Who do you think are the top 10 greatest ODI batters of all time?

[The Bald Eagle]

Viv
Yuvi
Ponting
Damien Martyn
Bevan
Miandad
Sobers

 

[ads101]

I’ll do it out of the ones I’ve watched more

1. Dhoni
2. Kohli
3. Ab de Villiers
4. Rohit Sharma
5. David Warner
6. Jos Butler

I think there’s a big drop off after those 6 so I’ll stop there. Dhoni is that high because it’s very rare to be able to finish like that, I’ve never seen someone do it as consistently as he did and he did it in a harder position down the order. It kind of shows how India still haven’t been able to replace him since Dhoni retired.

Warner I feel was underrated and probably the best out of the super aggressive openers.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

I’ll do it out of the ones I’ve watched more

1. Dhoni
2. Kohli
3. Ab de Villiers
4. Rohit Sharma
5. David Warner
6. Jos Butler

I think there’s a big drop off after those 6 so I’ll stop there. Dhoni is that high because it’s very rare to be able to finish like that, I’ve never seen someone do it as consistently as he did and he did it in a harder position down the order. It kind of shows how India still haven’t been able to replace him since Dhoni retired.

Warner I feel was underrated and probably the best out of the super aggressive openers.

Jos buttler is a bit overrated in ODIs he has done well in T20 cricket so i will replace him with Ben Stokes.

 

[mominsaigol]

Heck,lol, wth,, do you have anything apart from these?

Post Kohlis stats batting first and you will get to know if they are better or worse.

Kohli has literally smashed the world cup record, is one of the greatest performers in Champions trophy and in Asia cup.

Compare Ponting stats to his contemporaries and you will get to know why he is overrated. I know that you and others around here will use that simpleton WC final century argument as your only retort but believe me stats paint the real picture. Kohli is miles ahead of Ponting who is on the same level as Saeed Anwar and Aravinda De Silva type players.

I will post a graph of their ratings and then you can decided.

No stats don't paint a true picture.

Babar azam and Imam are superior to Saeed Anwar and Inzi by this logic.

A player is represented by their value, not their figures that highly depend on what opposition their facing, what bowlers their facing and what pitch and conditions their playing on.

Someone like Travis head is already in the class of Warner even if his stats show that a crapola player like rizwan is superior.

You genuinely have no clue what you're talking about or started watching cricket yesterday if you think stats matter.

According to stats Imad wasim is the greatest no 7 of all time

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

No stats don't paint a true picture.

Babar azam and Imam are superior to Saeed Anwar and Inzi by this logic.

A player is represented by their value, not their figures that highly depend on what opposition their facing, what bowlers their facing and what pitch and conditions their playing on.

Someone like Travis head is already in the class of Warner even if his stats show that a crapola player like rizwan is superior.

You genuinely have no clue what you're talking about or started watching cricket yesterday if you think stats matter.

According to stats Imad wasim is the greatest no 7 of all time

Stats do matter if they are analysed correctly.

I have seen your opinions here most of them are outright assumptions and not based on cold hard facts.

Travis Head is not already in the league of Warner, he hasn’t done enough to deserve that.

Compare Mark Waugh with Ponting and you will get to know what I am talking about, Waugh is not ever mentioned amongst the greatest odi players ever but has both stats and impact similar to Ricky Ponting considering both of them played against full strength teams and Waygh actually played most of his career in the 90s.

I do understand that sometimes stats are deceiving because they are inflated but here I am not comparing Ponting to Rizwan or babar, teams used to play their full strength squad in Odis in the 90s and 00s, Odis were actually serious competition at that tome and not JAMODIs which they are today.

You can’t use a blanket statement like stats don’t matter only value does, it isn’t true, stats paint the real picture if they are analysed correctly.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

I see people mentioning Yuvraj singh here amongst their top 10 bats, even though I am his biggest fan I would not even put him in top 25.

Singh was never our premier batsman , yes he was clutch and destructive but it came with a lot of inconsistency, for people who followed his career they would remember both the crests and troughs of his career.

I would put Andrew Symonds over Yuvi in batting capacity and that’s just one example.

 

[Ab Fan]

Yuvraj did well vs Australia and England in bilaterals also. I remember he had some good series against them vs Australia in 2004 or even early in 2000. In contrast, say, Sehwag doesn't have good record vs Australia except for that 2003 Final knock where the game was all gone. That's why in ODIs if you followed the game very well, you will rate Yuvi better than Sehwag despite the difference in strike rate being huge between them and hardly any difference in average.

 

[mominsaigol]

Stats do matter if they are analysed correctly.

