What's new

Martin Guptill vs Rohit Sharma vs David Warner - Who is the best opener in ODIs?

Ab Fan said:
Gibbs is a better odi batsmen than Amla.One can remember his 6 sixes record in WCs against Netherlands and that 175 in greatest odi match of all time beyond the stats. Amla can be considered better than Smith though in odis.
Click to expand...

Quite silly. One knock does not a career make. If it did, Afridi would be an ATG.

You remember the dazzle and forget the fizzle.

You forget that the failure of a batsman also has an impact.

Amla's almost preternatural productivity is hugely underrated, as was Kallis.

Gibbs was very good, but the numbers barely merit comparison.

Gibbs Ave 36, SR 83, 21 100's in 248 Matches. Amla Ave 52, SR 89. 23 100's in 137 matches

There is an ocean of difference between a 36 average and a 52 average.

Gibbs was very very good; the fact that Amla is better merely puts his achievement in perspective.
 
New Yorker said:
Quite silly. One knock does not a career make. If it did, Afridi would be an ATG.

You remember the dazzle and forget the fizzle.

You forget that the failure of a batsman also has an impact.

Amla's almost preternatural productivity is hugely underrated, as was Kallis.

Gibbs was very good, but the numbers barely merit comparison.

Gibbs Ave 36, SR 83, 21 100's in 248 Matches. Amla Ave 52, SR 89. 23 100's in 137 matches

There is an ocean of difference between a 36 average and a 52 average.

Gibbs was very very good; the fact that Amla is better merely puts his achievement in perspective.
Click to expand...

What about the difference in the era they played in and not to forget Gibbs ability to shift gear was better than probably anyone.
 
blue_champion said:
He is expected to have atleast 1 good knock after all these years....Amla is a good player and a fantastic test batsman but despite the numbers he is not anywhere near the top.

He is more in the Darren Bravo category who will play good knocks but not have the same impact,
Click to expand...

Agree with your 1st paragraph. It's the point I'm trying to make with [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION].
 
New Yorker said:
Quite silly. One knock does not a career make. If it did, Afridi would be an ATG.

You remember the dazzle and forget the fizzle.

You forget that the failure of a batsman also has an impact.

Amla's almost preternatural productivity is hugely underrated, as was Kallis.

Gibbs was very good, but the numbers barely merit comparison.

Gibbs Ave 36, SR 83, 21 100's in 248 Matches. Amla Ave 52, SR 89. 23 100's in 137 matches

There is an ocean of difference between a 36 average and a 52 average.

Gibbs was very very good; the fact that Amla is better merely puts his achievement in perspective.
Click to expand...

You do have to look at several other things too. Gibbs avgs 56 in WCs. He has centuries against strong Aus and NZ attacks in world cups. He was a very highly impactful player and a superior odi player to Smith and even Kallis irrespective of the numbers. Also has a record of 6 sixes in an over. He is underrated highly in odis. Only AB and Klusener can be considered superior batters to him in odi format.
 
I think it was [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] who had said in some post, if you are debating whether a batsman is an ATG, then he isn't one. No one debates about Ponting or Kallis being an ATG.
 
Hasan123 said:
Good innings but it didn't win the game which is the most important thing. It was good to get him into form but he should be winning the game from that position, it was not like it was a difficult task. All he to do was rotate the strike and try find the odd boundary if he could but he still failed.

I wouldn't say he was declining at the time btw, it was just a lean patch. But no way is he one of the greatest openers in LO history. I refuse to accept that.
Click to expand...

bit of blame should goto ABD as well. This is where Msd and Kohli differentiate him. He was well set and game in hand but he just throws his wicket away. Yeah Amla too was blamed but major blames should goto finishers. The guy was batted for 130 odd delivery and he was exhausted so it's excusable why he isn't able to hit out that time. But there's no excuse to fresh batsman to not play run a ball innings.

Btw openers job as giving solid start and he's doing that more often than not so yeah, he's one of the best openers pre 2010 era.

Hasan123 said:
He has slowed down the innings plenty of times for south Africa it may have not cost them the game but this is due to other south African players being able to accelerate.

Yet you have someone on this forum calling him atg and one of the greatest openers in LO. :)
Click to expand...

Was missed this part earlier. They were able to accelerate due to the platform build by Amla. By holding one end Amla assures there's enough wickets in hand to Slog in death overs.
And yeah he's one of the best openers of his time (won't call him atg as of now). There were only few players can find a place on batting powerhouse team from current crop of players and he's one of them (ie he can guarantee a place in team like India, Aus, NZ, Eng if he's playing for them).
 
blue_champion said:
He is expected to have atleast 1 good knock after all these years....Amla is a good player and a fantastic test batsman but despite the numbers he is not anywhere near the top.

He is more in the Darren Bravo category who will play good knocks but not have the same impact,
Click to expand...
He has at least one good knock against good opponents in World cup and Champions Trophy. but he has failed all KO matches he played.
Btw Darren Bravo is like tier 4 batsmen who's play 1 good innings and missing in next 7-8. While Amla was in tier two atleast assuming only Kohli and ABD in tier 1 (and msd in past).
 
