Which nation has produced the most ODI greats?

[dildildalwalla]

The List

So you have all been debating and waiting, but wait no more. Here you go:

1. Australia - 18 batsmen and 13 bowlers, a whopping 31 players!
2. South Africa - 13 batsmen and 7 bowlers, a very good total of 20
3. Pakistan - 8 batsmen and 10 bowlers, a better than expected total of 18
4. England - 14 batsmen and 3 bowlers, a surprising total of 17
5. India - 12 batsmen but only 4 bowlers, smack bang in the middle with 16
6. West Indies - 7 batsmen and 4 bowlers, a worrying total of 11
7. Sri Lanka - 7 batsmen and 3 bowlers, a total of 10
8. New Zealand - 6 batsmen and 3 bowlers, a total of 9
9. Bangladesh - 1 batsman and 2 bowlers, a total of 3
10. Zimbabwe - 1 batsman and 1 bowler, bottom of the pile with 2

 

[rtramdas]

A catch, no matter how good it was, does not excuse Kapil failing in that final. He isn't an ATG all-rounder but merely a great one.



Dravid was a mediocre ODI player, not any better than Younis Khan was for Pakistan. Sehwag probably won't make an India all-time XI and was pretty overrated, if I'm being honest. Surprised not to see Srinath in the India list but a good one by [MENTION=139754]New Yorker[/MENTION].

Ajmal was the best ODI bowler in the world for a period of three years and has performed everywhere, possessing an average of below 23. Imran Khan has very good numbers and was instrumental in Pakistan winning the '92 WC. He's an ATG in the ODI format.

you cannot call Kapil's inns a complete failure.He scored 15 in mere 8 balls.

All in all India could score only 183 runs from 54.4 overs. This means the

conditions were bowler friendly both bowling wise & also wicket wise.

PAK in the 92 world cup final could score 249 in 50 overs.This means batting was

lot more easy.The best inns played on that day was by Akram who scored
33 or mere 18 balls. Imran played his role of anchoring to perfection where as
both Akram & Inzamam played their roles of hard hitting in the final overs to

even more perfection.Just because Imran scored 72 doesn't mean he was far better

than Akram or Inzamam. This because str: rate also comes into play.

Imran scored 72 of 110 balls. Akram & Inzamam combined to score 42+33=75 runs in

mere 53 balls.Means both Akram & Inzamam combined performance was more than

double the performance of Imran .Which implies both Akram & Inzamam performed

better than Imran on that day.Now Kapil scored 15 of 8 balls out of 183.it is

worth almost 21 of 11 balls in a total of 249.Now if we relate this perf
ormance to Akram's 33(18) , Kapil's batting performance was worth more than half
as that of Akram's.And since Akram's was better than that of Imran's , i must say Kapil's knock was worth more than half as that of Imran's too.

What about other contributions in than match.Imran conceded 43 runs in 6.2 overs.
an econ of almost 7.Kapil only 21 in 11 overs.Econ of only 1.9.

In fielding, that catch Kapil took was one of the most important catches in history.A difficult catch of perhaps the greatest one day batsman of all time
at perhaps the most vital moment in the match that completely turned the course of the match.

All in all Imran was brilliant as a batsman & captain in the world cup final.Kapil the 'all rounder' was brilliant in the final shining in fielding,
bowling, captaincy & batting in that order.To me the 2nd was more worthy.

 

[rtramdas]

A catch, no matter how good it was, does not excuse Kapil failing in that final. He isn't an ATG all-rounder but merely a great one.



Dravid was a mediocre ODI player, not any better than Younis Khan was for Pakistan. Sehwag probably won't make an India all-time XI and was pretty overrated, if I'm being honest. Surprised not to see Srinath in the India list but a good one by [MENTION=139754]New Yorker[/MENTION].

Ajmal was the best ODI bowler in the world for a period of three years and has performed everywhere, possessing an average of below 23. Imran Khan has very good numbers and was instrumental in Pakistan winning the '92 WC. He's an ATG in the ODI format.

you cannot call Kapil's inns a complete failure.He scored 15 in mere 8 balls.

All in all India could score only 183 runs from 54.4 overs. This means the

conditions were bowler friendly both bowling wise & also wicket wise.

PAK in the 92 world cup final could score 249 in 50 overs.This means batting was

lot more easy.The best inns played on that day was by Akram who scored
33 or mere 18 balls. Imran played his role of anchoring to perfection where as
both Akram & Inzamam played their roles of hard hitting in the final overs to

even more perfection.Just because Imran scored 72 doesn't mean he was far better

than Akram or Inzamam. This because str: rate also comes into play.

