Hashim Amla fastest to 7,000 ODI runs watch

[soso_killer]

Last World Cup in SA

India world cup finalists.
South Africa knocked out in group stages


Last World Cup in Aus

India group winners, losing semifinalists.
India beat South Africa by 130 runs.


Last ICC tournament in England

India winners.
India beat South Africa by 26 runs.



South Africa care about success in bilaterals in ODIs. Well done to your lot if you care about that.


India and Australia care about success in ICC competitions. Not everyone can be a jamodi champion.

I don't get the line of argument here. SA did defeat India in India in the 2011 WC. Was that meaningless? If India winning the 2011 edition negates that defeat then why were other WC editions mentioned as India didn't win them either?
Both SA and India went out in the semis of the 2015 WC with SA being the only side that was competitive in the semifinals. Then there's the 2007 WC in which India bowed out in the group stages which was neglected for some reason, yet 2003 was relevant. So I don't get the point here.

While ICC tournaments are important they aren't the only measure. Bilaterals form part of the calendar too.
They may not be as glamorous as a global event but they're part and parcel of the game.
What makes them worthy for me is beating the opposition in their backyard. At ICC events the ICC is responsible for curating the pitch taking away any home advantage. This is not the case in bilaterals, the home side can prepare any surface they want. Hence the gratification of winning away. If conditions were the same everyone would be winning away but that's not the case. This is not to imply that bilaterals are more important, but are also an integral part of the game.

Else should we start judging players on four year windows and forget everything in between? Is it tenable to wait for four years for the next global event to rate players? If that's the case why is a guy like Thomas Muller not rated leagues ahead of Messi and Ronaldo? In just two editions he has more goals than them combined and has won it. Messi and Ronaldo have failed 3 times. Even FIFA tried to make Messi look glamorous when it was di Maria who was Argentina's best player in Brazil.

Is it not at the back of these "meaningless bilaterals" the legend of one Virat Kohli was born? If so when are these bilaterals meaningful? when are they not?

 

[Pantani]

No he is not the fastest. How many balls did it take? Afridi will be the fastest, he would have reached 7000 in 6500 balls or less.

 

[Pantani]

I don't get the line of argument here. SA did defeat India in India in the 2011 WC. Was that meaningless? If India winning the 2011 edition negates that defeat then why were other WC editions mentioned as India didn't win them either?
Both SA and India went out in the semis of the 2015 WC with SA being the only side that was competitive in the semifinals. Then there's the 2007 WC in which India bowed out in the group stages which was neglected for some reason, yet 2003 was relevant. So I don't get the point here.

While ICC tournaments are important they aren't the only measure. Bilaterals form part of the calendar too.
They may not be as glamorous as a global event but they're part and parcel of the game.
What makes them worthy for me is beating the opposition in their backyard. At ICC events the ICC is responsible for curating the pitch taking away any home advantage. This is not the case in bilaterals, the home side can prepare any surface they want. Hence the gratification of winning away. If conditions were the same everyone would be winning away but that's not the case. This is not to imply that bilaterals are more important, but are also an integral part of the game.

Else should we start judging players on four year windows and forget everything in between? Is it tenable to wait for four years for the next global event to rate players? If that's the case why is a guy like Thomas Muller not rated leagues ahead of Messi and Ronaldo? In just two editions he has more goals than them combined and has won it. Messi and Ronaldo have failed 3 times. Even FIFA tried to make Messi look glamorous when it was di Maria who was Argentina's best player in Brazil.

Is it not at the back of these "meaningless bilaterals" the legend of one Virat Kohli was born? If so when are these bilaterals meaningful? when are they not?

Don't talk about football man, smashing it for Barcelona and Real Madrid/Man United is serious business, unlike your average ODI bilateral series. Some people even argue that the Champions League is of equivalent importance to the World Cup

 

[Bilal7]

Amazing!!! Have always admired a guy who is so unassuming and reticent yet a champion player, goes on to show you don't have to scream, hurl abuses and sledge to become a good player. Not always does Sachin appreciate a player, Amla was always rated highly by him. Hard to find dignified players in today's day and age, he certainly is a role model for all upcoming cricketers.

Him and Sachin are friends off the field from what I heard. Always have nice things to say about each other.

He has one century vs Australia, 10 out of the 24 centuries have come against West indies, Netherlands, Ireland ,and Zimbabwe.
Kohli is bashed by you for not scoring vs the best attacks Amla is guilty of the same . I haven't included the centuries he has vs sri Lanka.

