Is there a team that can beat this Asian ODI XI?

[trundler]

Or Clive Rice.

Rice would be like Hardik.

 

[Daemon]

Sanga was a moderate upgrade over Misbah for most of his career tbh.

Lol Sanga made 4 on the trot and others have hit double hundreds. Poor Misbah went his entire career century-less.

 

[bagapath]

Good side, but there are 8 regular bowling options (plus 2 part-timers in Hussey and ABDV). Strengthen the batting. Either pick a better opener than Watson, or perhaps Ross Taylor at 4, drop the others down one and leave Flintoff out of the side (or Klusener for Flintoff).

Also I don't want to seem like I've got something against Flintoff (I haven't) but he was a slow starter who batted best at no 5, yet people pick him at 7 in these ODI best ever teams. The same thing happens with Chris Cairns. Also Watson often get picked at 7 when he was best opening and Hussey at 5 when he was best finishing at 7.

I see four ATG great bowlers - garner/ mcgrath/ pollock/ warne and the fifth bowling option split between two good all-rounders flintoff/watson.

viv and simo don't need to bowl at all. they are in the team for their outstanding batting and fielding. hussey and ABDV are great finishers and , again, deadly fielders.

5 out of the top 7 are undisputed batting greats and watson and flintoff are good allrounders suitable for limited overs cricket.

 

[subshakerz]

It's really not.

He averages significantly better than all of them. If they are better, they it can only be a close thing.

 

[subshakerz]

Adam Gilchrist +
Shane Watson
Viv Richards
ABDV
Michael Hussey
Andrew Symonds
Andrew Flintoff
Shaun Pollock
Shane Warne
Joel Garner
Glen McGrath

What is the point of Watson and Symonds if you already have 5 quality bowlers?

 

[h_hurricane]

He averages significantly better than all of them. If they are better, they it can only be a close thing.

To the best of my knowledge, you give a great amount of importance to peer reputation while rating a player.

So who had a better peer reputation in ODIs ? Aravinda or Sanga ?

Or did Sanga have any peer reputation at all in ODIs ?

 

[subshakerz]

Most people are idiots.

Sanga SR
2000-04 - 71 ( 80+ was the norm for good batsmen )

2005-09 - 77 ( 85 was the lowest SR among top 5 run scorers of India )

2010-15 - 85 ( 25 of top 50 run scorers had better SR than Sanga )

First 10 years he was Dravid and Kallis level.. ie, Pathetic.
He did better in the last few years.. But nothing spectacular.
Comparing him to Aravinda is an insult to Aravinda.. Who was one of best batsman of his generation.

Dont really care how you rate Sanga but stop overrating Desilva and acknowledge that with his record he doesnt belong in the final XI.

 

[subshakerz]

To the best of my knowledge, you give a great amount of importance to peer reputation while rating a player.

So who had a better peer reputation in ODIs ? Aravinda or Sanga ?

Or did Sanga have any peer reputation at all in ODIs ?

Peer reputation is one factor along with overall record and I may be willing to grant Desilva may even be better slightly better than Sanga but to pretend he is a league above Sanga while averaging 34 is silly.

 

[srbhkshk]

Here be a very fun asian team -

Sehwag
Jayasuriya
Srikkanth
Yuvraj
Dhoni +
Afridi
Kapil
Rashid
Akram
Waqar
Bumrah

It's not gonna be great on good pitches (mostly on the batting side, the bowling can still win games on it's own), but it should absolutely rip apart anything it comes across on a flat pitch.

 

[subshakerz]

For the rest of the world, most seem to be agreeing along the similar lines.

