Gilly was a better batsman in my opinion. It's hard to average 45 opening the batting especially when you strike at around 100.Honestly, at this point it's more like the only reason you don't have Dhoni ahead of Gilly in the ODI side (assuming only one of them were available) is if you thought Gilly's keeping was that much better than Dhoni's.
Gilchrist struck at 80 with a 47 average, what's your point?
My bad - thought he struck 65-70 in tests for some reason.. Gilly and Sehwag become very comparable in that sense, although Sehwag had much more of an impact as an opener in Tests imo. And Gilly had the benefit of being able to downhill ski after a platform was set already as well.yes, such a massive difference between 49.3 @ 82 and 47.6 @ 82. truly vast.
This thread is not about Shewag,My bad - thought he struck 65-70 in tests for some reason.. Gilly and Sehwag become very comparable in that sense, although Sehwag had much more of an impact as an opener in Tests imo. And Gilly had the benefit of being able to downhill ski after a platform was set already as well.
His average point of entry suggests that he benefited from it - not saying he depended on it since he did have some great backs-to-the-wall innings. He probably came to bat with the team in a good situation more often than not more than anyone batting at his position in the history of cricket (considering Australia's batting line-up of the time).except that gilchrist wasn't known for downhill skiing at all
Except he used to throw his wicket away in most cases when Australia where in a good position like that. Save probably his 57 ball hundred and one he scored against Zimbabwe as notable exceptionsHis average point of entry suggests that he benefited from it - not saying he depended on it since he did have some great backs-to-the-wall innings. He probably came to bat with the team in a good situation more often than not more than anyone batting at his position in the history of cricket (considering Australia's batting line-up of the time).
I fail to see how "throwing his wicket away" can be taken as a positive.Except he used to throw his wicket away in most cases when Australia where in a good position like that. Save probably his 57 ball hundred and one he scored against Zimbabwe as notable exceptions
because it meant that he didn't try to protect his average rather than doing what the team needed, which was get as many runs as quickly as possible.I fail to see how "throwing his wicket away" can be taken as a positive.
When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.It's not... Just saying he didn't benefit much from Australia's strong platforms because he used to get out cheaply often in those cases
Yep. For a finisher not outs are much more relevant than strike rate, because scoring the necessary runs is important, not how quickly you score them.Doesn't Dhoni have a lot of not outs in chases, though? Combined with his position down the order, explains the low second innings rpi stat.
How does his average compare when the team score was lower than that base compared to higher?When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.
It's not exactly plain sailing from that position. 249/5 can quite easily turn into 270 all out if you're not careful.When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.
What is his average in successful chases these days anyway? At one point it was in excess of 100.i thought that through most of 2010-2012 tbh
It's not a perfect position - but compared to an average batsman coming in at 7, that's a great position. Do you think the current Australia #7 doesn't come in with the team at a tougher position? It's not hard to accept that Gilly benefited from that situation.It's not exactly plain sailing from that position. 249/5 can quite easily turn into 270 all out if you're not careful.
I would expand on this more but it's quite clear reading your posts that while you're a whizz with scorecards and spreadsheets you have no actual understanding of how the game actually works so it would be a waste of time typing out the reply.
When entering at <= 249/5:How does his average compare when the team score was lower than that base compared to higher?
Not the point though.When he batted at 7 (which he did for the majority of his career), he came in to bat when the scoreboard read 249/5 on average. I wouldn't say that's a team in trouble.
So in what way did he benefit?When entering at <= 249/5:
Average = 48.21
Strike Rate = 83.35
When entering at > 249/5:
Average = 45.21
Strike Rate = 85.09
Really not much of a difference to claim that he just had a go when the team was in a good position imo. Maybe slightly but -3 Avg +1.5 SR isn't that significant of a difference.