Having amla in all time 11 for odis is an absolute joke. You must be extremely biased to consider Amla in an all time 11.

Jaysuriya
Gilchrist
Grenidge
Lara as an opener

These names are all better than Amla as an opener. Lol I don't think you will find many people who will put Amla in an all time odi 11. That just says it all.

I have lots of respect for Jayasuriya and Gilly but did you even bother checking their records minus the countries you mentioned? Or is this another lazy comment? Jaya has 18 centuries against Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak and SA while Amla has 14 against Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak and SL, at a much higher average and a SR that is in the same ballpark as Jayasuriya's. As you may realize, Amla has gotten has gotten his hundreds in half the number of games as well.

Jayasuriya, Gilly, Sehwag, Anwar were all pretty good ODI batsmen and revolutionized opening but at the end of the day, they averaged in the 30s and have inferior numbers to Amla in almost every country and against every opposition. The same holds true for World Cups, lest you plan on being lazy again, mind you.

Nothing is more impactful than winning games for your country and whenever Amla scores, South Africa win, which is reflected in the fact that he has 22 hundreds in wins and only 2 in losses, both games where he was severely let down by his teammates.

If great innings are your thing, Amla has that covered too with his majestic 150 at a SR of 120 in England; a hundred down in the UAE against an attack of Akhtar, Ajmal, Afridi, Gul and Hafeez, back when scoring in the UAE was very difficult; an innings in Sri Lanka where he was batting on a different pitch to the rest of the Saffers and got a hundred while the next highest score wasn't even a 50, IIRC; the 300+ chase that him and de Kock aced last year, etc. I can go on and on.

You don't need to argue with me about Amla's status in ODIs, since I don't think he's an ATG yet either. He is a great batsman but unlike tests, he does have flaws in ODIs. He needs an iconic performance in World Cups to get to the next level where his compatriot, de Villiers already stands. He is however, the second greatest opening batsman of all time in ODI cricket.

I'm on about in this thread. A majority rate him fairly. Don't judge off 1 or 2 people's opnion

There is what 10 people who are commenting on this thread. If this is all you're basing your opinion on off, you're being very gullible.

 

[soso_killer]

Don't talk about football man, smashing it for Barcelona and Real Madrid/Man United is serious business, unlike your average ODI bilateral series. Some people even argue that the Champions League is of equivalent importance to the World Cup

One could also argue smashing it for United/Barca/Madrid/Bayern is also easy, especially for a top top player.
Think about it, those clubs in terms of revenue and stature are miles ahead of everyone else. That includes new money leagues such as your Chelsea's, City and your PSG's of this world.
They could outspend or raid any squad they want.
Look at Chelsea they've been established a bit longer than City and PSG, however if Real Madrid were to raid for Hazard they'd have a hard time holding on to him despite being in the top 6/8 teams in the world in terms of revenue. Good sides like Tottenham, Porto, Benfica, Napoli, Dortmund etc will keep on producing young protégés or buy players of unknown quantity only to be bullied by the elite a few years down the line. Thus making those clubs even stronger.
Porto and Leicester were the exception to the rule i.e. winning a major trophy without belonging to the elite.

At club level the top teams simply go to the market if their global youth is not good enough (not just restricted to the borders of one country). At international level you could be the only world class player in your national side. Or have a world class front line and be rubbish defensively. There's no market for that.
At club level top sides go on a shopping spree to pepper over the cracks.
The Champions League is also played annually meaning there's ample opportunity for the trophy to rotate among the top 4/6 clubs over a world class players career.

 

[Hasan123]

Him and Sachin are friends off the field from what I heard. Always have nice things to say about each other.



I have lots of respect for Jayasuriya and Gilly but did you even bother checking their records minus the countries you mentioned? Or is this another lazy comment? Jaya has 18 centuries against Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak and SA while Amla has 14 against Aus, Eng, Ind, Pak and SL, at a much higher average and a SR that is in the same ballpark as Jayasuriya's. As you may realize, Amla has gotten has gotten his hundreds in half the number of games as well.

Jayasuriya, Gilly, Sehwag, Anwar were all pretty good ODI batsmen and revolutionized opening but at the end of the day, they averaged in the 30s and have inferior numbers to Amla in almost every country and against every opposition. The same holds true for World Cups, lest you plan on being lazy again, mind you.