Frankly, looking at the balance of the side, if you have four quality bowlers, you can afford to have a weaker 5th bowler, but you can't afford to have only three quality bowlers. Which means either Flintoff or Pollock or Hadlee have to be there. Choosing Symonds would likely mean choosing Watson as both combined can take up the fifth bowling place whereas Klusener can hold his own. So you end up with the following lineup:

Gilly
Watson or Lara
Viv
Ponting or Deano
Buttler or ABD
Hussey or Bevan
Symonds or Klusener or Flintoff - batting position is changeable
Pollock or Hadlee
Warne
McGrath
Garner

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Here be a very fun asian team -

Sehwag
Jayasuriya
Srikkanth
Yuvraj
Pandya
Afridi
Kapil
Rashid
Akram
Waqar
Bumrah

It's not gonna be great on good pitches (mostly on the batting side, the bowling can still win games on it's own), but it should absolutely rip apart anything it comes across on a flat pitch.

Who is the wicketkeeper?

 

[srbhkshk]

Who is the wicketkeeper?

hmm guess I'll have to drop Pandya for Dhoni, a bit less fun I guess unless it's early career version.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

For the rest of the world, most seem to be agreeing along the similar lines.

Frankly, looking at the balance of the side, if you have four quality bowlers, you can afford to have a weaker 5th bowler, but you can't afford to have only three quality bowlers. Which means either Flintoff or Pollock have to be there. Choosing Symonds would likely mean choosing Watson as both combined can take up the fifth bowling place whereas Klusener can hold his own. So you end up with the following lineup:

Gilly
Watson or Lara
Viv
Ponting or Deano
Buttler or ABD
Hussey or Bevan
Symonds or Klusener
Pollock or Flintoff
Warne
McGrath
Garner

You wouldn't bat Flintoff at 8. A number 8 rarely faces more than 10 balls in a one layer and often never bats. Pollock is completely fine there, as would Hadlee. Flintoff was best at 5 (definitely not 8) and Symonds was also no 5, not a 7.

Flintoff was a fine ODI allrounder but as a bowler who would hardly bat he wouldn't make an ATG NZ side let alone ROW side (inferior to Hadlee, Bond, Boult, Chatfield and possibly a few others).

Lloyd is another option for no 6. I'd possibly pick Amla as one of the openers too - magnificent ODI player or perhaps Bairstow.

 

[subshakerz]

You wouldn't bat Flintoff at 8. A number 8 rarely faces more than 10 balls in a one layer and often never bats. Pollock is completely fine there, as would be Hadlee. Flintoff was best at 5 (definitely not 8) and Symonds was also no 5, not a 7.

Thanks I modified to add Hadlee. But the order can shifted around.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Not really true in ODIs. As a bowler he averaged under 30 every year from 2001 onwards except for 2005.

As a batsman this is more the case for sure, his numbers jump around a lot more with the blade.

Small sample size on some years acknowledged

Yeah I was mostly thinking about his battinf. Around 2004 he batted no. 4 IIRC and was genuinely one of the most dangerous bats in the world at the time. Like Harmison's bowling though, which peaked about the same time, it didn't last nearly long enough

 

[TheJediBrah]

You wouldn't bat Flintoff at 8. A number 8 rarely faces more than 10 balls in a one layer and often never bats. Pollock is completely fine there, as would Hadlee. Flintoff was best at 5 (definitely not 8) and Symonds was also no 5, not a 7.

Flintoff was a fine ODI allrounder but as a bowler who would hardly bat he wouldn't make an ATG NZ side let alone ROW side (inferior to Hadlee, Bond, Boult, Chatfield and possibly a few others).

Lloyd is another option for no 6. I'd possibly pick Amla as one of the openers too - magnificent ODI player or perhaps Bairstow.

Symonds would be a perfect no. 7, but you'd need another bowling option in the top 6 to justify playing him there

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Also Viv was a very handy ODI bowler too.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I'm surprised Starc isn't named in more of these ROW teams. He probably edges AB and Kohli as the best ODI player of the last 10 years.

 

[GIMH]

I'm surprised Starc isn't named in more of these ROW teams. He probably edges AB and Kohli as the best ODI player of the last 10 years.

Terrible record in WC semis in the northern hemisphere though

 

[Himannv]

He averages significantly better than all of them. If they are better, they it can only be a close thing.

Minnow bashing probably. When it matters he only scores 17 off 35 and takes the pressure off the bowlers.