Originally Posted by Jono
Bowls, and is one of the best fielders in the world. On top of that he's absolutely devastating with the bat at times, and since the WC has been brilliant.
He's the better player alright.
Its closer if you count just batting, but even so, I reckon most teams would rather Symonds than Trescothick. Even if he doesn't face the new ball. Otherwise you could use that argument for every good but not great opener against great middle order batsmen.
And I reckon that Trescothick is one of the best ODI openers in the world and it's not a position that just anyone can succeed in.
Symonds only averages marginally more than Trescothick and scores centuries at a far less frequent rate. Granted, Symonds doesn't get as much time to bat, but it's really my whole point as to why you can't categorically call Symonds better than Trescothick.
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."