Does it really matter who out of three is better? What matters is each one of them us doing the job well for their respective countries and have won a few matches on their own for their country..
 
Smbhayi said:
bit of blame should goto ABD as well. This is where Msd and Kohli differentiate him. He was well set and game in hand but he just throws his wicket away. Yeah Amla too was blamed but major blames should goto finishers. The guy was batted for 130 odd delivery and he was exhausted so it's excusable why he isn't able to hit out that time. But there's no excuse to fresh batsman to not play run a ball innings.

Btw openers job as giving solid start and he's doing that more often than not so yeah, he's one of the best openers pre 2010 era.



Was missed this part earlier. They were able to accelerate due to the platform build by Amla. By holding one end Amla assures there's enough wickets in hand to Slog in death overs.
And yeah he's one of the best openers of his time (won't call him atg as of now). There were only few players can find a place on batting powerhouse team from current crop of players and he's one of them (ie he can guarantee a place in team like India, Aus, NZ, Eng if he's playing for them).
Click to expand...

AB is a different topic but he certainly should get some blame for throwing his wicket away. His game relies on instinct rather than thinking about the game situation that's why he shouldn't be a finisher.

You can call it holding an end but he doesn't really have it in him to accelrate like he should.
 
Amla is missing only 1 thing in his ODI resume and that is a strong WC performance.

He averages 40+ at SR of 80+ against all non-minnows excluding Australia and WI.

Against Australia, he averages 34 at 76 SR. Sachin averaged 35 at 76 vs SA. Hayden averaged 31 at 68 vs SA, Waugh averaged 26 at 73 SR against Pakistan.So, Amla's lower average against Australia is acceptable as most of the openers have one such opposition team.

Even, if minnows and WI are excluded, he still has 12 centuries and 22 fifties in 97 innings (average of 46 and SR of 85) which is a tremendous record.

He has been above 750 ratings and among the top 5 ODI batsmen for the majority of his career as an ODI opener.

http://www.icc-cricket.com/player-rankings/profile/hashim-amla

There is enough reason to believe that he is a very good ODI opener regardless of what anybody says.
 
Gibbs averaged 30 vs Australia and 28 vs Pakistan, the two top bowling teams of his time.

Moreover, he averaged 25 in Australia, 31 in England, and 26 in NZ. Excluding minnows and WI, he averaged 32 at 79 SR. How does it make him better than Amla who averages 46 at 85 SR?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The_Odd_One said:
Gibbs averaged 30 vs Australia and 28 vs Pakistan, the two top bowling teams of his time.

Moreover, he averaged 25 in Australia, 31 in England, and 26 in NZ. Excluding minnows and WI, he averaged 32 at 79 SR. How does it make him better than Amla who averages 46 at 85 SR?
Click to expand...

Gibbs has slight edge due to his WC record (didn't check but someone said he's averaging over 55 there). But people forget Amla is the one who replaces inform Gibbs. Amla got breakthrough in the ODI when Gibbs injured (Gibbs scored a century before that injury if my memory serves right) and he helps an ODI series win against Eng (or Aus?) with ABD (That's where the time ABD turned himself). Gibbs, after coming back to the team couple of low scores means he's dropped from the team all together.
 
Hasan123 said:
You can call it holding an end but he doesn't really have it in him to accelrate like he should.
Click to expand...

Yeah everyone has flaws including Kohli (he's averaging 41 while compared to his overall avg of 51. Also thinks he's averages 70 odd while batting second. It was 38 earlier but was improved after last Aussies series. still he's averaging 35 while batting first excluding minnows plus WI. This is what happened when you try to nit picking stats).
Amla lacks fifth gear, true, but he set ups win if he bats upto more than 30 overs. In recent match while chasing 260 odd against Aussies he and de Kock form a brilliant partnership and when the time Amla departs they barely need run a ball chase with 7 WKT in hand (something like 80 odd runs in 80 odd balls) but rest of team screwed it which means they lost. These knocks are often forgotten due to these aren't results in Win.
 
I'm a firm believer of partnership. Amla has at least 11 100+ opening partnership (8 with de Kock, 2 with Smith, 1 with Russow) plus 23 50+ partnership. He also have in part two double hundred opening partnership (total 4 180+ opening partnership). These stats are mind blowing whichever way you looking at.
 
^I only searched opening partnership. Otherwise he has 100+ partnership with ABD, faf, Kallis etc!
 
Smbhayi said:
Yeah everyone has flaws including Kohli (he's averaging 41 while compared to his overall avg of 51. Also thinks he's averages 70 odd while batting second. It was 38 earlier but was improved after last Aussies series. still he's averaging 35 while batting first excluding minnows plus WI. This is what happened when you try to nit picking stats).
Amla lacks fifth gear, true, but he set ups win if he bats upto more than 30 overs. In recent match while chasing 260 odd against Aussies he and de Kock form a brilliant partnership and when the time Amla departs they barely need run a ball chase with 7 WKT in hand (something like 80 odd runs in 80 odd balls) but rest of team screwed it which means they lost. These knocks are often forgotten due to these aren't results in Win.
Click to expand...