Nothing is more impactful than winning games for your country and whenever Amla scores, South Africa win, which is reflected in the fact that he has 22 hundreds in wins and only 2 in losses, both games where he was severely let down by his teammates.

If great innings are your thing, Amla has that covered too with his majestic 150 at a SR of 120 in England; a hundred down in the UAE against an attack of Akhtar, Ajmal, Afridi, Gul and Hafeez, back when scoring in the UAE was very difficult; an innings in Sri Lanka where he was batting on a different pitch to the rest of the Saffers and got a hundred while the next highest score wasn't even a 50, IIRC; the 300+ chase that him and de Kock aced last year, etc. I can go on and on.

You don't need to argue with me about Amla's status in ODIs, since I don't think he's an ATG yet either. He is a great batsman but unlike tests, he does have flaws in ODIs. He needs an iconic performance in World Cups to get to the next level where his compatriot, de Villiers already stands. He is however, the second greatest opening batsman of all time in ODI cricket.



There is what 10 people who are commenting on this thread. If this is all you're basing your opinion on off, you're being very gullible.

One thing I wanted to bring up with you as well is, Kohli is bashed by yourself for scoring on flat pitches and scoring of inferior bowlers. Amla is playing in the same era, you will present me 4/5 innings when he scored on difficult pitches, but let's be honest a majority of Odi pitches are played on flat pitches. So going by that shouldn't Amla be rated less than Jaysuria, Gilly,Anwar who were facing much supeior bowlers and in conditions which had more in it for the bowling. So judging by your standards they should be rated higher?

Also one thing I want to make clear is playing on flat pitches and vs inferior bowlers I not how I will judge Amla compared to other players of other eras, my opinion is Kohli, Amla, and other batsmen of this era can play what's in front of them. They can't control conditions and quality of attacks.

Your happy to think he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time I don't think he is. You just named them innings, whilst they are good I am almost certain you would have had to go on cricinfo just to look for them. With Kohli, I can name many impactful and memorable knocks without looking at cricinfo or scorecards. With Gilly, Sanath unfortunately I didn't see them at there peaks so I would be unable to remember there impactful knocks.

What I was on about when I said don't judge of 1or 2 peoples opinion was about people calling moyo being called ATG batsmen in Odis. Nothing to do with Amla.

 

[soso_killer]

One thing I wanted to bring up with you as well is, Kohli is bashed by yourself for scoring on flat pitches and scoring of inferior bowlers. Amla is playing in the same era, you will present me 4/5 innings when he scored on difficult pitches, but let's be honest a majority of Odi pitches are played on flat pitches. So going by that shouldn't Amla be rated less than Jaysuria, Gilly,Anwar who were facing much supeior bowlers and in conditions which had more in it for the bowling. So judging by your standards they should be rated higher?

Also one thing I want to make clear is playing on flat pitches and vs inferior bowlers I not how I will judge Amla compared to other players of other eras, my opinion is Kohli, Amla, and other batsmen of this era can play what's in front of them. They can't control conditions and quality of attacks.

Your happy to think he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time I don't think he is. You just named them innings, whilst they are good I am almost certain you would have had to go on cricinfo just to look for them. With Kohli, I can name many impactful and memorable knocks without looking at cricinfo or scorecards. With Gilly, Sanath unfortunately I didn't see them at there peaks so I would be unable to remember there impactful knocks.

What I was on about when I said don't judge of 1or 2 peoples opinion was about people calling moyo being called ATG batsmen in Odis. Nothing to do with Amla.

One could argue Amla has had more impact in ODI's than Kohli by the virtue of winning matches away from home for his team.

Kohli has played 35 matches in and against SA, NZ, ENG & AUS (the best teams of his era.)
He's won just 8 of those 35 matches.
In SA he's won 2, averaging 25.
In Aus won 2, average 13.
In England won 4, average 28.
Never won a single match in NZ. Not a single 50 or hundred in these won matches.

Amla on the other hand has played 34 matches.
In Aus won 5, average 50, 2 50's, HS 97
In Eng won 2 average 247, 1 100 & 1 50. HS 150
In India won 5, avg 42, 2 50's. HS 81
In NZ won 5, avg 66, 1 100, 2 50's. HS 119
He also done well in alien conditions like the UAE and Lanka.

As we can see Amla has won matches for his country in all conditions not just one. A guy that wins more matches for his team has more impact on the game than a guy who simply wins at home only. That's just my humble opinion.
Of course Amla has his flaws and needs to perform in ICC events, but let's make no mistake he's a match winner.

