Better ODI batsman?

[Jono]

The 2007 line-up is still the best batting line-up I've seen in ODIs. Gilchrist, Hayden, Ponting, Clarke, Symonds, Hussey, Watson. Not a bad bowling line-up either.

That's obviously a phenomenal lineup, but I think Australia 2005 is slightly better on paper.

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Martyn
Symonds
Clarke
Hussey

Ironically this team massively underperformed in the ODIs in England just before the Ashes, losing quite a few ODIs to England and of course the famous Bangladesh loss. Then Hayden was dumped from ODIs after the Ashes.

By the time he came back Martyn was gone.

 

[vcs]

It would be interesting to debate whether Australia were more dominant in Tests or in ODIs at their peak. Think their ODI dominance gets somewhat overlooked in their Test winning streaks. They won absolutely everywhere, and had no trouble winning in tough places like India, SL, SA, etc.

 

[Jono]

Well, it's an apples to oranges comparison anyway. Given the choice between Ponting and Bevan, I'd take Ponting (purely as a batsman).

Yeah, no doubt Bevan was brilliant. Ponting's longevity also goes in his favour. I guess I just prefer the really prolific top-order batsmen who churn out the numbers (runs, hundreds etc. at a very good SR). A guy like Bevan/Hussey is probably going to turn an already very good team into an unbeatable one.

If you had to build a team around a batsman in ODIs, you'd choose Ponting over Bevan. But if you were to ask me who is the better ODI batsman, I'd go Bevan by the tiniest of margins. I can't quite explain why the guy who I'd build my team around isn't better than the other choice. I guess it's mainly because Ponting's a top order batsman and Bevan wasn't one (though he had the ability to be).

You'd very rarely, if ever, build a team around a 5-7 batsman, particularly in ODIs (which is why ten Doeschate batting at 5 is so silly for Netherlands). But that doesn't necessarily mean the batsman at 5-7 isn't better than someone in the top 4.

Great example is Dhoni (forgetting his recent form slump) is India's 2nd best ODI batsman (arguably best considering Sachin rarely plays), yet mainly bats 5-7.

 

[Furball]

It would be interesting to debate whether Australia were more dominant in Tests or in ODIs at their peak. Think their ODI dominance gets somewhat overlooked in their Test winning streaks. They won absolutely everywhere, and had no trouble winning in tough places like India, SL, SA, etc.

The side which won the last World Cup was without doubt the greatest ever ODI side.

They absolutely hammered everyone in their path, all the more impressive given that Hussey played like **** all tournament and Brett Lee missed the tournament through injury.

 

[Jono]

Symonds missed part of the tournament too.

 

[Furball]

Symonds missed part of the tournament too.

Haha yeah, forgot about that.

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Symonds
Watson
Hogg
Bracken
McGrath
Tait

Seriously, just look at line up. Literally no weaknesses in it whatsoever, and makes the current Indian batting line up look positively schoolboy in comparison.

 

[Jono]

Important to remember that Clarke back then was better than he is right now. Scored faster whilst also being damn solid.

 

[vcs]

And Gilchrist didn't even have a great tournament before the final.

Always amazes me how Australia's bowlers (who are very good but not necessarily ATGs) like Tait, Bracken, Hogg, Bichel etc. start performing like ATGs come World Cup time.

 

[vcs]

The side which won the last World Cup was without doubt the greatest ever ODI side.

They absolutely hammered everyone in their path, all the more impressive given that Hussey played like **** all tournament and Brett Lee missed the tournament through injury.

Would be interesting to put them up against the WI '79 team.

 

[vcs]

If you had to build a team around a batsman in ODIs, you'd choose Ponting over Bevan. But if you were to ask me who is the better ODI batsman, I'd go Bevan by the tiniest of margins. I can't quite explain why the guy who I'd build my team around isn't better than the other choice. I guess it's mainly because Ponting's a top order batsman and Bevan wasn't one (though he had the ability to be).

You'd very rarely, if ever, build a team around a 5-7 batsman, particularly in ODIs (which is why ten Doeschate batting at 5 is so silly for Netherlands). But that doesn't necessarily mean the batsman at 5-7 isn't better than someone in the top 4.

Great example is Dhoni (forgetting his recent form slump) is India's 2nd best ODI batsman (arguably best considering Sachin rarely plays), yet mainly bats 5-7.

I see what you mean. When I checked Bevan's record, I found he has done a fair bit of batting at No. 4 and No. 5 also, so he was not always restricted to that "finisher" role that he is best known for.

 

[Jono]

Pretty sure his record at 4 is phenomenal.

 

[vcs]

Yeah, he averages 59.6.

 

[silentstriker]

Haha yeah, forgot about that.

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Symonds
Watson
Hogg
Bracken
McGrath
Tait

Seriously, just look at line up. Literally no weaknesses in it whatsoever, and makes the current Indian batting line up look positively schoolboy in comparison.

Yea, the current Indian batting lineup is not even the best Indian lineup of recent times. It's filled with a few too many people in the middle order who you don't really expect will make a big innings too often. It's very different from the Indian Test batting lineup where it wouldn't be unexpected for anyone in the batting line up to make a big score - except probably the guy batting in Yuvraj Singh spot, especially if that guy is Yuvraj Singh.

The same with this Aussie ODI lineup - anyone could make a big score and take the game way.