True stats can be misleading in cricket, especially in LO formats. For me lo players should be making an impact on the game and be able to shift gears and peform in pressure situations. That what I will call a great odi player.
 
I will take Sharma in the group stage, Guptill in the knockouts before the final and Warner in the final.
 
Hasan123 said:
Also many times ab and other south African players have made show when amla is struggling to accelerate they will take that mantle and relieve him from it.

Kohli is much better than Amla at rotating the strike. Haven't you seen how he builds his LO knocks with singles and than will wait for the bad balls to hit boundires l, than at the end of the innings finish well with big hits something which amla can never ever do. LO are about taking risks especially in big chases, with smaller totals it's understandable not to take such risks but with big scores there is not really time to completely drop anchor and slow the scoring rate down. Kohli won't slow the momentum of innings down like Amla will that is for certain.

Lmao there won't be many who think afridi and akhtar are better than Waqar anyway. Yes but I don't see him improving in those 2 aspects which you mentioned. Kohli, de kock, Root will all be better LOI players than Amla. In fact kohli is leagues ahead of amla in LOI formats.
Click to expand...

It's a team game! Of course his teammates are going to help him out. Just like how AB's teammates help him out or Root's teammates help him out. 21 match-winning centuries tell you that Amla iis nowhere near the liability you're portraying him to be.

Are you saying Kohli is better than Amla at strike rotation and then mentioning his ability to hit big as proof? Wut? Amla has a lower dot-ball ratio than Kohli, if I'm not mistaken. He may be able to slog better than Amla at the death but Amla is better at scoring runs on spicy pitches. Every batsman has their strengths and weaknesses.

Amla doesn't slow the momentum down, the guys bats at a SR of 90. If you claim that he never increases the tempo, that means he goes at a SR of 90 even during the middle overs which is phenomenal.

Root and de Kock have done zilch to even be put in the same sentence as Amla. What a joke, lol.
 
Hasan123 said:
True stats can be misleading in cricket, especially in LO formats. For me lo players should be making an impact on the game and be able to shift gears and peform in pressure situations. That what I will call a great odi player.
Click to expand...

This is the same thinking that Afridi fans use to call him a great match-winning batsman. :facepalm:
 
Hasan123 said:
Also many times ab and other south African players have made show when amla is struggling to accelerate they will take that mantle and relieve him from it.

Kohli is much better than Amla at rotating the strike. Haven't you seen how he builds his LO knocks with singles and than will wait for the bad balls to hit boundires l, than at the end of the innings finish well with big hits something which amla can never ever do. LO are about taking risks especially in big chases, with smaller totals it's understandable not to take such risks but with big scores there is not really time to completely drop anchor and slow the scoring rate down. Kohli won't slow the momentum of innings down like Amla will that is for certain.

Lmao there won't be many who think afridi and akhtar are better than Waqar anyway. Yes but I don't see him improving in those 2 aspects which you mentioned. Kohli, de kock, Root will all be better LOI players than Amla. In fact kohli is leagues ahead of amla in LOI formats.
Click to expand...

Quinton de Kock is miles above Amla as an LOI opener this year as it is. Amla has few years left, and QdK has many years ahead of him. The way QdK is going right now he will overtake Amla with ease especially since he is one of the few players in the SAF team with a spine for a fight, and looked incredibly threatening vs England in the the recent ODI series against massive scoreboard pressure.

Looks 10x more threatening than Amla.

Honestly Amla will be one of the first batsmen he overtakes, if he takes care of his fitness and keeps playing he could be looking to overtake the best of the best like Gilchrist (huge call to make atm).

Root has work to do in ODIs. But in this recent t20 World Cup he showed that he has the skills to switch gears format to format.
 
Last edited:
Suleiman said:
Quinton de Kock is miles above Amla as an LOI opener this year as it is. Amla has few years left, and QdK has many years ahead of him. The way QdK is going right now he will overtake Amla with ease especially since he is one of the few players in the SAF team with a spine for a fight, and looked incredibly threatening vs England in the the recent ODI series against massive scoreboard pressure.

Looks 10x more threatening than Amla.

Honestly Amla will be one of the first batsmen he overtakes, if he takes care of his fitness and keeps playing he could be looking to overtake the best of the best like Gilchrist (huge call to make atm).

Root has work to do in ODIs. But in this recent t20 World Cup he showed that he has the skills to switch gears format to format.
Click to expand...

Agree on de kock. Guy is very dynamic also. Just needs to remain consistent and keep his fitness. Yes he does seem mentally strong can see him captaining south Africa don't know if till be enough for them to peform better in icc tournaments
 
Bilal7 said:
This is the same thinking that Afridi fans use to call him a great match-winning batsman. :facepalm:
Click to expand...

Afridi doesn't peform in pressure situations and he is so inconsistent. Have I called afridi a great odi player anyway? No I haven't. Amla fans like you can only use his stats to call him great
 
aslaisnomasla said:
Rohit is garbage , can't place him on the same plate.
Click to expand...