I have seen your opinions here most of them are outright assumptions and not based on cold hard facts.

Travis Head is not already in the league of Warner, he hasn’t done enough to deserve that.

Compare Mark Waugh with Ponting and you will get to know what I am talking about, Waugh is not ever mentioned amongst the greatest odi players ever but has both stats and impact similar to Ricky Ponting considering both of them played against full strength teams and Waygh actually played most of his career in the 90s.

I do understand that sometimes stats are deceiving because they are inflated but here I am not comparing Ponting to Rizwan or babar, teams used to play their full strength squad in Odis in the 90s and 00s, Odis were actually serious competition at that tome and not JAMODIs which they are today.

You can’t use a blanket statement like stats don’t matter only value does, it isn’t true, stats paint the real picture if they are analysed correctly.

Stats paint the true picture if they are analysed correctly but what determines your human judgment and analysis is automatically superior my interpretation?

Everything would become opionanted and would hold zero value as a result.

1) This is why impact is what determines a players legacy and not their statistical implications.

Without looking it up do you even remember who top scored in every tournament since the 80's? Or who had the highest avg and sr in each tournament since then? Or what tendulkar's avg and sr would be if cricinfo did not exist.

I don't remember 2023 wc based of who averaged 40 or 30 or 50, I remember it for

A) Kohli breaking the odi 100's record

B) Rohit PP bashing teams to oblivion

C) Maxwell cementing himself an an atg allrounder by playing the greatest comeback of all time

D) Travis Head giving India Ricky Pointing flashbacks

E) Falhar Zaman orchestrating the greatest Pakistani 100 on a world cup all time

F) Rizwan ans Abdullah chasing the highest ever wc total

G) Quinton de kock going gun hoe and cementing himself as the South African Gilchrist

H) Rachin Ravindra being the find of the tournament

J) Shami and Bumrah utterly going to town on oppositions

No one cares that bobby averaged 40 in that tournament lol.


Travis Head is 100% in the league of Warner, the reason you don't like this statement is because it exposes your narrative, Travis is not a better batsmen then Warner in the sense that Warner is a more complete package, Dominated for longer periods of time, his 2015 wc exploits are the pinnacle of left handed domination,

Meanwhile Travis gets bowled out for 0 more times then not however Travis is superior to Warner in impact. If Travis head kicks off their is a 99% chance it's game over for the opposition unless Bumrah is bowling who himself is an equally accomplished atg bowler. Warner in his prime despite being dominant, their was always a worry that he'll get out and the game will tilt In the favour of the opposition whereas that's not the case With Travis Head.

If he kicks off then you require atg bowling to get rid of him, otherwise it's game over plain and simple.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Stats paint the true picture if they are analysed correctly but what determines your human judgment and analysis is automatically superior my interpretation?

Everything would become opionanted and would hold zero value as a result.

1) This is why impact is what determines a players legacy and not their statistical implications.

Without looking it up do you even remember who top scored in every tournament since the 80's? Or who had the highest avg and sr in each tournament since then? Or what tendulkar's avg and sr would be if cricinfo did not exist.

I don't remember 2023 wc based of who averaged 40 or 30 or 50, I remember it for

A) Kohli breaking the odi 100's record

B) Rohit PP bashing teams to oblivion

C) Maxwell cementing himself an an atg allrounder by playing the greatest comeback of all time

D) Travis Head giving India Ricky Pointing flashbacks

E) Falhar Zaman orchestrating the greatest Pakistani 100 on a world cup all time

F) Rizwan ans Abdullah chasing the highest ever wc total

G) Quinton de kock going gun hoe and cementing himself as the South African Gilchrist

H) Rachin Ravindra being the find of the tournament

J) Shami and Bumrah utterly going to town on oppositions

No one cares that bobby averaged 40 in that tournament lol.


Travis Head is 100% in the league of Warner, the reason you don't like this statement is because it exposes your narrative, Travis is not a better batsmen then Warner in the sense that Warner is a more complete package, Dominated for longer periods of time, his 2015 wc exploits are the pinnacle of left handed domination,

Meanwhile Travis gets bowled out for 0 more times then not however Travis is superior to Warner in impact. If Travis head kicks off their is a 99% chance it's game over for the opposition unless Bumrah is bowling who himself is an equally accomplished atg bowler. Warner in his prime despite being dominant, their was always a worry that he'll get out and the game will tilt In the favour of the opposition whereas that's not the case With Travis Head.

If he kicks off then you require atg bowling to get rid of him, otherwise it's game over plain and simple.

