Wow. You have a long history of being a world class hype machine. Bell (Better than Amla), Cook (ATG), Hafeez (Better than Anwar), Kamran (Better than Gilly), Kohli (Better than Sachin), Yousuf (Better than Younis), et cetera but Rohit being better than de Villiers has got to be the most laughable thing ever.
As for your earlier inquiry of opening being easier, compare ABDV's performances as an opener, at the beginning of his career, compared to what he's done in the middle. Or how Inzamam and Malik flourished lower down the order compared to when they were batting at #3. The easiest position to bat at in ODIs would have to be #4, where you are shielded from the new ball but do not have to start hitting from ball one and usually start your innings against the opposition's third and fourth choice bowlers.
Are you saying batting first up, with zero runs on the board and a fresh cherry in the hands of a Starc, Amir or Boult is easier than starting your innings with the score at around 100/2 with Mitchell Marsh or Woakes delivering their pies?
Batsmen are simply suited to different jobs, just like bowlers. You won't criticize Hassan Ali for not consistently opening the bowling so why would you do blame ABDV for not doing a job not suited to his game? He is at his best when he comes in with a platform after which he does things no batsman has ever done. Amla and de Kock are far better at handling the new ball and laying a platform.
Again, painting a false narrative to drive home a point, but why I am not surprised? The purpose of comparing Hafeez and Anwar was not to show that Hafeez is better than Anwar; the purpose was to expose the hypocrisy of certain posters.
I didn't say Bell is better than your god, and I didn't say Kamran is better than Gilchrist - another blatant lie. I used Gilchrist as an example to illustrate Kamran's fall from grace. It was Ian Chappell in 2005 who compared Kamran to Gilchrist. He was fantastic with both bat and gloves at that time, and was even more highly rated than Dhoni.
The rest I agree with. Cook is an ATG, Kohli is better than Tendulkar and MoYo is better than Younis. Now to address the main point in hand here - de Villiers chickened out of opening when he got found out by Asif, but that was 10 years ago.
During his peak years, he should have batted at number 3 in ODIs instead of letting inferior players like du Plessis, Ingram etc. hog the spot. The 2015 World Cup SF is the most significant example of how de Villiers restricting himself to 20-25 overs only is not going to do any good for SA. In ODis, it is criminal for the best batsman in the team to not bat in the top 3.
Malik did not flourish lower down the order. He was excellent at number 3 in the early 2000's, averaged 50 at SR of 90. Similarly, Inzamam's restricted his potential in ODIs by running away from the new ball. Sure he was a very good middle-order batsman, but post Ijaz, Pakistan played many average number 3 batsmen when Inzamam was at his peak.
Most other teams have realized that your best batsman have to face maximum deliveries in ODIs. That is why successful ODI teams like India, Australia etc. have historically played their best batsman in the top 3, while Pakistan decided to play them at 4/5 in order to protect them from the new ball.
Good bowling conditions are rare in ODIs, and your best batsmen are actually more equipped of facing a challenging scenario than your mediocre so-called specialist batsmen. Specialist openers do not work in ODIs, and majority of the great ODI openers in history have played in the middle-order in Tests. It is not a coincidence.
In addition, the fact that there are many examples of failing middle-order batsmen transforming into quality openers - while the reverse has not been true in most cases - is not a coincidence either.
Middle-order is more challenging than opening because you have to adjust to so many different situations. You can walk in at 4-2 one day, and 200-2 the next. You need a complete game to excel in the middle-order, and batsmen who aren't good at strike rotation are exposed.
In opening, PP overs allows batsmen to pick up regular boundaries and make for dot balls. In addition, as they always start at 0-0, they have the freedom to often take their time unless they are chasing a huge total, which is not always.
Hasan Ali? What a fail analogy. He is not the captain - he has to do what the captain and coach tell him to do, but it is disappointing to see a fantastic bowler like him not getting a crack upfront because of a mediocre pacer like Junaid.
Your best fast bowler and your best batsman have to take the bull by the horns. Not play second-fiddle to inferior players. Your two best pacers have to open, and your best batsmen has to open or bat at number 3. Anything below that is counter-productive, and SA can testify to that.