Which plate bhai? :msd

He failed in South Africa, but in Australia and vs Australia in general he has been a beast. Yeah you can say he got his double tons off a hapless SL attack, but English batsmen are cashing in on the same low quality attack and none of them could replicate the utter destruction he caused on them.

He's a bit of a hack in that he is a step forward hit through the line guy who thrives on flat tracks, but even then he has been much more brutal than other openers and top order bats in general who are served similar flat tracks.
 
Bilal7 said:
It's a team game! Of course his teammates are going to help him out. Just like how AB's teammates help him out or Root's teammates help him out. 21 match-winning centuries tell you that Amla iis nowhere near the liability you're portraying him to be.

Are you saying Kohli is better than Amla at strike rotation and then mentioning his ability to hit big as proof? Wut? Amla has a lower dot-ball ratio than Kohli, if I'm not mistaken. He may be able to slog better than Amla at the death but Amla is better at scoring runs on spicy pitches. Every batsman has their strengths and weaknesses.

Amla doesn't slow the momentum down, the guys bats at a SR of 90. If you claim that he never increases the tempo, that means he goes at a SR of 90 even during the middle overs which is phenomenal.

Root and de Kock have done zilch to even be put in the same sentence as Amla. What a joke, lol.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call amla a liability but I wouldn't say he is carrying like South Africa like you make out too be.

Yes I am saying kohli is better than Amla at strike rotation. You can present me with these dot ball stats but I have seen with my own eyes how good Kohli is a at strike rotation. His strike rotation and ability to shift gears, and his ability to play under pressure make him a better LOI bat than Amla. Of course kohli has weakness you are right.

Look at Amla's record outside of the Powerplay overs in t20s and you will see for yourself.

You love talking about how many centuries Amla has, Kohli has 25 centuries in odis which is more than Amla and he can't be mentioned in the same sentence as him :)) :)) :)) :)) . Also he has 4 centuries in 4 games against Australia in Australia. Has Amla done that in one series against Australia. While Amla is ahead in tests kohli is ahead in LOI formats. By the end of kohlis career he would have left Amla for dust. Only a biased person would disagree :)
 
Hasan123 said:
Afridi doesn't peform in pressure situations and he is so inconsistent. Have I called afridi a great odi player anyway? No I haven't. Amla fans like you can only use his stats to call him great
Click to expand...

and he isn't bad as you guys making out to be. well he wont run away with game like other dynamic players but he more often than not will set platform to other players to run away with game.

You guys severally underrate Amla's impact (or David's). For every format of the game Partnership is the key thing. And he's the one of the man which players would like to bat together. Also he has 100+ partnership close to 30 (out of 130 odd match) which more than enough to considers he's a very very good player.
 
Smbhayi said:
and he isn't bad as you guys making out to be. well he wont run away with game like other dynamic players but he more often than not will set platform to other players to run away with game.

You guys severally underrate Amla's impact (or David's). For every format of the game Partnership is the key thing. And he's the one of the man which players would like to bat together. Also he has 100+ partnership close to 30 (out of 130 odd match) which more than enough to considers he's a very very good player.
Click to expand...

Bro he's a good player I'm not denying that. But I'm just making the point he's not the greatest opener of all time. Bilal is calling amla the best ever opener
 
Amla was involved in 37 100+ partnership (13 of them past 150 and 6 of them past 200) and 62 50+ partnership. and still if you aren't rate him high you're either biased or hates him much.

stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=fow_runs;partnership_runsmin1=50;partnership_runsval1=partnership_runs;player_involve=9952;size=200;spanmin1=05+Jan+2006;spanval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=fow
 
Hasan123 said:
Bro he's a good player I'm not denying that. But I'm just making the point he's not the greatest opener of all time. Bilal is calling amla the best ever opener
Click to expand...

He's one of the best openers post 2010 tbh. And I think he'll do fairly well in every era (well maybe not in which don't have field restrictions) coz he isn't hard hitter. he's relies more on finding and he also batted well in difficult surface too. Maybe not average 50+ with 90 SR but he's more than capable of averaging 40+ with 70-80 SR in previous eras.
 
1. Warner - seems to be developing into the perfect blend of aggression and stability
2. Amla - reliable, steady, tends to go AWOL when the going gets tough
3. Sharma - mostly a hack with poor technique but massively dangerous when conditions are right
 
Since Warner is rubbish against Pakistan in odi's, I don't rate him.
 
13.6 Nurse to Amla, SIX

15.4 Rampaul to Amla, FOUR

16.2 Parnell to Amla, SIX

16.3 Parnell to Amla, SIX

16.6 Parnell to Amla, FOUR

Hmm, this is one long "power-play".... :13: :amla

Just kidding guys. :yk2
 
Last edited:
Abdullah719 said:
13.6 Nurse to Amla, SIX

15.4 Rampaul to Amla, FOUR

16.2 Parnell to Amla, SIX

16.3 Parnell to Amla, SIX

16.6 Parnell to Amla, FOUR

Hmm, this is one long "power-play".... :13: :amla

Just kidding guys. :yk2
Click to expand...

Haha.