 

[Hasan123]

One could argue Amla has had more impact in ODI's than Kohli by the virtue of winning matches away from home for his team.

Kohli has played 35 matches in and against SA, NZ, ENG & AUS (the best teams of his era.)
He's won just 8 of those 35 matches.
In SA he's won 2, averaging 25.
In Aus won 2, average 13.
In England won 4, average 28.
Never won a single match in NZ. Not a single 50 or hundred in these won matches.

Amla on the other hand has played 34 matches.
In Aus won 5, average 50, 2 50's, HS 97
In Eng won 2 average 247, 1 100 & 1 50. HS 150
In India won 5, avg 42, 2 50's. HS 81
In NZ won 5, avg 66, 1 100, 2 50's. HS 119
He also done well in alien conditions like the UAE and Lanka.

As we can see Amla has won matches for his country in all conditions not just one. A guy that wins more matches for his team has more impact on the game than a guy who simply wins at home only. That's just my humble opinion.
Of course Amla has his flaws and needs to perform in ICC events, but let's make no mistake he's a match winner.

I won't deny it I think I may have underestimated him as an Odi player slightly. The problem I have is claims that he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time, which for me are well wide of the mark. A very good Odi player but behind the likes of Jaysuriya,Gilly,Anwar.

 

[soso_killer]

I won't deny it I think I may have underestimated him as an Odi player slightly. The problem I have is claims that he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time, which for me are well wide of the mark. A very good Odi player but behind the likes of Jaysuriya,Gilly,Anwar.

Well I don't have the stats and I will have to analyse those guys later. (But before then can you explain to me why you rate them ahead of Amla, there's no wrong answer here. It's your opinion and you're entitled to it.)

Yes I understand they were flashy players and influenced how the game is played today. But still we have to use the same metric to judge all players.
Were they consistent?, Did they score away from home, How did they compete against the best teams of their era etc. Yes and performances in in ICC events too. Even there I want consistency. A player can't have poor World Cup/Champions Trophy after another and simply turn up in the final and be labeled as having a great record at ICC events.

The common logic at PP is "performing when it matters". My question would thus be: Did the quarter and semifinals not matter? What about round robin games in a tough group?
If the entire team didn't have the right attitude towards those games then an individual who relishes those finals simply wouldn't get an opportunity to shine and would remain a failure.

Let's take Dhoni for example, I'm not even going to downplay the brilliant knock he played in the 2011 final. Yes Gambhir also played well, yes the first wicket provided a platform, yes a cynic could argue it's easy to promote yourself when the player of the tournament is yet to bat and behind Dhoni should he have failed.
All those arguments warrant merit, however do they take away that Dhoni played a clutch knock? Do they take away his bravery and a very good captains innings? In my opinion, No. It was a good knock in a crucial game, which is where all arguments should end.

Back to performing when it "matters", does that mean a guy like Yuvi who had a brilliant WC didn't perform when it mattered? Having won his side a tight game against the defending champions? Should his performances be disregarded, even for argument sake and hypothetically speaking, say he got a duck in the final his team won. Does that take away his man of the tournament award?
Dhoni at ICC events has been underwhelming, one good final is not going to change that.

It's clear where I'm going with this, Gilly. It's been said he's been poor at ICC events but loved finals. I want to analyse his performances and in context. And a quick fire 30 won't cut it for me in a batting line up of Hayden, Ponting, Clarke (was very good in WC's, yes an accumulator but gave guys like Symonds and Hussey a platform to launch.

A guy like JP has stood up when it "mattered" in Test cricket wrestling Australia and England down in their dens. Should i forget all those times JP has let SA down?

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Any amount of nitpicking , selective stats or highlighting Amla's exploits won't change the fact that there will be 5 different names for Top ODI ATG XI instead of Amla.

 

[Abdul]

Impactless runs scored under no pressure.

 

[Hasan123]

Well I don't have the stats and I will have to analyse those guys later. (But before then can you explain to me why you rate them ahead of Amla, there's no wrong answer here. It's your opinion and you're entitled to it.)

Yes I understand they were flashy players and influenced how the game is played today. But still we have to use the same metric to judge all players.
Were they consistent?, Did they score away from home, How did they compete against the best teams of their era etc. Yes and performances in in ICC events too. Even there I want consistency. A player can't have poor World Cup/Champions Trophy after another and simply turn up in the final and be labeled as having a great record at ICC events.

