Captain Cook's All Time ODI XI

[Captain_Cook]

I've noticed a large number of threads dedicated to Test XI so I'm going to add to the smaller number of ODI XIs. There are some surprises and some predictable choices. Be warned, this list is a matter of personal preference.

I will start with the twelfth man before I start the list:

Shane Watson
Australia 2002-

RHB RFM

Runs - 5105
Average - 41.16
Strike Rate - 89.48
100s - 8
50s - 30

Wickets - 162
Average - 29.53
Economy - 4.83

This Australian all rounder is one of my favourite players, mainly due to his antics in the summer of 2005 for Hampshire where he recorded his highest FC score. I think he's the perfect twelfth man: an aggressive batsman at any position in the batting order (despite his technical flaws) and a stingy pace bowler who can bowl 10 inexpensive overs and take wickets when batsmen make errors. However, his jack of all trades, master of none playing style has cost him a place in the team outright.

Captain Cook's All Time ODI XI

I - ?
II - ?
III - ?
IV - ?
V - ?
VI - ?
VII - ?
VIII - ?
IX - ?
X - ?
XI - ?

Twelfth Man - SR Watson

 

[smash84]

thanks for the warning

 

[Maximas]

decent pick IMO, Watson's ODI credentials are often forgotten when we get pissed off at him ****ing up constantly in tests, very valuable ODI player.

Although I probably don't consider him up with the ATGs though tbh

 

[adub]

Jonty ftw.

 

[Red]

Although I probably don't consider him up with the ATGs though tbh

I do. Batting average of 40 at a SR of 90 as an opener. And he's your 5th bowler sorted.

Adds a lot of flexibility to an ODI team does Watto

 

[Maximas]

Yeah, his figures looks excellent but you have to consider the era of ODI cricket he has played in - very different to the 80s and 90s and I think that should be taken into account tbh.

 

[Captain_Cook]

X

Wasim Akram
Pakistan
1984-2003

LHB LF

Wickets - 502
Average - 23.52
Economy - 3.89

The leader of the bowling attack. Akram's record is spectacular and I would use him to open and close the innings along with my IX. The weapons he had at his disposal are matched by few ODI bowlers in the game nowadays. Even in this era of powerplays, better bats, two new balls and short boundaries, I feel that Wasim Akram's talents would still be almost impossible for most batsmen to dominate. As the master of the yorker, he defines the death bowler as it was originally intended and I don't know anyone who has executed it better.

Captain Cook's All Time ODI XI

I - ?
II - ?
III - ?
IV - ?
V - ?
VI - ?
VII - ?
VIII - ?
IX - ?
X - W Akram
XI - ?

Twelfth Man - SR Watson

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Here's hoping Ronnie Irani will make it in the team.

 

[Maximas]

Mate, that guy was the main reason for my successful Essex campaign in cricket captain 2005, although Graham Napier wasn't too shabby either

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Mate, that guy was the main reason for my successful Essex campaign in cricket captain 2005, although Graham Napier wasn't too shabby either

Whatever Ronnie lacked in international cricket, he made up for in demonstrating his calisthenics to the adoring crowds.

I can even forgive him his unfortunate affliction - being Lancastrian.

 

[ankitj]

They both belong in my XI (or get very close). So I like the start.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, his figures looks excellent but you have to consider the era of ODI cricket he has played in - very different to the 80s and 90s and I think that should be taken into account tbh.

I still think he's one of the best ODI players of all time though. He'd definitely make my list of the best eleven ODI players, but he probably wouldn't make my all-time XI (or XII) for balance reasons.

 

[Red]

Yeah, his figures looks excellent but you have to consider the era of ODI cricket he has played in - very different to the 80s and 90s and I think that should be taken into account tbh.

No doubt, but his figures compare with Amla, KP and AB Devill, who are the best modern ODI bats imo

 

[watson]

Even though this is an ATG ODI team, I do have a problem with the selection of players who aren't also great/extremely good Test match players. They just seem like half-baked players with some kind of flaw in their game to me.