Anyhow, a quality pressure knock by Amla. Batted right through, first steadying the ship after TKR slipped to 20/4, then upping the ante to great effect towards the end.
 
Last edited:
Hasan123 said:
Afridi doesn't peform in pressure situations and he is so inconsistent. Have I called afridi a great odi player anyway? No I haven't. Amla fans like you can only use his stats to call him great
Click to expand...

Afridi has performed in a few pressure situations. One T20 World Cup comes to mind. But he was a model of inconsistency. While not on the same level, Gibbs was also hit and miss compared to Amla. (Most batsmen are compared to Amla.) I remember Gibbs putting Pakistan to the sword a few times, but he never inspired the kind of dread produced by juggernauts like Sehwag or Hayden. He could score fast but wasn't impossible to get out for a quick 30. Amla is a proverbial limpet by comparison; along with ABDV, Amal's is always wicket that one feels that everything hinges on, like Kallis before him. The Immovable Object. Which tells you something about impact, I think.
 
Ab Fan said:
You do have to look at several other things too. Gibbs avgs 56 in WCs. He has centuries against strong Aus and NZ attacks in world cups. He was a very highly impactful player and a superior odi player to Smith and even Kallis irrespective of the numbers. Also has a record of 6 sixes in an over. He is underrated highly in odis. Only AB and Klusener can be considered superior batters to him in odi format.
Click to expand...

I didn't know about his WC average, which is admittedly impressive. And his overall record is impressive plenty. 20+ centuries. But here's the difference; underrated or not, Gibbs is not in anyone's estimation an ODI ATG. More of a Laxman like figure, a player who played some spectacular knocks, who was as good as anyone else on his day, but didn't have as many of those days as a Tendulkar or Ponting or a Dravid or a Kallis. Amla's failure relatively speaking at WCs may be a blotch on his record, but it says something for his record, I believe, that if he were to have one good WC, then there simply would not be any debate. Because his numbers otherwise are just freakish. In my opinion, those numbers are already good enough to count him among ODI ATGs. I am curious though, who else is on that list anyway, in people's minds? ...Richards, Tendulkar, Bevan, Ponting, Kohli, Dhoni, Sanga, Anwar (?)...who am I missing...?
 
Ab Fan said:
What about the difference in the era they played in and not to forget Gibbs ability to shift gear was better than probably anyone.
Click to expand...

Did Gibbs have that many lower gears? I don't remember him as a... nuanced
player.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
New Yorker said:
Afridi has performed in a few pressure situations. One T20 World Cup comes to mind. But he was a model of inconsistency. While not on the same level, Gibbs was also hit and miss compared to Amla. (Most batsmen are compared to Amla.) I remember Gibbs putting Pakistan to the sword a few times, but he never inspired the kind of dread produced by juggernauts like Sehwag or Hayden. He could score fast but wasn't impossible to get out for a quick 30. Amla is a proverbial limpet by comparison; along with ABDV, Amal's is always wicket that one feels that everything hinges on, like Kallis before him. The Immovable Object. Which tells you something about impact, I think.
Click to expand...

Gibbs innings vs Australia is an innings amla could never ever play.I wouldn't say gibbs is better than Hayden or Sehwag but his impact on a LO game is bigger than Amla will is
 
New Yorker said:
I didn't know about his WC average, which is admittedly impressive. And his overall record is impressive plenty. 20+ centuries. But here's the difference; underrated or not, Gibbs is not in anyone's estimation an ODI ATG. More of a Laxman like figure, a player who played some spectacular knocks, who was as good as anyone else on his day, but didn't have as many of those days as a Tendulkar or Ponting or a Dravid or a Kallis. Amla's failure relatively speaking at WCs may be a blotch on his record, but it says something for his record, I believe, that if he were to have one good WC, then there simply would not be any debate. Because his numbers otherwise are just freakish. In my opinion, those numbers are already good enough to count him among ODI ATGs. I am curious though, who else is on that list anyway, in people's minds? ...Richards, Tendulkar, Bevan, Ponting, Kohli, Dhoni, Sanga, Anwar (?)...who am I missing...?
Click to expand...

Of course Amla needed one good WC with an impactful Knock which he didn't had when he was at peak. Him failing in WCs go against him big time. In odis you do have to look at records in big tournaments where Amla goes missing. Gibbs is no odi ATG but he was a very very good odi opener and impact wise more ferocious than even a Kallis.
 
New Yorker said:
Did Gibbs have that many lower gears? I don't remember him as a... nuanced
player.
Click to expand...

He wasn't a typical Sehwag like batsmen who would have a go at bowler from start. He would get set, take a bit time and then smash the bowlers. He was similar to AB in that aspect although AB is much more consistent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would take Gibbs over Sehwag in odis. Sehwag SR is overrated. Most of the times he would hit a 25 ball 35 and throw his wicket. He had a luxury of doing that because his opening partner was a GOAT batsmen. His record in WC is mediocre too with the only good Knock was the 2003 final where the game was already over before he got out. His only achievement in odi was a 200 against a poor WI attack.
 
Sehwag as a test bat was wayy superior to Gibbs though. No comparison there.
 
