• 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.

CW decides the greatest ODI batsman ever (submit your own top 20 list)

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
It kind of is though. I don't really get why stephen brought it up but it genuinely shows that scoring was easier in India than Australia during that period.

Comparing Bevan and Sachin is dumb though, completely different players and completely different roles
It depends on the quality of bowlers plying their trade. During this period, I can hardly remember any great ODI bowler playing for any good stretch of time in India. In Australia there were plenty. All I remember in my childhood is plenty of mediocre bowlers (India and otherwise) getting thrashed here.
 
Last edited:

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It depends on the quality of bowlers plying their trade. During this period, I can hardly remember any great ODI bowler playing for any good stretch of time in India. In Australia there were plenty. All I remember in my childhood is plenty of mediocre bowlers (India and otherwise) getting thrashed here.
I think that's a bit sketchy reasoning. I can definitely see the logic behind it though. Seriously though why are we talking about this? Is it Sachin v Bevan?
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You just need ignore all statistical analysis that isn't done by PEWS or DoG. Everyone else is just torturing stats.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
stephen has history doing this

Mark Waugh v Sachin ring a bell?
I know. I believe a fair bit of effort is going into denigrating Sachin with right presentations of fact arguably but wrong inferences. Tendulkar vs Waugh was ridiculous somewhere along the lines of Mcgrath vs Srinath or Warne vs Kumble. We all know who is better even before the discussions start.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I wasn't directly comparing Bevan and Sachin.

I only suggested that one had to take into account the country in which batsmen (And bowlers) played the majority of their cricket. Which is why Bevan's strike rate of 75 isn't as low as it looked and why Sachin's strike rate of 85 isn't as high as it looked.

I'm not even saying that it's a direct multiplier, just a consideration.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I know. I believe a fair bit of effort is going into denigrating Sachin with right presentations of fact arguably but wrong inferences. Tendulkar vs Waugh was ridiculous somewhere along the lines of Mcgrath vs Srinath or Warne vs Kumble. We all know who is better even before the discussions start.
I never even compared Sachin and Waugh directly. All I did was say that Sachin was a moderate upgrade on Waugh as an opener. Less than a week later and cricketweb voted Waugh into the second XI of all time, implying he's a top 4 opener of all time. Yet somehow people completely misinterpret that to say I'm denigrating Sachin or over rating Waugh, when really neither is true.

The only comparison I've actually made in this thread is Gilchrist to Sehwag. How is it that both cricketers are rated so differently as ODI batsman yet have stats so similar if no account is made for the conditions in which they played?
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I wasn't directly comparing Bevan and Sachin.

I only suggested that one had to take into account the country in which batsmen (And bowlers) played the majority of their cricket. Which is why Bevan's strike rate of 75 isn't as low as it looked and why Sachin's strike rate of 85 isn't as high as it looked.

I'm not even saying that it's a direct multiplier, just a consideration.
You're probably right, you do have a point. But I think a bigger reason for the differing strike rates is the roles they played. Some of Bevan's best innings looked something like 65 (100) on difficult decks that won Australia games, whereas Sachin was usually going about a run a ball or just under regardless of the situation. I think they're both first picked for an ATG ODI XI though.

Sachin, Kohli, Bevan, McGrath are definites. The rest are all debatable.

I think nature of this thread makes bad comparisons happen, because you can't compare Tendulkar and Bevan.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I never even compared Sachin and Waugh directly. All I did was say that Sachin was a moderate upgrade on Waugh as an opener. Less than a week later and cricketweb voted Waugh into the second XI of all time, implying he's a top 4 opener of all time. Yet somehow people completely misinterpret that to say I'm denigrating Sachin or over rating Waugh, when really neither is true.

The only comparison I've actually made in this thread is Gilchrist to Sehwag. How is it that both cricketers are rated so differently as ODI batsman yet have stats so similar if no account is made for the conditions in which they played?
Sehwag's ODI peak came after Gilchrist's retirement when the high-scoring era was well underway (Dilshan, Watson, Amla etc. also had really good stats as openers in that period). They aren't rated differently because of where they played their home games. And also, Gilchrist had that extra string to his bow as a keeper.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hardly indicative. With the likes of Jayasurya and Afridi thrashing Manoj Prabhakar,Venkatesh Prasad and Balaji, the scoring rates are likely to go up. Not much to do with Sachin. On the other hand look at the great bowlers who played a lot of cricket in Australia. Garner had retired, but Mcgrath, Akram, Ambrose had played a hell lot of cricket in Australia during this period.
This might have a lot to do with it. But doesn't that prove my point that there should rightly be some consideration for the quality of cricket that makes up a player's career? Doesn't what you're saying mean that Australian batsmen have faced higher quality bowling attacks on average?

