aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Top thread, i guess some top teams could get away with it. But in cricket specialist postions have great importance thats why for example in Australia's ODI team over the years with Gilchrist yea he could come in @ 6 or 7 & be destructive just like he has been in test cricket, but in ODI's given the field restrictions & power-plays with his ability to score runs in that period of the game & the aura of him coming out to bat (which has had a strong psycological effect on teams) you would always want him to do so.
But then you look at some lesser sides like the West Indies where Lara being their best batsman. In the ODI format even though he showed early in his career that he could be a top ODI opener, it would have been foolish for the windies to let him open since for opponents psycological they would think we get Lara early the windies are overw which in most cases even though he had batsmen like Hooper, Chanderpaul, Gayle, Richardson they didn't always come to the party.
So overall i'd say it could work depending on the ability of your batsmen to adapt to different batting positions or roles but if your side lacks that versatily & is a bit one player dependent its a no no.
But then you look at some lesser sides like the West Indies where Lara being their best batsman. In the ODI format even though he showed early in his career that he could be a top ODI opener, it would have been foolish for the windies to let him open since for opponents psycological they would think we get Lara early the windies are overw which in most cases even though he had batsmen like Hooper, Chanderpaul, Gayle, Richardson they didn't always come to the party.
So overall i'd say it could work depending on the ability of your batsmen to adapt to different batting positions or roles but if your side lacks that versatily & is a bit one player dependent its a no no.