Ab Fan said:
I would take Gibbs over Sehwag in odis. Sehwag SR is overrated. Most of the times he would hit a 25 ball 35 and throw his wicket. He had a luxury of doing that because his opening partner was a GOAT batsmen. His record in WC is mediocre too with the only good Knock was the 2003 final where the game was already over before he got out. His only achievement in odi was a 200 against a poor WI attack.
Click to expand...

Yes, Sehwag the ODI batsman will not find a place in all time India XI.

Ganguly was a much better opener.
 
As I said Amla's impact was way way underrated here. Only missing was he found warning in WC KOs.
 
Smbhayi said:
So according to that Sachin isn't top ODI player! hmm.
Click to expand...

Ahaha nice try. In the 90's Sachin was more than capable of being the agressor. Some injuries turned him into an acmulator. Don't forget Sachin has a 200 :)) :)). Something which Amla will never ever be able to do.
 
The_Odd_One said:
Yes, Sehwag the ODI batsman will not find a place in all time India XI.

Ganguly was a much better opener.
Click to expand...

Agreed. He is overrated in odis. He had one brilliant series in NZ in his early days where he was a lone warrior but apart from that most of his knocks were against not so strong teams or less pressure knocks. Yuvi and Ganguly are both better in odis.
 
Hasan123 said:
I wouldn't call amla a liability but I wouldn't say he is carrying like South Africa like you make out too be.

Yes I am saying kohli is better than Amla at strike rotation. You can present me with these dot ball stats but I have seen with my own eyes how good Kohli is a at strike rotation. His strike rotation and ability to shift gears, and his ability to play under pressure make him a better LOI bat than Amla. Of course kohli has weakness you are right.

Look at Amla's record outside of the Powerplay overs in t20s and you will see for yourself.

You love talking about how many centuries Amla has, Kohli has 25 centuries in odis which is more than Amla and he can't be mentioned in the same sentence as him :)) :)) :)) :)) . Also he has 4 centuries in 4 games against Australia in Australia. Has Amla done that in one series against Australia. While Amla is ahead in tests kohli is ahead in LOI formats. By the end of kohlis career he would have left Amla for dust. Only a biased person would disagree :)
Click to expand...

He's been a great batsman for South Africa and has definitely carried his team at times. Every great player does at times.

You make zero sense. Amla and Kohli both have the same SR. So if you're saying that Kohli can slog better than Amla, which is true, that means he is Amla's inferior in strike rotation. If Kohli was better than Amla at rotating the strike as well, then his SR would be at AB's level. Understand?

SMH at the # of centuries part. Kohli has played 50+ more games for those two extra centuries. Amla's centuries/innings ratio is better than Kohli's and by the time he plays as many matches as Kohli has right now, he will have scored 30 centuries.

How many of those 4 centuries resulted in wins for his team? Not only did Amla play a legendary test knock in Australia last time he was there, he also won his team the match and the series. Not to mention the triple that Amla has in England or the 270 in India. Only a fool would compare them in tests at this point. Nor do I believe that Kohli will end up as a great test batsman, he doesn't have the necessary qualities for something like that.

However, don't derail the thread by talking about test cricket.
 
Ab Fan said:
Sharjah desert storm knocks.. And that 175 at Hyderabad vs Aus. Remember Gibbs didn't finished on his own either.
Click to expand...

I think you didn't get me. I implying that you can't call a batsman top ever bcz they've couple of amazing knocks. If that was the case then Rohit Sharma will be the greatest ODI opener all time as nobody can emulates his 264 innings.
I mentions their MoM records for despite playing along with de Kock, faf, abd etc (who other words more dynamic and impactful) he has higher percentage of MoM award (top 5) and higher percentage of MoS award (no.1).
As of now I'd put Gibbs over Amla just bcz of you pointed out he has impressive records in WC. If Amla have a good WC in future then I won't hesitate to replace Gibbs with Amla!
 
Also I won't think Gibbs can grinding out when he's struggle to get going (Which Amla can able to do). He's more like to fail that regard while trying to get out of the jail.
 
Bilal7 said:
He's been a great batsman for South Africa and has definitely carried his team at times. Every great player does at times.

You make zero sense. Amla and Kohli both have the same SR. So if you're saying that Kohli can slog better than Amla, which is true, that means he is Amla's inferior in strike rotation. If Kohli was better than Amla at rotating the strike as well, then his SR would be at AB's level. Understand?

SMH at the # of centuries part. Kohli has played 50+ more games for those two extra centuries. Amla's centuries/innings ratio is better than Kohli's and by the time he plays as many matches as Kohli has right now, he will have scored 30 centuries.

How many of those 4 centuries resulted in wins for his team? Not only did Amla play a legendary test knock in Australia last time he was there, he also won his team the match and the series. Not to mention the triple that Amla has in England or the 270 in India. Only a fool would compare them in tests at this point. Nor do I believe that Kohli will end up as a great test batsman, he doesn't have the necessary qualities for something like that.

However, don't derail the thread by talking about test cricket.
Click to expand...

I have seen it with my own eyes that kohli cam slog better than Amla. I don't need stats for everything bro.

