• 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.

Choose opening batsmen for all-time ODI XI

Please choose two opening batsmen for the All-time ODI XI

  • Sachin Tendulkar

    Votes: 47 71.2%

  • Sourav Ganguly

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • Adam Gilchrist

    Votes: 38 57.6%

  • Sanath Jayasuriya

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • Saeed Anwar

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • Mark Waugh

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • Matthew Hayden

    Votes: 8 12.1%

  • Chris Gayle

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Desmond Haynes

    Votes: 5 7.6%

  • Gary Kirsten

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Gordon Greenidge

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • Herschille Gibbs

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • Total voters
    66
  • Poll closed .
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
No, of course not. But averages don't work that way. Knight played more large innings than Gilchrist. Gilchrist played more cameos than Knight.

Gilchrist also played one hell of a lot more games, too, and also didn't have to open on seam-friendly wickets especially often.
Click to expand...
Just like a lot of these arguments in reality it comes down to the different role that each batsman played in their respective sides. Gilchrist knew that he had a very strong batting lineup around him (Ponting, Symonds, Clarke, Mark Waugh, Bevan, Hussey) so he knew that even if he made 30 off 25 balls that although he had failed personally, in the team context it wasn't as bad because there were other batsman available to score runs and he was usually just a launching pad off which they all started. If he went on to score a ton then there is a high chance that Australia would win, so destructive is his batting.
 
open365

open365

International Vice-Captain
Tbh i think Gilchrist is Gilchrist whoever and wherever he plays, who cares that he had a strong batting line up behind him? He still played the same fantastic innings.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
open365 said:
Tbh i think Gilchrist is Gilchrist whoever and wherever he plays, who cares that he had a strong batting line up behind him? He still played the same fantastic innings.
Click to expand...
But because he had that strong batting lineup it made less of a difference if he didn't make a substantial score as he would still be giving momentum to the team and that allowed other batsman to build on his good start.
 
open365

open365

International Vice-Captain
Are you saying that that would alter the way he plays? Or just that was what happened when he played?
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
open365 said:
Are you saying that that would alter the way he plays? Or just that was what happened when he played?
Click to expand...
Well if he come into the Australian ODI team that had a weak batting lineup and he was being relied upon to score a lot of runs, then do you think he would have the same cavalier approach? I don't think he would, and IF he did, then I don't think it would take long before he realised that he would have to play more responsibly for his team. As it is, Gilchrist plays for the perfect role for Australia.
 
open365

open365

International Vice-Captain
Personaly i think he would, i think it might be more noticeable that he gets out in the 20s a lot but i think he'd still do it as much.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
open365 said:
Personaly i think he would, i think it might be more noticeable that he gets out in the 20s a lot but i think he'd still do it as much.
Click to expand...
Gilchrist does not seem to me to be a selfish guy...I think he would adjust to the team situation. He does so in Tests on the rare occassion where there has been a batting collapse and he needs to consolidate.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
open365 said:
Personaly i think he would, i think it might be more noticeable that he gets out in the 20s a lot but i think he'd still do it as much.
Click to expand...
Exactly, if he did keep it up with the same attitude and found himself being dismissed for run-a-ball twenties then I think the selectors would put the hard word on him and he would probably find himself out of the side. Weak teams need more runs, even if they come slower.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Perm said:
Exactly, if he did keep it up with the same attitude and found himself being dismissed for run-a-ball twenties then I think the selectors would put the hard word on him and he would probably find himself out of the side. Weak teams need more runs, even if they come slower.
Click to expand...
Well I doubt anyone who is averaging 36 runs as a keeper in ODIs would find himself out of a side. There might be harsh words if he throws wickets away, but thats about all...
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
silentstriker said:
Well I doubt anyone who is averaging 36 runs as a keeper in ODIs would find himself out of a side. There might be harsh words if he throws wickets away, but thats about all...
Click to expand...
When he went through a slump then I doubt he'd be given as much time to work into form TBH.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Eh? I've just said, I don't disregard batting-SR, but if a good bowler can bowl economically, batting-SRs are going to be lower. Simple maths.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
silentstriker said:
Gilchrist does not seem to me to be a selfish guy...I think he would adjust to the team situation. He does so in Tests on the rare occassion where there has been a batting collapse and he needs to consolidate.
Click to expand...
It's not neccessarily a question of selfishness and not wanting to adjust his game, it's a case of does he have the ability to? I honestly don't think he does. Sure, he's had an occasional spell of slow-scoring in Tests, but I've virtually never seen him score what I'd call a conventionally slow innings, in any game.

Hence, I don't know that he'd be capable of adjusting his game, really.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
It's not neccessarily a question of selfishness and not wanting to adjust his game, it's a case of does he have the ability to? I honestly don't think he does. Sure, he's had an occasional spell of slow-scoring in Tests, but I've virtually never seen him score what I'd call a conventionally slow innings, in any game.

Hence, I don't know that he'd be capable of adjusting his game, really.
Click to expand...
But really, does he need to? He has saved quite a few games for Australia batting at his normal pace and turned what could've possibly been a loss if he failed with the bat, or a draw if he batted slowly, into a win and I think that is a good talent to have. Yes sometimes he does fail to save his team when perhaps a slower scoring batsman would've been able to do the job and maybe salvage a draw because he takes less risks, but those times are compensated for by the innings that Gilchrist plays to win a game for his team.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Richard said:
Eh? I've just said, I don't disregard batting-SR, but if a good bowler can bowl economically, batting-SRs are going to be lower. Simple maths.
Click to expand...
And if a batsman scores quickly, then bowling economy rates are going to be higher. You do realise that sometimes the batsman can attack decent bowling and score a few runs? Yes the chances are he will be dismissed, but sometimes it does happen.
 
Perm

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Raghav said:
:laugh:
Click to expand...
No, it is. If a bowler bowls 10 straight overs at one batsman and the batsman faces just the one bowler for his innings, the bowler has an economy rate of 3.00 then the batsman will have a strike rate of only 50. Simple.
 
Raghav

Raghav

International Vice-Captain
Perm said:
No, it is. If a bowler bowls 10 straight overs at one batsman and the batsman faces just the one bowler for his innings, the bowler has an economy rate of 3.00 then the batsman will have a strike rate of only 50. Simple.
Click to expand...
I understand perm...Doesnt it look silly when Richards told that , he disregards the SR when the if the bowler bowls well. A hard hitter will definetly score at any type of bowler IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top