CricketWeb selects the ATG ODI XI

[Burgey]

Did you think they were cheats? And who in the side is fixing?

1. Yes.
2. All of them

 

[subshakerz]

Al lot of poster really downplaying the bowling attack.

McGrath, Akram, Pollock, Garner, Murali is relentless accuracy and no release.

 

[bagapath]

All rounders for an ATG ODI XI

Jayasuriya
Watson
Kallis
Yuvraj
Stokes
Dhoni +
Imran *
Kapil
Afridi
Pollock
Hadlee

 

[Sunil1z]

ODI ATXI based on WC MoS/Final MoM

Adam Gilchrist (2007 Final)
Sachin Tendulkar (2003 MoS)
Ricky Ponting (2003 Final)
Viv Richards (1979 Final)
Dhoni( 2011 Final)
Klusener (1999 MoS)
Ben Stokes (2019 Final)
Warne ( 99 Final)
Akram (92 Final)
Garner (79 Final)
McGrath (2007 MoS)

 

[Bolo.]

But they're also just better. I can't split Donald, Ambrose, Waqar, Bond, Hadlee and Starc but the pacers in the first XI just stand out more for one reason or another. Does variety matter that much?

I get the logic behind Watson + Klusener though but it just feels a little underwhelming.

It's very hard to judge ODIs by stats. I didn't watch that much of most of these guys, other than Donald. He was very good, but completely rubbish in comparison to Pollock. And he didn't bat. Making that level of sacrifice for the sake of variety is idiocy.

Really liked what what I saw of Bond and Ambrose. Waqar was just insane. Didnt see enough of them to have an informed opinion though, and don't like their stats other than Bond (who didn't play enough), and Ambrose (who is elite statisically, but not quite on the Garner/ Mcgrath/Pollock level). Never saw Hadlee.

Yip, Watson/Klusener is underwhelming. Got to pick between that and crappy batting. Think I prefer the crappy bowling, but it is a bit of a coin flip.

 

[Ashes81]

Anyways, I am going to call it in favor of Pollock over Kapil 8-6. No votes for Klusener surprisingly.

So the final XI is:

1. Lara
2. Tendulkar
3. Viv
4. Kohli
5. ABD
6. Dhoni
7. Pollock
8. Akram
9. Garner
10. McGrath
11. Murali

Observations:
- Without doubt the strongest top six in terms of pure batsmanship
- Without doubt the strongest and most miserly bowling lineup of 5 worldclass top tier bowlers
- Only one Australian!
- A team favoring specialists overs part-timers and top order strength over low order hitting

Obviously a really strong line up and in many ways an old fashioned one day team. When ODIs 1st started teams largely picked their test teams with the odd all rounder or hitter included.

As time has gone on, teams have gone down the more specialist one day player route.

My only concern is the lack of a 6th bowler to cover an injury. Viv could bowl a few but that's about it.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Final XI:

1. Lara
2. Tendulkar
3. Viv
4. Kohli
5. ABD
6. Dhoni
7. Pollock
8. Akram
9. Garner
10. McGrath
11. Murali

Could play a decent tri series vs:

Gilchrist +
Watson
Ponting
Abbas
Bevan
Symonds
Hussey
Hadlee
Starc
Warne
Bond

&

Afridi
Gavaskar
Howarth
Jadeja*
Kallis
Tim David
Woakes
Sobers
Stokes
C Pringle
Wade +

 

[trundler]

Could play a decent tri series vs:

Gilchrist +
Watson
Ponting
Abbas
Bevan
Symonds
Hussey
Hadlee
Starc
Warne
Bond

&

Afridi
Gavaskar
Howarth
Jadeja*
Kallis
Tim David
Woakes
Sobers
Stokes
C Pringle
Wade +

That third side needs more of Kepler Wessels.

 

[Prince EWS]

The XI that's been picked would sweep through every WC with ease.

Don't let these ****s bait you into thinking it's a serious comparison based on a sample size of a handful of games or the extremely low IQ logic of "it's impossible for gun teams not to contain more than one of the best eleven players of all time".

 

[ankitj]

Ben Stokes (2015 Final)

England didn't play the final in 2015. Or the semi final. Or the quarter final.

 

[ankitj]

And did Viv Richards and Joel Garner both get MoM in 1979 final?

 

[Sunil1z]

And did Viv Richards and Joel Garner both get MoM in 1979 final?

One scored 138 and other took 5 wkts . So , I awarded both of them ?

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

England didn't play the final in 2015. Or the semi final. Or the quarter final.

They ran Bangladesh mightily close in the group stage though. A creditable performance.

 

[ankitj]

One scored 138 and other took 5 wkts . So , I awarded both of them ?

kuchh bhi bc (translation: makes sense)

 

[h_hurricane]

lol you've got a five and seven who choke for a living at WCs; a bloke whose career sample size at opener is relatively small and who struck in the 70s batting in that position; the other opener failed for a living in finals and your number four averages 22 in finals across eight games since 2009.

Decent bowling line up though.

Pollock has a 5 for in the 1999 SF and also a really good cameo in the same match at the exact spot he is picked to play for in this hypothetical team. A bit odd that the choker tag is held against him, when in this very thread you were praising Jayawardene for scoring a hundred for the losing team in a knock out.

 

[subshakerz]

It's only ABD and Pollock, not enough choker germs to infect the rest of the team.

 

[Burgey]

Pollock has a 5 for in the 1999 SF and also a really good cameo in the same match at the exact spot he is picked to play for in this hypothetical team. A bit odd that the choker tag is held against him, when in this very thread you were praising Jayawardene for scoring a hundred for the losing team in a knock out.

He made a ton in a WC final ffs. Pollock gassed up multiple times in WCs. The sides he played in are a meme ffs. It’s embarrassing having him in this side, same with de Villiers.

 

[Bolo.]

He made a ton in a WC final ffs. Pollock gassed up multiple times in WCs. The sides he played in are a meme ffs. It’s embarrassing having him in this side, same with de Villiers.

It is embarrassing having you on this forum.

 

[Burgey]

Who even are you?

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Are there any Aussie batsmen with a WC record as good as de Villiers'? His average of 80 with a SR over 100 in WC knock outs doesn't seem to scream 'choker' either.