Dream ODI XI: Select the TWO opening batsmen

[PhoenixFire]

Yeah, mindless. Hayden is the better bat then Gilly, but people are selecting him because of his keeping whilst I would select Dhoni as the keeper as his probably the better ODI player.

I don't know about other people (but you clearly do...), but I voted for Gilchrist, because umm, he is better ODI opener than Hayden.

Maybe because his not?

 

[stephen]

Yeah, a pioneer of ODI cricket. Not a great. There is a difference.

As an opener (which is what this discussion is about) he has very similar stats to Gilly. Average of just under 35 with a strike rate of 92.

The real question here is "if we are after an aggressive partner for Tendulkar, do we want one that can keep to a very high standard or do we want one that can bowl to a reasonable standard?" Most people have chosen the first. I certainly wouldn't begrudge someone for chosing the latter.

Personally I think each of the real contenders here offer something different:

Gilchrist - keeping, aggression
Jayasuriya - part time bowling, aggression
Hayden/Greenidge - consistency and high average
Waugh - Aggression and beauty

I'm sure that there are others, but Jayasuriya definately deserves to be among the top tier of ODI openers when viewed through a historical lens.

 

[honestbharani]

Lara and Sachin.. left/right and all that.. And allows us to pick Dhoni as the keeper, who inspite of the lack of longevity, is really starting to grow on me as an ODI batsman..

 

[G.I.Joe]

There's no law against Gilchrist and Dhoni both being picked. I'd have both in the team, with Gilchrist ahead of Hayden and company even if he didn't keep wickets.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Jayasuriya falls into the same category as Michael Clarke in terms of being called an allrounder and I wouldn't call Clarke an allrounder. His batting never really impressed me either.

 

[Athlai]

Jayasuriya falls into the same category as Michael Clarke in terms of being called an allrounder and I wouldn't call Clarke an allrounder. His batting never really impressed me either.

wot

 

[Prince EWS]

Disappointed to not see Greenidge with a vote, even though not even I myself voted for him. I think he's the second best ODI opener of all time - I went with Gilchrist though for balance reasons.

 

[The Sean]

Though I didn't vote for either and haven't looked up their ODI career numbers, I always felt Haynes was the better of the two at the shorter form of the game.

 

[honestbharani]

There's no law against Gilchrist and Dhoni both being picked. I'd have both in the team, with Gilchrist ahead of Hayden and company even if he didn't keep wickets.

no law.. personally, I feel it is overkill.. Esp. if it is gonna cost Bevan or Hussey or Lara or Ponting..

 

[Uppercut]

Disappointed to not see Greenidge with a vote, even though not even I myself voted for him. I think he's the second best ODI opener of all time - I went with Gilchrist though for balance reasons.

I think Dhoni picks himself and the side doesn't need two keepers. I went for Anwar, but considering the depth a Dream ODI side is going to have, I think Gilly might actually be the best option on batting alone.

Cross-era comparisons become seriously difficult when it comes to ODIs. Even allowing for the generational gap, why would a team comprised of all the greatest batsmen ever to play the game even dream of opening with a batsman striking at 64?

 

[Prince EWS]

I think Dhoni picks himself and the side doesn't need two keepers. I went for Anwar, but considering the depth a Dream ODI side is going to have, I think Gilly might actually be the best option on batting alone.

Cross-era comparisons become seriously difficult when it comes to ODIs. Even allowing for the generational gap, why would a team comprised of all the greatest batsmen ever to play the game even dream of opening with a batsman striking at 64?

I don't know why, but I still have reservations about picking Dhoni. I really shouldn't, and I probably wouldn't if he'd already retired, but I still see him as a player who's going particularly well rather than a player who has done particularly well - as a player proving himself rather than as a proven player - despite compelling evidence to the contrary. I think there's a case for Gilchrist over Dhoni in the team even ignoring my reservations though - not because he's necessarily better, but because there's more competition in the middle order and Gilchrist playing allows a better batsman than Greenidge to fill the spot that would've otherwise been taken up by Dhoni.

As for Greenidge's strike rate, it was perfectly acceptable during his era. I'm not interested in how he'd go now, but the impact he had when he actually played. The rate he scored at is quite comparable to the rate Hayden scored at given what a winning score was at the time. His standardised strike rate is 73.77 which actually is still slightly on the slow side I suppose, but Hayden's been mentioned a few times and his is only 76.66 at a significantly lower average (particularly in standardised terms, but in actual terms as well).

 

[Pothas]

Went for Tendulkar and Jayasuriya, probably would have gone for Gilly usually but he is going to win anyway and I would be happy with Dhoni.

 

[four_or_six]

Went for Tendulkar because you have to, and then I think to partner him either Gilchrist or Jayasuria are best because of their strike rates. Went for Gilchrist because I'm going to go for bowling options lower down the order rather than Dhoni.

 

[G.I.Joe]

no law.. personally, I feel it is overkill.. Esp. if it is gonna cost Bevan or Hussey or Lara or Ponting..

The only reason you feel its an overkill is because he keeps wickets too. If he was just a pure batsman, there'd be no talk of this 'overkill' business. He'd be in competition with those players as just another batsmen; because he's good enough just with the bat to merit comparison with the likes of Hussey and Bevan, and people would be perfectly fine with it. In essence, he's actually being penalised for possessing a secondary skill that has no bearing on his merits as a batsman alone.

 

[andyc]

Longetivity doesn't necessarily mean his one of the alltime greats. His not even an allrounder, his a part-timer. Took less wickets then innings bowled in.

Gahhhhhh. When you write something for school, do you write his or he's?



Anywho... Gilly and Sachin for me. Sanath a very good shout though, has always been a favourite of mine. Just so brutal.

 

[JBH001]

Sanath and Anwar as I'd like either one of these to partner Sachin - although it looks moot at this stage.

Dhoni to keep.

 

[zaremba]

Gahhhhhh. When you write something for school, do you write his or he's?



Anywho... Gilly and Sachin for me. Sanath a very good shout though, has always been a favourite of mine. Just so brutal.

this

 

[Maximus0723]

I really wanted Lara as opener. He has done amazing as an opener. And with Sachin, you know something special is going to happen every time possible.

Assuming Sachin and Gilly got this covered, I want Lara at one down.

Edit:: nvm about Lara, I forgot about Sir Viv lol

 

[Zinzan]

I reckon there's day-light between Tendulkar and 'Night"

 

[Spark]

Jayasuriya falls into the same category as Michael Clarke in terms of being called an allrounder and I wouldn't call Clarke an allrounder. His batting never really impressed me either.