-
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.
Dhoni v Gilchrist
- Thread starter Jack1
- Start date
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think either of Rohit and dhawan would work better with a Gilchrist type aggressive opener than they did with each other. Some quick starts would've been great for us in 2015 and 2019.
srbhkshk
International Captain
Maybe, maybe not - but there's a chance Gilly might not make that side as a pure opener.
srbhkshk
International Captain
Better than comparing ODI averages across eras for the same position tbf.
sunilz
International Regular
Considering India lost total 3 matches in 2 ODI WC , 2 of them in SF , One was against Enģ, I don't think this statement to be true.
Have you even checked batting average of Dhawan, Sharma in ODI WC ?
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Don't really care about batting averages to that extent when what I was talking about was getting quick starts. Its something that has held indias scores in odis back quite a bit.
Migara
Cricketer Of The Year
In ODIs openers tend to average more than late order
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Gilchrist will not make a lot of sides as a pure opener. As a keeper-batsman who opens, he still wont be picked ahead of MSD or ABD or even Sangakkara. A lot of mental gymnastics going around here by some just to double down on a bad take.
Like I said earlier, its fine if u rate Tests as a higher format and therefore wanna choose Gilly. But constructing strawman arguments that retroactively makes Gilchrist some kind of ODI great is just
And there is the small point that a great side will need a player like Gilly to reach even greater status but for a poor side, a player like MSD may actually be more valuable given he has shown he can construct a competitive and good side from scratch across all 3 formats as a captain, while still contributing heavily enough to be a key player within that side.
Like I said earlier, its fine if u rate Tests as a higher format and therefore wanna choose Gilly. But constructing strawman arguments that retroactively makes Gilchrist some kind of ODI great is just
And there is the small point that a great side will need a player like Gilly to reach even greater status but for a poor side, a player like MSD may actually be more valuable given he has shown he can construct a competitive and good side from scratch across all 3 formats as a captain, while still contributing heavily enough to be a key player within that side.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hey fine if you don't think Gilchrist was a great odi player but the idea that were trying to give him that status retroactively is complete absurdity. He was always considered a great of the format. There is no retroactive reappraisal of his career here.. But constructing strawman arguments that retroactively makes Gilchrist some kind of ODI great is just
Teja.
Global Moderator
I don't rate Dhoni as highly as I did around 2013 because since then he has played few of the worst match losing innings I have seen in ODIs at critical junctures.
Makes me angry to think of the times he was tuktuking along and putting too much pressure on the other end when the RRR was 12 an over with 10-12 overs to go and smashes a few meaningless boundaries to get a good SR at the end when 50 is needed of the last 2 overs.
Makes me angry to think of the times he was tuktuking along and putting too much pressure on the other end when the RRR was 12 an over with 10-12 overs to go and smashes a few meaningless boundaries to get a good SR at the end when 50 is needed of the last 2 overs.
Teja.
Global Moderator
Even ignoring the above, Gilchrist is clearly several leagues ahead of Dhoni as a test cricketer. Dhoni's test keeping was just at the brink of acceptability at test level and his batting was dire outside Asia (He averages 29 with 0 hundreds in 39 tests).
Gilchrist on the other hand is routinely brought up as a candidate for ODI ATG XIs and clearly at least in the top 5 ODI openers (as a specialist batsman) by the time he retired. Dhoni is a better ODI batsman but I don't get why people are directly comparing GIlchrist's average in ODI cricket to Gilchrist to say that the avg diff in ODIs is higher than it is in tests between them.
Gilchrist is an ODI opener, Dhoni was a lower middle order batsman. This is in contrast to tests where they both batted in the lower middle order. Invoking a 14 run difference in their ODI average to establish the extent of Dhoni's superiority is on the same level as invoking Bevan's ODI average which is 10 runs higher than Sachin as some indicator that he was the superior batsman by that much to Sachin. It's a complete joke.