Another way of looking at it is to look at how the same batsmen have done overseas vs at home.

Team India:
Team records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Top scoring rates in Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. Lowest in UAE, Australia and South Africa.

Team Australia:
Team records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Top scoring rates in India, West Indies and South Africa. Lowest in Sri Lanka, Australia and England.

That suggests that there's something about Indian conditions that makes it an easier place to bat, and Australian conditions that makes it harder to bat.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I never even compared Sachin and Waugh directly. All I did was say that Sachin was a moderate upgrade on Waugh as an opener. Less than a week later and cricketweb voted Waugh into the second XI of all time, implying he's a top 4 opener of all time. Yet somehow people completely misinterpret that to say I'm denigrating Sachin or over rating Waugh, when really neither is true.

The only comparison I've actually made in this thread is Gilchrist to Sehwag. How is it that both cricketers are rated so differently as ODI batsman yet have stats so similar if no account is made for the conditions in which they played?
Junior being the opener in the second all time XI was an argument winner if I ever saw one

Hoping Fred finalises his list soon so I can start the countdown and we can all gauge if the gap between Junior and Sachin is a moderate distance or not
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
I never even compared Sachin and Waugh directly. All I did was say that Sachin was a moderate upgrade on Waugh as an opener. Less than a week later and cricketweb voted Waugh into the second XI of all time, implying he's a top 4 opener of all time. Yet somehow people completely misinterpret that to say I'm denigrating Sachin or over rating Waugh, when really neither is true.

The only comparison I've actually made in this thread is Gilchrist to Sehwag. How is it that both cricketers are rated so differently as ODI batsman yet have stats so similar if no account is made for the conditions in which they played?
Waugh brought a lot into the plate other than opening the batting. One of the best all round fielders ever. Also, at this moment I am not sure whether he would be an automatic choice for the 2nd ATG XI. With Rohit batting the way he does, and the likes of Warner and Dhawan strengthening their cases, he is no more a cut and dry choice.

Additionally, making to the 2nd ATG XI is not indicative of the gulf between him and the best opener. Just have to be better than the rest.

Gilchrist vs Sehwag is interesting. Both had similar averages and strike rates home and abroad. Gilchrist makes it ahead of Sehwag in ATG XIs for his wicket keeping and WC knockout performances.Sehwag arguably played a knock out innings under greater pressure and against a better attack than Gilchrist ever did, but I believe he falls a bit short there for the right reasons(being inconsistent rather than Gilchrist having to encounter difficult bowling conditions).
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
This might have a lot to do with it. But doesn't that prove my point that there should rightly be some consideration for the quality of cricket that makes up a player's career? Doesn't what you're saying mean that Australian batsmen have faced higher quality bowling attacks on average?
He's got you there hurricane
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
For comparison:

South Africa:
Team records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Fastest scoring in SA, NZ and WI. Slowest scoring in Australia, England and Pakistan.

Sri Lanka:
Team records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Fastest in Pakistan, WI and SL. Slowest in the UAE, Australia and England.

That covers the four best ODI sides since around the early 90s. Every one of them, including Australia score slower in Australia and faster in other countries. The UAE also seems to result in slower scoring while the other Asian nations and home countries tend to result in faster scoring.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
On it now
I didn't vote but am interested in the result. ODI ranking are much less clear cut than test rankings since there are a lot more roles to fill in an ODI side. To me, balance is more important than anything else in an ODI side.
 

fredfertang

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Not easy is it?


Virat Kohli
Viv Richards
AB de Villiers
Brian Lara
Greg Chappell
Rohit Sharma
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Kevin Pietersen
Michael Bevan
Aravinda de Silva
Kumar Sangakarra
Marcus Trescothick
Saurav Ganguly
Saeed Anwar
Herschelle Gibbs
Neil Fairbrother
Kapil Dev
Inzaman Ul Haq
Sanath Jayasuriya
 

Top