The common logic at PP is "performing when it matters". My question would thus be: Did the quarter and semifinals not matter? What about round robin games in a tough group?
If the entire team didn't have the right attitude towards those games then an individual who relishes those finals simply wouldn't get an opportunity to shine and would remain a failure.

Let's take Dhoni for example, I'm not even going to downplay the brilliant knock he played in the 2011 final. Yes Gambhir also played well, yes the first wicket provided a platform, yes a cynic could argue it's easy to promote yourself when the player of the tournament is yet to bat and behind Dhoni should he have failed.
All those arguments warrant merit, however do they take away that Dhoni played a clutch knock? Do they take away his bravery and a very good captains innings? In my opinion, No. It was a good knock in a crucial game, which is where all arguments should end.

Back to performing when it "matters", does that mean a guy like Yuvi who had a brilliant WC didn't perform when it mattered? Having won his side a tight game against the defending champions? Should his performances be disregarded, even for argument sake and hypothetically speaking, say he got a duck in the final his team won. Does that take away his man of the tournament award?
Dhoni at ICC events has been underwhelming, one good final is not going to change that.

It's clear where I'm going with this, Gilly. It's been said he's been poor at ICC events but loved finals. I want to analyse his performances and in context. And a quick fire 30 won't cut it for me in a batting line up of Hayden, Ponting, Clarke (was very good in WC's, yes an accumulator but gave guys like Symonds and Hussey a platform to launch.

A guy like JP has stood up when it "mattered" in Test cricket wrestling Australia and England down in their dens. Should i forget all those times JP has let SA down?

People will present Amla stats away from home and how he has done in difficult conditions. Whilst he will have good knocks away from home, if we're honest most modern day pitches are flat. In tests he has proven he can score in all conditions anyway.

The reason I'll rate Sanath, Gilly, etc over Amla is simple they are much more impactful in odis than Amla. Amla for the most part will accelerate in pp overs than his strike rate will stay the same when it should increase. Whilst the other openers I mentioned will bat aggressively throughout there innings and increase there strike rates, also they will take the game away from the opposition. So that is there impact. Amla will bat a run a ball than will need Ab,Miller, or someone else to play the risky innings to see SA over the line. Whilst I understand there are different roles in LO, someone like Kohli or Punter aren't seen as power hitters yet they are able to bat in gears Amla just can't.

His stats will look good but I am almost certain that you will have to look up other scorecards just to remember his great innings. For other great odi players I have mentioned you will just recall them off the top off your head. Furthermore about stats , Dravid has 10,000 odi runs but he is never talked about in odis because he lacked any impact. Players with inferior records like Gibbs and Gayle are more talked about as they are impacting the game more and taking the attack to the opposition. In this moder era where pitches are flat, Amla will have his uses but when teams are scoring 350 plus you want players who can switch gears. Amla's icc tournament record also goes against him massively. He doesn't have many memorable knocks in such tournaments. Taking all this into consideration, I will not rate Amla as an atg in LO.

He is a very good odi player though but I wouldn't take Amla over Gilly, Sanath, Anwar,Ganguly, etc.

 

[SL_Fan]

A lot of people go after AB’s record in major tourneys even though it’s fairly decent. Amla on the other hand has flopped in each and every one of them.

That’s clearly a massive drop in performance. All these runs and records in meaningless bilaterals don’t mean much if you can’t actually score runs when it actually matters.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Waqar Younis is an ATG despite having no performance in a WC but Amla is not among top 10 ODI openers.

Regards,
A bitter Pakistani fan

 

[Bilal7]

One thing I wanted to bring up with you as well is, Kohli is bashed by yourself for scoring on flat pitches and scoring of inferior bowlers. Amla is playing in the same era, you will present me 4/5 innings when he scored on difficult pitches, but let's be honest a majority of Odi pitches are played on flat pitches. So going by that shouldn't Amla be rated less than Jaysuria, Gilly,Anwar who were facing much supeior bowlers and in conditions which had more in it for the bowling. So judging by your standards they should be rated higher?

Also one thing I want to make clear is playing on flat pitches and vs inferior bowlers I not how I will judge Amla compared to other players of other eras, my opinion is Kohli, Amla, and other batsmen of this era can play what's in front of them. They can't control conditions and quality of attacks.

