wfdu_ben91
International 12th Man
His more of a pioneer then an alltime great. They've been many ODI opening batsman that have been better.He's also a great for revolutionising the approach to opening in ODIs.
His more of a pioneer then an alltime great. They've been many ODI opening batsman that have been better.He's also a great for revolutionising the approach to opening in ODIs.
I remember a comment during the 2003 WC (IIRC) and the commentator said "the average doesn't matter so much, but the strike rate is the most important" and I wentSehwag has mostly been dreadful in ODIs though - only recently and in 2002 has he begun to look like a genuine proposition. If he keeps up his form of late for the next 4-5 years I'd say he might possibly be fairly regarded as better than Ponting. Right now it's an apples-oranges case - one batsman's career record gives a surprisingly accurate representation; the other's gives the usual no-real-indication-at-all.
In ODIs essentially strike-rate is only a worthy consideration once the average reaches a certain level. Shahid Afridi's astronomical strike-rate is no real credit to him given that his average is so exceedingly low. Ditto Ricardo Powell. For a fair while the same was true of Andrew Symonds.
What are we talking? ODIs? Wickets taken, economy rate etc.?Let's hear some names then. There are, obviously, more than 0 good bowlers around, but plenty? Gross exaggeration.
That is purely a subjective thing. His performances of late have been indeed brilliant and overshadows the aforementioned two.Suresh Raina. No way he's better than Yuvraj and Gambhir.
Yeah, the other thing to consider is where they're batting. It's far more important for a number 7 or 8 to have a good strike rate than a good average, whereas a number four wants a good average.I remember a comment during the 2003 WC (IIRC) and the commentator said "the average doesn't matter so much, but the strike rate is the most important" and I went
Indeed, it was a hypothetical example rather than a genuine query.That has more to do with his average as an opener of 35-36 at a SR of ~90, which is a quite phenomenal performance, especially over 15 years or so.
ODIs, and bowlers with decent-to-good economy-rates.What are we talking? ODIs? Wickets taken, economy rate etc.?
Better than Knight and Jayasuriya perhaps, but certainly not close to Ganguly. Both have loads of their careers ahead of them and may worsen again in time.Smith and Gayle are already better ODI batsman then Knight, Ganguly and Jayasuriya.
You could, but it'd not be the case. Knight >> Tresscothick in ODIs.You could make an arguement that Trescothick is a better ODI Opening Batsman then Knight.
Gilchrist is a little below any of those above names and Hayden was fit to rank with them for just a year, which puts him as a whole substantially below.Hayden, Gilchrist should be added to that list...
Rather unlikely but we'll see.Gambhir & Watson have the potential to be great aswell.
I disagree. If every bowler in a side had an economy of 4.76, they would win most matches.ODIs, and bowlers with decent-to-good economy-rates.
And no, 4.76-an-over is not a decent economy-rate, it's a poor one.
Half of Ganguly's ODI centuries were against minnows. Really, his no better then Herschelle Gibbs. Infact Gibbs is probably better.Better than Knight and Jayasuriya perhaps, but certainly not close to Ganguly. Both have loads of their careers ahead of them and may worsen again in time.
You could, but it'd not be the case. Knight >> Tresscothick in ODIs.
Gilchrist is a little below any of those above names and Hayden was fit to rank with them for just a year, which puts him as a whole substantially below.
Rather unlikely but we'll see.