If kohli plays over 300 odis he will have more than 30 centuries btw. But yes amla has played less games.

Yes they didn't result in wins but that cannot be blamed on kohli he more than did his job in the tests the bowlers were a let down as Indian posters will tell you. Yes your opnion is kohli won't be a great test batsmen but I believe he will be. A player of his quality will not be a let down in tests.

We could discuss this forever you believe amla is an elite LOI players I do not.
 
Ab Fan said:
Agreed. He is overrated in odis. He had one brilliant series in NZ in his early days where he was a lone warrior but apart from that most of his knocks were against not so strong teams or less pressure knocks. Yuvi and Ganguly are both better in odis.
Click to expand...

You mean tri-series btw IND NZ and ZIM when Ganguly-Chappel relationship got worsen? Kaif played very well in that series :sanga. Would have got MoS award had india able to win final match.
 
Smbhayi said:
You mean tri-series btw IND NZ and ZIM when Ganguly-Chappel relationship got worsen? Kaif played very well in that series :sanga. Would have got MoS award had india able to win final match.
Click to expand...

Some odd bilateral series in NZ in 2002 I guess.He hit two centuries while others were struggling to get bat on ball.
 
Hasan123 said:
I have seen it with my own eyes that kohli cam slog better than Amla. I don't need stats for everything bro.

If kohli plays over 300 odis he will have more than 30 centuries btw. But yes amla has played less games.

Yes they didn't result in wins but that cannot be blamed on kohli he more than did his job in the tests the bowlers were a let down as Indian posters will tell you. Yes your opnion is kohli won't be a great test batsmen but I believe he will be. A player of his quality will not be a let down in tests.

We could discuss this forever you believe amla is an elite LOI players I do not.
Click to expand...

The point of debate was who rotates strike better. If Kohli is better at slogging then he's definitely not as good at rotating the strike since they have the same exact SR.

The point was that Amla's centuries/innings ratio is better so you were being silly by bringing up Kohli's 25 centuries.

Kohli does not score daddy-hundreds, which is the one real way a batsman can influence test matches on flat pitches. He needs to learn a lot about batting in whites.

Yes, we could but I really don't want to discuss this any further.
 
The problem with Kohli the test batsman, he's lacking hunger after reaching century. I'm sure he can do well if he himself sets a target of 200+. he's good when he has a focus to score. The guy has two 180+ in odi so it's not the case with the ability or temperament.
 
Hasan123 said:
Gibbs innings vs Australia is an innings amla could never ever play.I wouldn't say gibbs is better than Hayden or Sehwag but his impact on a LO game is bigger than Amla will is
Click to expand...

His impact in ONE game, yes. I know a guy called Afridi who played an even better knock once...
 
Ab Fan said:
Of course Amla needed one good WC with an impactful Knock which he didn't had when he was at peak. Him failing in WCs go against him big time. In odis you do have to look at records in big tournaments where Amla goes missing. Gibbs is no odi ATG but he was a very very good odi opener and impact wise more ferocious than even a Kallis.
Click to expand...

Point of order. I haven't done the numbers. But according to a previous post Amla averages
40-42 in WC. Since when do we count a 42 average, in ODI's, as 'failure.'? That is better
than Ganguly's career average in ODIs. It is comparable to Saeed Anwar's average at 45,
and Tendulkar's at 44. And it is in another league from Gibb's career average, at 36. So by
these peculiar standards, was Gibbs a failure as an ODI batsman across his career? Amla's WC
record may not live up to his otherwise lofty standards, but it is hardly the eternal night
of a stain that people make it out to be.
 
New Yorker said:
Point of order. I haven't done the numbers. But according to a previous post Amla averages
40-42 in WC. Since when do we count a 42 average, in ODI's, as 'failure.'? That is better
than Ganguly's career average in ODIs. It is comparable to Saeed Anwar's average at 45,
and Tendulkar's at 44. And it is in another league from Gibb's career average, at 36. So by
these peculiar standards, was Gibbs a failure as an ODI batsman across his career? Amla's WC
record may not live up to his otherwise lofty standards, but it is hardly the eternal night
of a stain that people make it out to be.
Click to expand...

100s vs Ireland and Netherland hardly mean anything. That avg isn't poor but he got that avg bashing the non test playing teams. And not to forget Gibbs avg of 36 will be equivalent to 43-44 for current era which is good considering the fact that he can change gears quickly against the opposition. Amla is a good odi batsmen but to hit the big league you need to have atleast one memorable Knock or an overall great WC which Amla lacks.
 
Ab Fan said:
100s vs Ireland and Netherland hardly mean anything. That avg isn't poor but he got that avg bashing the non test playing teams. And not to forget Gibbs avg of 36 will be equivalent to 43-44 for current era which is good considering the fact that he can change gears quickly against the opposition. Amla is a good odi batsmen but to hit the big league you need to have atleast one memorable Knock or an overall great WC which Amla lacks.
Click to expand...

100 against Netherlands means nothing but six 6s against Netherlands is a towering achievement?

They count for equally little I would say.
 