Your happy to think he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time I don't think he is. You just named them innings, whilst they are good I am almost certain you would have had to go on cricinfo just to look for them. With Kohli, I can name many impactful and memorable knocks without looking at cricinfo or scorecards. With Gilly, Sanath unfortunately I didn't see them at there peaks so I would be unable to remember there impactful knocks.

What I was on about when I said don't judge of 1or 2 peoples opinion was about people calling moyo being called ATG batsmen in Odis. Nothing to do with Amla.

No, because unlike a Kohli or Dhoni, Amla has shown that he has no troubles batting on pitches that assist pacers. Yes, pitches have been especially flat since 2015 but Amla was ranked the #1 ODI batsman in the world back in 2010 up until 2013 or so. So he can't be accused on taking advantage of the flat pitches that have begun to pop up everywhere, since the last World Cup. He was a great ODI player before that and averaged nearly 60 at a SR of 95 at one point, lol.

No, I did not use cricinfo and I remember these innings because they are memorable. I would have provided links had I gone to cricinfo to search for these great innings.

It's sad that you haven't watched Gilly and Jaya bat yet are claiming that they had more impact on games. How so? Amla clearly has more impact because he scores more runs per innings, at a similar SR, and does so in conditions where other batsmen fail.

People will present Amla stats away from home and how he has done in difficult conditions. Whilst he will have good knocks away from home, if we're honest most modern day pitches are flat. In tests he has proven he can score in all conditions anyway.

The reason I'll rate Sanath, Gilly, etc over Amla is simple they are much more impactful in odis than Amla. Amla for the most part will accelerate in pp overs than his strike rate will stay the same when it should increase. Whilst the other openers I mentioned will bat aggressively throughout there innings and increase there strike rates, also they will take the game away from the opposition. So that is there impact. Amla will bat a run a ball than will need Ab,Miller, or someone else to play the risky innings to see SA over the line. Whilst I understand there are different roles in LO, someone like Kohli or Punter aren't seen as power hitters yet they are able to bat in gears Amla just can't.

His stats will look good but I am almost certain that you will have to look up other scorecards just to remember his great innings. For other great odi players I have mentioned you will just recall them off the top off your head. Furthermore about stats , Dravid has 10,000 odi runs but he is never talked about in odis because he lacked any impact. Players with inferior records like Gibbs and Gayle are more talked about as they are impacting the game more and taking the attack to the opposition. In this moder era where pitches are flat, Amla will have his uses but when teams are scoring 350 plus you want players who can switch gears. Amla's icc tournament record also goes against him massively. He doesn't have many memorable knocks in such tournaments. Taking all this into consideration, I will not rate Amla as an atg in LO.

He is a very good odi player though but I wouldn't take Amla over Gilly, Sanath, Anwar,Ganguly, etc.

Well, you're just wrong if you believe that Amla cannot accelerate. Did you even watch his last innings where he smashed 50 runs in 19 deliveries at the death, including five sixes? Amla's game may be based on strike rotation but don't mistake that for him not being able to hit out when needed because he definitely can. However, he's not a Sanath, Sehwag or Anwar type opener and South Africa certainly don't want him to be. Most people would take an opener who has the ability to bat through the innings, at a good clip and getting those big hundreds and being the glue that holds the innings together.

The typical, modern-day opener is nothing special and it's not difficult to smash a few quick 30s and 40s. Look at how many of these batsmen have been seen at the international scene in recent times; Sanath, Gilly, Sehwag, McCullum, Warner, Guptil, Dilshan and Anwar. How many openers like Amla have an average of 50+ and have balanced records almost everywhere and against everyone? Just the guy I would pick to partner Amla in an ODI XI, Sachin Tendulker.

People talk about Afridi more than any other Pakistani player. He gets more publicity than the likes of Yousuf, Younis and Inzamam got combined. That means nothing though because we're not talking about who the most popular and famous players are but who are the most effective. So yes, Gayle is more famous and gets more publicity but is he a better ODI batsman? No, he most certainly is not. Amla is quite comfortably the second best opening batsman of all time, in ODIs.

 

[Bilal7]

I won't deny it I think I may have underestimated him as an Odi player slightly. The problem I have is claims that he is the 2nd best Odi opener of all time, which for me are well wide of the mark. A very good Odi player but behind the likes of Jaysuriya,Gilly,Anwar.

Lol, Anwar? I'm a big fan, once again. All three of these guys were great entertainers but in terms of actual performances, Amla is better than all three.