Imran scored 72 of 110 balls. Akram & Inzamam combined to score 42+33=75 runs in

mere 53 balls.Means both Akram & Inzamam combined performance was more than

double the performance of Imran .Which implies both Akram & Inzamam performed

better than Imran on that day.Now Kapil scored 15 of 8 balls out of 183.it is

worth almost 21 of 11 balls in a total of 249.Now if we relate this perf
ormance to Akram's 33(18) , Kapil's batting performance was worth more than half
as that of Akram's.And since Akram's was better than that of Imran's , i must say Kapil's knock was worth more than half as that of Imran's too.

What about other contributions in than match.Imran conceded 43 runs in 6.2 overs.
an econ of almost 7.Kapil only 21 in 11 overs.Econ of only 1.9.

In fielding, that catch Kapil took was one of the most important catches in history.A difficult catch of perhaps the greatest one day batsman of all time
at perhaps the most vital moment in the match that completely turned the course of the match.

All in all Imran was brilliant as a batsman & captain in the world cup final.Kapil the 'all rounder' was brilliant in the final shining in fielding,
bowling, captaincy & batting in that order.To me the 2nd was more worthy.

 

[AlizeeFan]

Prove he lied about the injury. I will give you all day.

I don't need to.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Given that Bangladesh beat Pakistan in 1999 and India is 2007, I am loath to consider them a minnow team.

Lol you will say anything to defend Indian cricket or cricketer, no matter how silly it sounds.

Now I have heard it all. Bangladesh was not a minnow team in 1999 and 2007. Great job!

 

[Napa]

Lol you will say anything to defend Indian cricket or cricketer, no matter how silly it sounds.

Now I have heard it all. Bangladesh was not a minnow team in 1999 and 2007. Great job!

Learn to read between the lines my friend.

 

[dildildalwalla]

Something I learned while researching this: England have produced some good ODI batters, some of whom are from recent times. It is striking that they have more players with very good numbers than a team like India. I was expecting India to be 2nd or 3rd and England to be...I dunno, 6th may be.

What is also striking is that India really, really lack in the ODI bowling department too.

South Africa continues to astound, such a short span of time and so many top players across both formats that I reviewed.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

[MENTION=142481]Nil Dhumrojal[/MENTION] Bangladesh

 

[Napa]

What is also striking is that India really, really lack in the ODI bowling department too.

Indians are quite happy with their ODI bowling thank you. India bowled out the first 7 teams it faced in 2015 WCC which was sensational.

 

[dildildalwalla]

Indians are quite happy with their ODI bowling thank you. India bowled out the first 7 teams it faced in 2015 WCC which was sensational.

That's great but in a historical context, none of them average what great bowlers across the globe do.

 

[Tusker]

That's great but in a historical context, none of them average what great bowlers across the globe do.

You can keep all the phasht bowling trophies (as long as Pak is listed as a top team from the bottom ) and we will keep our World trophies and #1 Ranking ... Everybody will be happy

 

[Napa]

That's great but in a historical context, none of them average what great bowlers across the globe do.

It's what the team does which determines who wins or loses rather than the individual bowlers. One can say that Nehra isn't an ATG, but his figures of 10 overs 33 runs 2 wickets was an important part of the bowling unit that throttled Pakistain in Mohali SF. India's score of 260 was below par and their chances of winning dim till their bowlers delivered.

 

[dildildalwalla]

It's what the team does which determines who wins or loses rather than the individual bowlers. One can say that Nehra isn't an ATG, but his figures of 10 overs 33 runs 2 wickets was an important part of the bowling unit that throttled Pakistain in Mohali SF. India's score of 260 was below par and their chances of winning dim till their bowlers delivered.

Again, good performances but what does that have to do with how great a player is. Are you going to argue Nehra is a great ODI bowler? We're not looking at moments, we're looking at entire careers.

Fact is, it is quite obvious Aus are the best ODI side around and the sheer number of top level cricketers they have produced proves that.

SA, Pak and Ind are about on the same level, altho Pak and SA have a comfortably higher W/L ratio but India have the edge in winning 1 more wc than Pak and 2 more than SA. The years of consistency by all 3 times is reflected by their number of top level players and correctly SA and Pak have more than Ind. I would have expected maybe more batsmen from IND but it's not the case just yet.

England are a bit of an out lier but then again, a number of their players are from the modern age and they have come on leaps and bounds in the ODI arena.

 

[Ab Fan]

England haven't produced anywhere close to ATG players India have produced as far as one day internationals are concerned. In tests, its a different case although still most are from older era but in odis its simply nowhere close.

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

Aus
Ind
WI
Pak
SL
SA
NZ
Eng
Zim

 

[dildildalwalla]

Aus
Ind
WI
Pak
SL
SA
NZ
Eng
Zim

what is this?

You already saw the actual list lol