura should be a criteria for a batsman's quality. Otherwise Sachin is easily a better batsman than Bradman. I definitely rate Sangakkara as a better batsman than de Villiers (although I can see de Villiers catching up to him in ODIs very soon). Dhoni is considered an ATG ODI batsman for his finishing skills. If that is the argument for de Villiers then it makes sense, but I don't think many people consider de Villiers to be filling the role of a finisher. As for the IPL, I responded to the "In RCB too, ABD batted lower down the order all these yars (mainly for the final 10) before moving up this year." comment. RCB are rarely wicket-less by the 5th over, much less the 10th. So for the past few seasons de Villiers has been coming to bat very early (in the first 10 overs of the innings usually) as he has mostly been batting at #3/4.

[BeautifulGame]

Because he is UNREAL at his job there. Does Symonds (who was damn good) have his stats or aura? ABD has stats PLUS viewing wise he looks a GOAT. See the way he plays bowlers. No one even remotely troubles him. ABD is CLEARLY a potential GOAT (maybe ATG if he fails in the next WC) but I guess your view is different. Dhoni is considered one of the greatest ODI bats and he played in the middle to lower middle order. These days the rule that the best batsman must play at the top isn't followed. Its all about who gives the team the best output at what slot.

Sorry but in which team does the best batsman doesnt bat in top 3 (or worse top4) in ODIs today? And Dhoni is considered ATG because he was great finisher.Thats what middle order bat main job is.And clearly AB DV isnt that good a finisher either.

[sensible-indian]

Statistics are obviously inflated considering the ridiculous rules in place nowadays. That makes it ridiculous to compare him with players from past generations who played in much more difficult conditions. But that deviates the discussion from his pressure handling capabilities. I don't think aura should be a criteria for a batsman's quality. Otherwise Sachin is easily a better batsman than Bradman. I definitely rate Sangakkara as a better batsman than de Villiers (although I can see de Villiers catching up to him in tests very soon). As for the IPL, I responded to the "In RCB too, ABD batted lower down the order all these yars (mainly for the final 10) before moving up this year." comment.

In ODIs?

As for the IPL, I responded to the "In RCB too, ABD batted lower down the order all these yars (mainly for the final 10) before moving up this year." comment.

Bro, my context was that he came out to bat to play the last 10 overs and not the first 10...most of the times. That's why I said position doesn't matter. At what stage he comes out matters.

[HippoSucks]

In ODIs? Bro, my context was that he came out to bat to play the last 10 overs and not the first 10...most of the times. That's why I said position doesn't matter. At what stage he comes out matters.

Yes, in ODIs, because Sangakkara has played over double the ODIs de Villiers has played. If de Villiers continues this form for a few more years than he will definitely surpass Sangakkara in ODIs IMO. By the way I meant de Villiers will catch up to him in ODIs very soon, not tests. @Bold I edited my post "RCB are rarely wicket-less by the 5th over, much less the 10th. So for the past few seasons de Villiers has been coming to bat very early (in the first 10 overs of the innings usually) as he has mostly been batting at #3/4."

[sensible-indian]

Sorry but in which team does the best batsman doesnt bat in top 3 (or worse top4) in ODIs today? And Dhoni is considered ATG because he was great finisher.Thats what middle order bat main job is.And clearly AB DV isnt that good a finisher either.

Dhoni was India's best ODI bat all these years (along with Kohli). Even if Kohli wasn't there, he would be the best batsman who was playing in middle to lower middle order. Yes, ABD isn't as good a finisher as Dhoni or Bevan. That will count against him a bit but overall he has been so good. Someone who is SO FAR ahead of the competition (like Viv was in the 70s and 80s and SRT was in the 90s)...DESERVES to be rated high. 1. And he doesn't bottle it like Amla. 2. He isn't all stats. His aura while playing can be seen. 3. He never looks troubled at any time. 4. Unreal ability to construct innings plus slog Just cos he isn't as good a finisher as Dhoni or Bevan shouldn't hold him back from being one of the greatest ODI bats (in a club where Viv, SRT, Bevan and Dhoni are part of). And like Viv, SRT....ABD is also far far ahead of his competition both in SR and average. He has the SAME NUMBER of runs as Amla while batting lower down the order. That's just shows who he is.

[sensible-indian]

Yes, in ODIs, because Sangakkara has played over double the ODIs de Villiers has played. If de Villiers continues this form for a few more years than he will definitely surpass Sangakkara in ODIs IMO. By the way I meant de Villiers will catch up to him in ODIs very soon, not tests. @Bold I edited my post "RCB are rarely wicket-less by the 5th over, much less the 10th. So for the past few seasons de Villiers has been coming to bat very early (in the first 10 overs of the innings usually) as he has mostly been batting at #3/4."

Forget overall achievements in ODI bro. Right now in the last 5 years, who is better in ODIs in your view? ABD (who bats at No 4 or No 5) or Sanga (who bats at No 3)?