Maximus0723
State Regular
Dang, Sachin has higher SR then both Watson and Gayle.
-
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.
Best ever ODI batsman
- Thread starter ankitj
- Start date
Faisal1985
International Vice-Captain
Afridi has a higher SR then all three of them.
Faisal1985
International Vice-Captain
Its not a bad average being a number 7 in a Pak side mind you...with 300+ odis. Plus 288 wickets at 35.21 and 101 catches...kinda under rated imo.
Last edited:
Maximus0723
State Regular
How is his batting underrated? ****ty is accurate word to describe Afridi's batting. He is just complete crapshot against good teams.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Emphasis on the crap
angad
U19 12th Man
Only 44 innings at number 7, career avg and avg @ no. 7 batting positions is same (23). 4 centuries in Sub-Continent, 1 in Sharjah. 100~ wickets vs BD, ZIM, Netherlands, Kenya, Scotland, WI, HongKong in 80~ games.
angad
U19 12th Man
Extra-ordinary (awesome record against Australia 
) - Viv + Sachin. 5200 runs @ 48 average, 12 100s, 34 50s, Strike Rate 85, World Cup Performance - 2800 runs @ 60 average, 7 100s, 18 50s.
Best finisher - Lance Klusener (8-9 batting position 1397 runs @ average of 67, strike rate 91)
) - Viv + Sachin. 5200 runs @ 48 average, 12 100s, 34 50s, Strike Rate 85, World Cup Performance - 2800 runs @ 60 average, 7 100s, 18 50s. Best finisher - Lance Klusener (8-9 batting position 1397 runs @ average of 67, strike rate 91)
Last edited:
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Entirely depends on how much weighting you place on longevity. For me, it kind of plateaus at 10-15 years. Furthermore, it's no fault of Richards that he only played 121 ODI's in the same way it was no fault of Bradman's that he didn't score 10,000 test runs.
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
Wasn't entirely been entirely serious - I voted for Viv after all. IMO, as long as either player has played for a decent sample size longevity really shouldn't matter all to much.
Teja.
Global Moderator
I voted for Viv since he was pretty much clearly better but if two batsman or on the same level and if one played for 12 and another for 20, I'd close my eyes and take the latter. There are some cases where I'd pick the slightly worse player for extraordinary longevity but this is not one.
GotSpin
Hall of Fame Member
While I do agree that in some circumstances longevity could be a potential deciding factor, the sheer amount of cricket played by one player in comparison to another doesn't necessarily make him any better.
Of course this isn't true in all cases, since I highly rate Courtney Walsh. That's slightly different, however, because he got significantly better with age and pace bowlers tend to not have such long careers. All credit to Tendulkar, but it's quite amazing for a pace bowler to last that long at the top level
M0rphin3
International Debutant
Massive awta.
M0rphin3
International Debutant
Yep averaging around 50 with about the same s/r against all teams. WAG.
Shri
Mr. Glass
So you don't rate Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi either?
Losing an eye in a moment > Losing it over the years.
smartass.
Blaze 18
Banned
He has not batted at number seven for the majority of his career. He is a good ODI player, without being great in either department.