• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Shane Watson vs Andrew Symonds (ODIs)

Cast Your Vote

  • Watson better batsman, Symonds better AR

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Symonds better batsman, Symonds better AR

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Can't Split as batsmen, Watson better AR

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    16

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
I agree Symonds is the best of them, but can't agree that line up would stack up against a stronger batting unit. Much as I love him to bit's, you are going to get laughed out of town naming Paul Collingwood in a World ATG side.
I'm not naming Collingwood in an ATG side. I am saying that a combo that places full emphasis on elite inner ring fielding in an ODI match will stack up well against a team with marginally better batters who are poorer fielders. It would make a big difference.
 

Victor Ian

International Coach
Symonds did the zinc sunscreen better than most too. It's got to be worth something.

My favourite thing about Symonds, aside from his big hitting was the way he could chase a ball down, dive on the ground and slide on his chest then get up and return the ball to the stumps at lights speed. I don't know how anyone can calculate this retrospectively, but my thought is he would have saved many more runs in the field, just through his presence, than Watson would have saved in bowling economy. Who, in their right mind would take that run when you have hit it in his vicinity, until it was well past him? A run saved every time the ball went near him. I am also a believer that a team of fielding guns would be worth heaps in keeping an oppositions run rate down. I just have no idea how you would stat that.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
I’ll the batsmen who average more at a quicker rate thanks. I know you have this massive hard on for Symonds to the extent that you quite ridiculously pick him as an all rounder for an all time eleven but truth is there are better options.
Avoiding the question

No, it wont be the "the batsmen who average more at a quicker rate thanks". We're talking about batsmen who clear the rope more frequently and safely. With the bat, that's the role he's being selected for.
 
Last edited:

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Avoiding the question

No, it wont be the "the batsmen who average more at a quicker rate thanks". We're talking about batsmen who clear the rope more frequently and safely. With the bat, that's the role he's being selected for.
Watson was/is pretty unmatched when clearing the rope tbf. When he gets on a role against spinners especially, done it plenty in T20 cricket and remember the 186* off ~90 balls against Bangladesh? Was dropping their left arm spinners into the stands with little effort

What are your reasons for thinking he doesn't belong in an ATG side?
Let's be honest, Symonds was good but he's no Chris Harris or Scott Styris
 

Flem274*

123/5
What are your reasons for thinking he doesn't belong in an ATG side?
he's not as good as many other odi middle order batsmen. he doesn't even make my australian one.

hayden
gilchrist
ponting
jones
bevan
hussey
watson

ftr

australian cw posting, internet posting being the be all end all of cricket fandom obviously, really is getting more and more one eyed and isolationist. you don't even have benchmark here prattling about alex doolan and kfc to blame. get a grip on yourselves.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
australian cw posting, internet posting being the be all end all of cricket fandom obviously, really is getting more and more one eyed and isolationist.
At the risk of turning this into a "no u" argument, this would really be more accurate with regard to NZ cw posting than Australian. You just don't notice it because you're in the bubble.
 

Jarquis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
At the risk of turning this into a "no u" argument, this would really be more accurate with regard to NZ cw posting than Australian. You just don't notice it because you're in the bubble.
Really not accurate. I shudder to think of the ****show this forum would have devolved into had it been Australia that England tied with in the WC final and beaten on boundary count.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Really not accurate. I shudder to think of the ****show this forum would have devolved into had it been Australia that England tied with in the WC final and beaten on boundary count.
That's a completely different metric though. I agree with your example, but when it comes to overrating their own players and generally living in a bubble regarding their own team, NZ fans have easily been the worst in my time here. Hasn't been that bad lately though, I'll admit. A few of the worst in that regard don't seem to post anymore

edit: I agree that the Kiwis (mostly) definitely took the WC final "result" extremely well. I think you're right that it would have been very different if it were England, or say Australia or India for that matter, in their position.
 
Last edited:

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
he's not as good as many other odi middle order batsmen. he doesn't even make my australian one.

hayden
gilchrist
ponting
jones
bevan
hussey
watson

ftr

australian cw posting, internet posting being the be all end all of cricket fandom obviously, really is getting more and more one eyed and isolationist. you don't even have benchmark here prattling about alex doolan and kfc to blame. get a grip on yourselves.
Watson shouldn't be batting 7 in a lineup like that. From memory he was only really good as an ODI opener.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Watson shouldn't be batting 7 in a lineup like that. From memory he was only really good as an ODI opener.
He never really played outside the top 3 during his peak period. He'd probably do a great job at no.7 but you're picking a player in a sport he never really played much in.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
He never really played outside the top 3 during his peak period. He'd probably do a great job at no.7 but you're picking a player in a sport he never really played much in.
He did bat a lot at 7, but from memory he wasn’t all that good. Though granted he was still quite young at the time.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
He did bat a lot at 7, but from memory he wasn’t all that good. Though granted he was still quite young at the time.
Yes that's what I mean by during his peak period. His batting really blossomed around 2008, and this coincided with his move to the top of his order. Whether his move just happened to occur when his cricket improved or his cricket improved because he was batting at the top of the order is s fair question. It's probably a bit of both.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
I remember watson batting 7 in 07 and having a great time. I havent double checked any numbers tho.
He averaged 145 at a strike rate of 170 batting 7 in the World Cup.

Only got out once but still, he didn't exactly suck at the role when he was required at that point.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
He actually averaged 40 at a strike rate of 87 at #7 overall in his career, from 23 innings. He seemed really unsuited to it early on but he was absolutely smashing it towards the end before moving up to opening. If he kept the role I think he would've been perfectly fine at it.
 

Top