Which team failed to produce a single ATG player in last 30 years?

[GIMH]

Flintoff an ATG in ODIs? nah.

Do tell why not

If he wasn't English his ODI brilliance would have been much more appreciated - and that's simply because he played in so many abject ODI sides.

32@88 with the bat
24@4.39 with the ball

 

[Flem274*]

Yeah there's no way Flintoff isn't an ATG in ODIs.

 

[GIMH]

Akilana hates Freddie tbf

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Neil Johnson, Andy Flower, Vusi Sibanda. Zimbabwe have had it all.

 

[Flem274*]

Akilana hates Freddie tbf

I reckon you could almost put Freddie at 8 and as the third seamer if you wanted. It would depend on the style of the eleven you wanted, like if you wanted ridiculous batting depth and a couple of allrounders. If he couldn't bat he would still have been a world class fast medium bowler. I don't know what the stats look like but from watching him, you knew he was one of the best bowlers in the world during his time.

 

[GIMH]

Was the best death bowler around, which makes his economy all the more impressive IMO

 

[NZTailender]

Bond (ODI) & Cairns (Tests) for NZ.

 

[Julian87]

Cairns was a real match winner but I don't know if he was an all time great test player.

 

[NZTailender]

Cairns was a real match winner but I don't know if he was an all time great test player.

At his peak, he was. Genuine batsman or bowler pick.

 

[Spikey]

didn't know flintoff had a big OD rep tbh

 

[viriya]

Flintoff being the ODI all-round GOAT is a valid argument.. Only thing against him is that he only played 137 ODIs and never really went through the inevitable decline period that would deflate his stats..

Shakib has played almost the same # of ODIs and within a couple of years it would be hard to pick Flintoff over him..

 

[cnerd123]

To me Freddy playing in a **** team worked in his favour. Batsmen were never under pressure to score quick off him as either they were chasing low targets or the bowlers at the other end were giving them easy runs anyways, whereas Freddie often batted pressure-free in lost causes. And just the general CBF attitude around the England ODI setup creates a sort of no-pressure environment for a guaranteed starter like Freddie.

Based on pure skill Freddie may be up there, but so are many other cricketers about whome you could say the same. The stats just don't impress me as much.

Mind that the same arguments can be made about Shakib too.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Shakib and Flintoff aren't similar all rounders at all. Flintoff was amazing at bowling in the death, and could come in and smash a few around better than most. He performed in ODIs the way I expected him to in tests tbh.

Shakib getting really really overrated in ODIs by ***** and others recently... he's great in tests, but he's just bashed Zimbabwe a lot in the LOI format... not done too much meaningful against the better teams.

 

[dogwalker]

Didn't realise Flintoff was so highly rated in ODIs.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

To me Freddy playing in a **** team worked in his favour. Batsmen were never under pressure to score quick off him as either they were chasing low targets or the bowlers at the other end were giving them easy runs anyways, whereas Freddie often batted pressure-free in lost causes. And just the general CBF attitude around the England ODI setup creates a sort of no-pressure environment for a guaranteed starter like Freddie.

Based on pure skill Freddie may be up there, but so are many other cricketers about whome you could say the same. The stats just don't impress me as much.

Mind that the same arguments can be made about Shakib too.

England had a couple of great ODI bowlers. Darren Gough for one, Flintoff's equal imo. Collingwood was tight through the middle, as was Giles. Add in a couple of decent bowler such as Caddick and the bowling is quite decent. Similarly you had KP, Tresco, Stewart, Knight, Thorpe in the batting. Not the greatest line up(s) around, but far from the dead weights the team record would suggest. You just have to remember that that was an incredible era for ODI cricket.

 

[dogwalker]

Great ODI bowlers, Gough, Collingwood, Giles?

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Great ODI bowlers, Gough, Collingwood, Giles?

Edited. Meant to say that Collingwood and Giles were decent, not the easy runs that was stated above.

 

[dogwalker]

Edited. Meant to say that Collingwood and Giles were decent, not the easy runs that was stated above.

England weren't bad, but ODIs are weird. SA were ranked 1 before the Australian tour, and we are rubbish.

 

[Maximas]

England weren't bad, but ODIs are weird. SA were ranked 1 before the Australian tour, and we are rubbish.

Nah, SA have some serious quality in their best XI - plus they can do the business all around the world, the issue is simply the dead weights in the team and the bench strength

 

[sledger]

Regardless of whether Freddie is an ODI ATG (which imo he is, but nevermind) his contribution to the England ODI side was huge, particularly with the ball. So many times the team would just go to **** when he wasn't there and had to be replaced by prank players like Rob Key or Anthony McGrath. The fact that England had a genuine allrounder like him meant that they could have all 50 overs bowled by proper bowlers - without him we'd often see a Vaughan/Solanki/Collingwood/Blackwell combination used to make up 10 overs that'd always concede loads of runs and take no wickets. Sadly this still wasn't usually enough to achieve anything particularly impressive, but the games in which Freddie played were much more close.