 

[Sin Nombre]

<snip>

You mentioned Aus, SA, Eng; don't keep on moving the goalposts all the time.

The analogy with football is bizarre. Most Manchester United and England fans care about Manchester United's results more. Same with Barcelona and Spain; in fact, a lot of them actively do not like the national team.

Club football predates international football by decades and is a bigger part of local and regional identity.

 

[Hasan123]

No, because unlike a Kohli or Dhoni, Amla has shown that he has no troubles batting on pitches that assist pacers. Yes, pitches have been especially flat since 2015 but Amla was ranked the #1 ODI batsman in the world back in 2010 up until 2013 or so. So he can't be accused on taking advantage of the flat pitches that have begun to pop up everywhere, since the last World Cup. He was a great ODI player before that and averaged nearly 60 at a SR of 95 at one point, lol.

No, I did not use cricinfo and I remember these innings because they are memorable. I would have provided links had I gone to cricinfo to search for these great innings.

It's sad that you haven't watched Gilly and Jaya bat yet are claiming that they had more impact on games. How so? Amla clearly has more impact because he scores more runs per innings, at a similar SR, and does so in conditions where other batsmen fail.



You're new here so instead of making assumptions, do some research instead. Anyone can make performance watch threads here for any player. From Sachin, to Malik, to Roussow, a wide variety of players have performance watch threads here.

There were similar countdown threads for Amla in the past as well and being the fastest to 7000 runs ever, is most certainly a great achievement.



Well, you're just wrong if you believe that Amla cannot accelerate. Did you even watch his last innings where he smashed 50 runs in 19 deliveries at the death, including five sixes? Amla's game may be based on strike rotation but don't mistake that for him not being able to hit out when needed because he definitely can. However, he's not a Sanath, Sehwag or Anwar type opener and South Africa certainly don't want him to be. Most people would take an opener who has the ability to bat through the innings, at a good clip and getting those big hundreds and being the glue that holds the innings together.

The typical, modern-day opener is nothing special and it's not difficult to smash a few quick 30s and 40s. Look at how many of these batsmen have been seen at the international scene in recent times; Sanath, Gilly, Sehwag, McCullum, Warner, Guptil, Dilshan and Anwar. How many openers like Amla have an average of 50+ and have balanced records almost everywhere and against everyone? Just the guy I would pick to partner Amla in an ODI XI, Sachin Tendulker.

People talk about Afridi more than any other Pakistani player. He gets more publicity than the likes of Yousuf, Younis and Inzamam got combined. That means nothing though because we're not talking about who the most popular and famous players are but who are the most effective. So yes, Gayle is more famous and gets more publicity but is he a better ODI batsman? No, he most certainly is not. Amla is quite comfortably the second best opening batsman of all time, in ODIs.

I have seen Sanath and Gilly bat live but it wasn't in there peaks rather at the end of there careers. They produced the odd memorable innings ala Gilchrist 2007 world cup so I have to relay on you tube, research, and others opnion. I can see the impact they had on the odi game with teams trying to select an explosive wicket keeper batsmen and Jaysuriya was the one who realised you have to take advantage of the PP overs. Later teams followed suit. So they have a massive impact on the LO game.

He accelerated in one innings but come on for the most part his strike rate will stay the same as it was in the PP overs. You can say he is playing the anchor role but really we know it's because he doesn't have the ability to accelerate like Kohli /AB.


Sehwag is rubbish in odis so I don't get why you keep saying his name. Never put Sanath and Gilly in the same sentence as Guptill as well. The modern odi player may not special to yourself but you have to look at how they play now as this is the era we are watching. Odis has become an extended version of t20s unless the game is played on a bowling pitch. So being able to mantain and increase your strike rate is vital.

Why use Afridi and Gayle as examples? They are talked about more because of there personalities. Someone like Kohli, Sachin,Gilly, Sanath, etc. are talked about for there batting. They are the main run getters in there teams just like Amla but because they have more impact on an odi game they are talked about more highly.

 

[Ab Fan]

I will take Gilly over any current opener in the world.

The guy opened the innings and had the ability to turn the game on it head in any condition and against any attack,His 149 in WC final is one of the best knocks played.Gilly was one of the rare openers in those era to have a SR of 95+.That is equivalent to a SR of 105+ today..

Amla is a good odi batsmen but his lack of great knocks and world cup performance along with his performance vs the best team in the world puts him leagues apart.