New Yorker said:
100 against Netherlands means nothing but six 6s against Netherlands is a towering achievement?

They count for equally little I would say.
Click to expand...

6 sixes in an over against Netherland isn't a huge achievement but much bigger than a normal 100s against same opposition. Any1 can hit a century but not all can hit 6 sixes in an over. Anyways, Gibbs has quality knocks against top teams too in WC. Also, Amla has struggled against the best team in the world quite like Gibbs and he has no great Knock in bilateral to show.
 
Gibbs would have been a devastating opener in the post-2010 era of flat wickets and more favorable ODI rules.

There has been a shift in scoring rates in the last 5-6 years, him opening the batting for SA in this era would certainly have made SA a more dangerous ODI unit.
 
Ab Fan said:
100s vs Ireland and Netherland hardly mean anything. That avg isn't poor but he got that avg bashing the non test playing teams. And not to forget Gibbs avg of 36 will be equivalent to 43-44 for current era which is good considering the fact that he can change gears quickly against the opposition. Amla is a good odi batsmen but to hit the big league you need to have atleast one memorable Knock or an overall great WC which Amla lacks.
Click to expand...

From Start of Amla debut to last match of Gibbs, they both played 24 matches (23 innings). In the meantime Amla averages almost +18 than Gibbs, have better strike rate by 2 points, hits more fours (94 compared to 90) and hit 5 sixes compared to Gibbs 8.
Gibbs: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...8;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Amla: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting
 
1fd53cd548c6812aec1d34fc0b227aa1.jpg


via Tapatalk
 
Smbhayi said:
1fd53cd548c6812aec1d34fc0b227aa1.jpg


via Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Didn't got this. Why would you compare a diminishing Gibbs with rising Amla? Gibbs would have loved to pile runs on these flat decks. He would have done really well in this era of flat decks and average bowling attack. He was like the AB De Villiers of 2000s for SA.
 
Ab Fan said:
Didn't got this. Why would you compare a diminishing Gibbs with rising Amla? Gibbs would have loved to pile runs on these flat decks. He would have done really well in this era of flat decks and average bowling attack. He was like the AB De Villiers of 2000s for SA.
Click to expand...

nope he's a well established batsman while Amla was just starting (also people calls he'll be failed as he's not suited to shorter formats). So even if Gibbs played today's era Amla would have been averaged more than him. It's not like Amla averaged low fourty pre2010 time and he increased his average despite having couple of bad patch over a five year time.
 
Amla is a very good opener and certainly is one of the better openers out there. It's unfair to say that he is a poor or even an average batsman. However, I won't say he is a great opener as the word "great" is reserved for the players who are the best of their generation and I don't think Amla is the best opener of his generation (or among the top 2 for that matter). ATGs are those who transcend generations and I don't think any of the current openers are ATG.
 
Smbhayi said:
nope he's a well established batsman while Amla was just starting (also people calls he'll be failed as he's not suited to shorter formats). So even if Gibbs played today's era Amla would have been averaged more than him. It's not like Amla averaged low fourty pre2010 time and he increased his average despite having couple of bad patch over a five year time.
Click to expand...

Obviously Amla would have averaged more than Gibbs as the former is more consistent. I do rate Amla as a good odi opener but the point is that to be called a great opener you need to have some impact in World cups. He has played two WCs and has found missing against quality teams barring a decent 60 odd vs India. His record vs best team in the world is poor and he can destroy the opposition like Gibbs or ABD or even Kohli could do.
 
Would be interesting to see who the current best world XI in ODIs are.

My team would be:

Rohit
Warner
Kohli
Smith (c)
AB
Buttler (wk)
Shakib
Tahir
Amir
Starc
Mustafizur

Subs: Guptill, Root, Mitch Marsh, Ashwin, Shami.

Marsh replaces Shakib in Australia and South Africa.
 
Ab Fan said:
Didn't got this. Why would you compare a diminishing Gibbs with rising Amla? Gibbs would have loved to pile runs on these flat decks. He would have done really well in this era of flat decks and average bowling attack. He was like the AB De Villiers of 2000s for SA.
Click to expand...

Ab Fan said:
Edit- Can't destroy..
Click to expand...

That destructive thing was Wat overrated. Hadn't Dravid is there india would've lost so many matches in 2000s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RidiculousMan
Rohit Sharma: The captain who ended India’s Trophy drought
Replies
42
Views
1K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
Savak
Rohit Sharma vs Yuvraj Singh: Who will be remembered as the greater legend in Indian limited-overs cricket?
Replies
38
Views
1K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
The Bald Eagle
  • Locked
England vs India | 1st Test | Headingley | June 20-24 | Pre-Match Discussion
2
Replies
80
Views
1K
Rajdeep
R
S
  • Poll Poll
Is Rohit Sharma the greatest captain of all time in T20Is?
Replies
51
Views
2K
Aang_The_last_airbender
Aang_The_last_airbender
BouncerGuy
[VIDEOS] Rohit Sharma announces his retirement from the T20Is - How will he be remembered in this format?
Replies
35
Views
2K
jnaveen1980
J
Back
Top