You ARE joking, aren't you?Saeed Anwar is a bit of a different story, because though his record was good, I still would take a couple others over him.
Yea, you wouldn't be wrong if you just ignore everything I say about ODIs. I have no defense for Jayasurya > Anwar in ODI, just who I think is better. Also, five points of average doesn't exactly mean all that much, depending on other factors. Look at Lara vs Dravid.You ARE joking, aren't you?
Ganguly maybe, but Jayasuriya? SRs pretty similar, Anwar's average was a good 5 points higher than Jayasuriya's.
Oh, hang on, I forget... ss and ODIs don't mix.
Jayasuria is an excellent one day player, maybe he is past his now. But he can open the batting, take advantage of the power plays and go on to make hundreds. Just look at this world cup. He is second in the list of most ODI 100's. Plus he has taken nearly 400 ODI wickets. He is the ULTIMATE ODI player.
but in ODIs I prefer Ganguly and Jayasurya above Anwar.IMO.
I don't entirely agree with that. Inzamam struggled against Warne in ODI's a lot IIRC. Warne has gotten him many times and if I recall Inzi looked a bit tentative an uncertain how to play him.If there was one batsman who was totally unconcerned about the reputaion of the bowler he was facing it was Inzy. In fact the better the bowler the better he batted.
To compare him to Richards and Jones (not to mention Zaheer Abbas) is utterly fruitless IMO.I think Inzamam is one of the ten best ODI batsmen ever personally. I don't have a dead-set top ten, but he'd be in there with Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Michael Bevan, Mark Waugh, Dean Jones, Ricky Ponting, Adam Gilchrist, Saeed Anwar etc.
Nonsense, that, IMO. Pakistan's most recent WC barely got going, so that counts for virtually nothing; and obviously he was poor in WC2003, which, purely and simply, can happen. But there was little wrong with his play in 3 out of 4 WCs, his first 3 being acceptible enough.One thing against Inzy is the accusation that he doesn't perform in big tournaments, an article before the WC highlighted Inzy's terrible record in tournaments and finals which is something that should be taken into consideration when rating him imo, especialy as players like Lara and Hayden have to deal with it anytime their name is mentioned.
Ditto.If there was one batsman who was totally unconcerned about the reputaion of the bowler he was facing it was Inzy. In fact the better the bowler the better he batted.
If there was one batsman who was totally unfazed (and looked it) by the dire condition of his team in the match, it was Inzy. He seemed to thrive in crisis situation.
If there was one batsman who could judge the game situation and go about as if he knew exactly what was required (including the most effortless changing of gears ever) it was Inzy.
If there was one batsman who never ever looked anything less than effortlessly imperial at the wicket it was Inzy.
No, I have no doubt whatsoever that he was one of the finest (and relatively most under-rated) one day batsman ever. The only blot was his runningt between the wickets. That too not because he was slow but because he couldnt be rushed with a bat in hand.
I wasn't comparing them, rather just saying they'd be in my top ten. As it is, Viv would be number #2 on my list of all time best ODI batsmen (and a contender for #1). Jones... I don't know where he'd rank... but he wasn't as great as Viv.To compare him to Richards and Jones (not to mention Zaheer Abbas) is utterly fruitless IMO.
It'd be like comparing WG to Barrington.
purly based on strike rate. inzi could play shots and make cricket fun to watch. Dravid is going to defence and defind every ball and make u fall asleep while watching the game. there ae occations that Dravid's slow bating have caused india the match. i will prove it soon.Can't really see how on Earth you got it that way around.