Gilchrist on the other hand is routinely brought up as a candidate for ODI ATG XIs and clearly at least in the top 5 ODI openers (as a specialist batsman) by the time he retired. Dhoni is a better ODI batsman but I don't get why people are directly comparing GIlchrist's average in ODI cricket to Gilchrist to say that the avg diff in ODIs is higher than it is in tests between them.
Gilchrist is an ODI opener, Dhoni was a lower middle order batsman. This is in contrast to tests where they both batted in the lower middle order. Invoking a 14 run difference in their ODI average to establish the extent of Dhoni's superiority is on the same level as invoking Bevan's ODI average which is 10 runs higher than Sachin as some indicator that he was the superior batsman by that much to Sachin. It's a complete joke.
Last edited:
Gilly should be no competition for Dhoni in Odi's where Dhoni had been a specialist in the league of giants like Bevan ( there are a lot of players like Gilchrist who could open with a bang) but very few like Bevan or Dhoni who are typically ODI specialist.
Along the same lines Dhoni seems to be a no competition for Gilly in tests, where Gilly is in a different league and Dhoni was an average batsman at best. Overall I will pick Dhoni in limited overs but Gilly in tests.
Along the same lines Dhoni seems to be a no competition for Gilly in tests, where Gilly is in a different league and Dhoni was an average batsman at best. Overall I will pick Dhoni in limited overs but Gilly in tests.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
I would've been less confident about Matt Henry destroying India's top order in the 2019 semifinal if Gilchrist had been opening for them.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
I love AB but would never pick him as a keeper in an ODI team (amazing fielder and passable 6th/7th bowler). Likewise Sanga is my favourite non-NZ player, but Gilchrist was a much better ODI batsman.Gilchrist will not make a lot of sides as a pure opener. As a keeper-batsman who opens, he still wont be picked ahead of MSD or ABD or even Sangakkara. A lot of mental gymnastics going around here by some just to double down on a bad take.
Like I said earlier, its fine if u rate Tests as a higher format and therefore wanna choose Gilly. But constructing strawman arguments that retroactively makes Gilchrist some kind of ODI great is just
And there is the small point that a great side will need a player like Gilly to reach even greater status but for a poor side, a player like MSD may actually be more valuable given he has shown he can construct a competitive and good side from scratch across all 3 formats as a captain, while still contributing heavily enough to be a key player within that side.
I actually think Buttler is more likely to be picked ahead of MSD as a keeper-batsman than AB, Sanga, or QDK are to be ahead of Gilchrist.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There was a very brief period around 2001 when he, M.Waugh and Hayden rotated through the position and potentially he might have missed out in an alternate reality where he didn't keep. That didn't last long before Waugh was ****ed off though
Flem274*
123/5
I think some people in this thread are forgetting what a big deal aggressive openers used to be. They're expected now, and if you don't have an aggressive opener (preferably two) then your side is already at a disadvantage, but that second wave of aggressive ODI openers were A Big Problem for opposition captains, and Gilchrist was the leader of that group.
Gilchrist had a strike rate of 96 in an era where 70 was still fine.
Gilchrist had a strike rate of 96 in an era where 70 was still fine.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
This is what the ODI batting list looked like when Gilchrist retired:
People have said that de Silva is underrated and was a great bat. His average was lower than Gilchrist's! 4 of the 7 guys above Gilchrist in the batting list had strike rates in the 70s.
By any measure Gilchrist was a great batsman who would make any side even without his keeping.
Even the 2019 English team would have been improved by Gilchrist opening.
People have said that de Silva is underrated and was a great bat. His average was lower than Gilchrist's! 4 of the 7 guys above Gilchrist in the batting list had strike rates in the 70s.
By any measure Gilchrist was a great batsman who would make any side even without his keeping.
Even the 2019 English team would have been improved by Gilchrist opening.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Half of Gilchrist's career 220 was a dependable score, and 250 was a very good one. Bowling was better, bats were worse and the game was completely different. Openers averaging 40+ in ODIs were rare and generally scored much slower. Comparing him to modern openers like Sharma, Roy, Finch etc is just a display of ignorance