However, he is not behind likes of Rohit and Guptill who themselves have performances vs minnows mostly in WCs and piled runs only on flat tracks.

 

[Bilal7]

I have seen Sanath and Gilly bat live but it wasn't in there peaks rather at the end of there careers. They produced the odd memorable innings ala Gilchrist 2007 world cup so I have to relay on you tube, research, and others opnion. I can see the impact they had on the odi game with teams trying to select an explosive wicket keeper batsmen and Jaysuriya was the one who realised you have to take advantage of the PP overs. Later teams followed suit. So they have a massive impact on the LO game.

He accelerated in one innings but come on for the most part his strike rate will stay the same as it was in the PP overs. You can say he is playing the anchor role but really we know it's because he doesn't have the ability to accelerate like Kohli /AB.


Sehwag is rubbish in odis so I don't get why you keep saying his name. Never put Sanath and Gilly in the same sentence as Guptill as well. The modern odi player may not special to yourself but you have to look at how they play now as this is the era we are watching. Odis has become an extended version of t20s unless the game is played on a bowling pitch. So being able to mantain and increase your strike rate is vital.

Why use Afridi and Gayle as examples? They are talked about more because of there personalities. Someone like Kohli, Sachin,Gilly, Sanath, etc. are talked about for there batting. They are the main run getters in there teams just like Amla but because they have more impact on an odi game they are talked about more highly.

What impact was this? If you're watching a highlights package of a player on YouTube, you'll only see their highs and never their lows, which greatly skews your judgement. This is the beauty of stats, even if you haven't followed the player's career, you can know quite a bit about them by looking at their numbers. Jayasuriya and Gilly's numbers tell you that they were great on their day but that day did not come around often and mediocrity was what was often found. Of course, they were very useful for their teams, which required a quick start from them but would I pick them in an all-time XI? No.

I mention Sehwag because he did the exact same things. What's the difference between Gilly and Sehwag except for the nationality? No, Afridi and Gayle are talked about for their batting. That's what got them their fame. A great personality alone doesn't make you a superstar. Just because they are "talked about" by the lowest common denominator of the cricketing world doesn't make them great players.

One innings? You haven't really followed his career, have you? I can keep giving you examples like his century during the 300+ chase against England last year, his century against New Zealand or the 150 against the West Indies in 2015. Or even going back to 2012 for his 150 in England, out of a score of 280, which he scored at a SR of 120. He can also play the pinch-hitting role which he displayed during a cameo of 45 against Australia last year. He has a SR of 90 for a reason, he is a fluent player and scores as quickly as anyone else in ODIs.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Amla might be able to break fastest to 7000 runs in ODI but he sure as hell isn't breaking 8000. His batting average is about to drop below 50 as well. What a decline. To think he averaged 58 at one point.

 

[Bilal7]

Amla might be able to break fastest to 7000 runs in ODI but he sure as hell isn't breaking 8000. His batting average is about to drop below 50 as well. What a decline. To think he averaged 58 at one point.

How many innings does he need to break the fastest to 8000 record? Gotta leave something for Kohli I guess.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

How many innings does he need to break the fastest to 8000 record? Gotta leave something for Kohli I guess.

36 innings. ABD crossed 8000 in 182 innings, Amla is currently on 145. Stats wise it's not that hard but Amla averages 36.5 in the last 33 ODIs. Kohli needs just 10 innings to score 245 runs.

 

[Bilal7]

36 innings. ABD crossed 8000 in 182 innings, Amla is currently on 145. Stats wise it's not that hard but Amla averages 36.5 in the last 33 ODIs. Kohli needs just 10 innings to score 245 runs.

I wouldn't be "sure as hell" about Amla not breaking the fastest to 8000 runs record if this is the case.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I wouldn't be "sure as hell" about Amla not breaking the fastest to 8000 runs record if this is the case.

Do you expect Amla to get back in form? If Kohli breaks record in 176 innings Amla would have to score 1168 runs in 31 innings. My assumption was based on his decline which is over a long period (30+ matches)

 

[Bilal7]

Do you expect Amla to get back in form? If Kohli breaks record in 176 innings Amla would have to score 1168 runs in 31 innings. My assumption was based on his decline which is over a long period (30+ matches)

He might, seeing how he is Hashim Amla who has been proving doubters wrong all his life, or he might not, seeing how he is 34 years old. One can't be "sure as hell" either way though.