So while the selection of Shane Watson just makes me go "blllurrrrr", the selection of Wasim Akram is excellent from every angle.

 

[Adders]

Even though this is an ATG ODI team, I do have a problem with the selection of players who aren't also great/extremely good Test match players.

Well I think that's a problem you have to deal with as picking a ODI side has as much to do with test credentials as vice versa.......and Shane Watson is the perfect example of this.

As others have said it is debatable if Watson is an ATG ODI player, I can certainly see arguments for both sides but one thing is for certain he is one of, if not the best short format players in the game today. Personally I don't think he is worth a squirt of piss as a test player though.......but why on earth would that stop me picking him in a current World 11 One Day or T20 side??

Do you suggest that Michael Bevan shouldn't make Captain Cooks list??

 

[watson]

Well I think that's a problem you have to deal with as picking a ODI side has as much to do with test credentials as vice versa.......and Shane Watson is the perfect example of this.

As others have said it is debatable if Watson is an ATG ODI player, I can certainly see arguments for both sides but one thing is for certain he is one of, if not the best short format players in the game today. Personally I don't think he is worth a squirt of piss as a test player though.......but why on earth would that stop me picking him in a current World 11 One Day or T20 side??

Do you suggest that Michael Bevan shouldn't make Captain Cooks list??

Michael Bevan would justifiably walk into any ODI team of the last 40 years or so because he is a great ODI batsman.

However, given the choice I prefer my ATG XIs to be made up of great cricketers, not just ODI specialists. Therefore, all things being equal, if there is a choice between a great cricketer who also happens to be a great ODI player, and a mere ODI specialist then I think that the preference should be given to the great cricketer. This may be irrational I know, but I am not insisting that anyone share my opinion. It's just my opinion.

Anyway, back to Shane Watson - I don't think that Shane Watson and the term 'Great' can really be used in the same sentence. To me they seem mutually exclusive irrespective of his ODI stat's. Although I could be persuaded with Michael Bevan - he is somehow different, and more worthy of the title. It's a real shame that he couldn't handle short-pitch bowling and do better in the Test match arena.

 

[adub]

I think it's more a shame that he wasn't given a longer go at test level. His shield record and his ODI record indicate he had everything required to be a superstar if he'd been given the same sort of support as others have had.

For instance he played only 18 tests for 6 50s at an average of 29.07 and a hs of 91.
After his first 18 tests Steve Waugh had 6 50s at an average of 29.39 and a hs of 79*

It would take Waugh over a year and 9 more tests before he finally cracked a test ton. I've no doubt at all that more time would have seen Bevo taking apart test attacks because he was a great great player. You don't average +53 in over 650 ODI, FC and List A games without a touch of greatness. Our selectors screwed up, but we could afford it at the time.

Your point is right about Watson though. He is a very good short format player, but he's not a great cricketer. He's got the ability to be amazing when it clicks, but in Tests that don't happen anywhere near enough to make up for when he's dreadful and his FC record is solid, but not special.

 

[Adders]

Michael Bevan would justifiably walk into any ODI team of the last 40 years or so because he is a great ODI batsman.

However, given the choice I prefer my ATG XIs to be made up of great cricketers, not just ODI specialists. Therefore, all things being equal, if there is a choice between a great cricketer who also happens to be a great ODI player, and a mere ODI specialist then I think that the preference should be given to the great cricketer. This may be irrational I know, but I am not insisting that anyone share my opinion. It's just my opinion.

.

Totally agree with you.........except this isn't an ATG XI thread, it's an All Time ODI XI And for that reason Watson is justifiably being discussed.

 

[Maximas]

Michael Bevan would justifiably walk into any ODI team of the last 40 years or so because he is a great ODI batsman.

So the issue is that you don't consider Watson to be a great ODI all-rounder then? Because Bevan's test credentials are a bit shabby.

 

[Hurricane]

I will boycotting this thread unless I receive a personal vm that Ewen Chatfield will be selected.