You are yourself saying that Warner is a more complete batsman and has dominated for longer.

We are yet to see the trough part of Heads career, he is 30 years old and if he gets into those low phases that every batsman has he will never be able to come close to Warner, so how is he already in his league?

Is Bumrah already in the league of Mcgrath, Wasim, Ambrose?

Let these players have some sprt of longevity before putting them with legends.

Who says that people remember only the average?

Everyone who followed world cup knows and agrees that Babar Azam was an utter failure and didn’t play a single valuable knock, I have hardly seen anyone who doesn’t agree with this.

For Example, Indians have been criticising Gill for not doing good enough in the last world cup even though he played a terrific innings in the semis.
Despite playing a clutch innings no one gave a hoot about it coz one odd innings dont actually matter.

 

[mominsaigol]

You are yourself saying that Warner is a more complete batsman and has dominated for longer.

We are yet to see the trough part of Heads career, he is 30 years old and if he gets into those low phases that every batsman has he will never be able to come close to Warner, so how is he already in his league?

Is Bumrah already in the league of Mcgrath, Wasim, Ambrose?

Let these players have some sprt of longevity before putting them with legends.

Who says that people remember only the average?

Everyone who followed world cup knows and agrees that Babar Azam was an utter failure and didn’t play a single valuable knock, I have hardly seen anyone who doesn’t agree with this.

For Example, Indians have been criticising Gill for not doing good enough in the last world cup even though he played a terrific innings in the semis.
Despite playing a clutch innings no one gave a hoot about it coz one odd innings dont actually matter.

No1: First of the Gill example is idiotic for so many reasons, many because you're acting as if Sheryas iyer and Kohli didn't just outscore him with kohli breaking the world record IN THAT VERY GAME, so obviously all eyes are going to be on kohli and not Gill who's 80 knocks come and go for any batter. It's not impactful by any means nor is it an innings to write home about when 2 innings exist within that game that are more memorable by default.

No 2: The Babar Azam Analogy was an example as to why stats are poor reflections of events. Babar azam averages 40 on that tournament, so according to you he did great, Why are you suddenly agreeing with me and everyone else that he performed poorly? Why? Because your own flawed analytical and interpretation of said statistics don't support your narrative?

No 3: Bumrah is not in their league. The bowlers you mentioned are amoung the top 7 greatest bowlers of all time, and I never said that he was in their league. I said he was an ATG bowler and that's a fact.

Bumrah is an ATG bowler because he's the greatest bowler of his era with no one coming close to him except for maybe shami in Odi otherwise everyone else is world's apart from him in every format.

However statistics would not show you that, especially considering he had to sit out for nearly 2 years due to injury.

No 4: You can be a more complete batsmen then someone, but that doesn't mean you're inferior and don't deserve to be in their class or superior to them.

Babar is a more complete batsmen then fakhar Zaman who is mostly just a terrific legside player and slogger with a few shots to the offside. Babar sucks against spin but against Pace he has more shots, better footwork, and his stats are miles superior to Fakhar.

However Fakhar Zaman when onsong is near Saeed Anwar levels of batting and demolition.

Warner and Travis is the same comparison however the difference is that Warner is actually a good batsmen unlike bobby and is just more consistent.

However Travis has surpassed Prine Warner in terms of impact. IF Travis head stays, then unless your bumrah, 99% chances are it's game over for the opposition whereas that isn't the case with warner. Warner can dominate and bully you but their chances of him getting out and you winning the game, While Travis doesn't perform as much but if he does he's taking the side home.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

No1: First of the Gill example is idiotic for so many reasons, many because you're acting as if Sheryas iyer and Kohli didn't just outscore him with kohli breaking the world record IN THAT VERY GAME, so obviously all eyes are going to be on kohli and not Gill who's 80 knocks come and go for any batter. It's not impactful by any means nor is it an innings to write home about when 2 innings exist within that game that are more memorable by default.

Gills innings was definitely impactful, I dont know why you are trying to argue against that, 80(66) in a semifinal is always great, yes he got outdone by Kohli and Iyer but his innings still remains impactful.

No 2: The Babar Azam Analogy was an example as to why stats are poor reflections of events. Babar azam averages 40 on that tournament, so according to you he did great, Why are you suddenly agreeing with me and everyone else that he performed poorly? Why? Because your own flawed analytical and interpretation of said statistics don't support your narrative?

Babar Azam was not even amongst 20 highest run scorers in this world cup, had an average of 40 but didn't even hit one century, how do stats suggest that he did well? Thats what I am trying to tell you, stats reveal the true picture if you look at them properly, his stats of 2023 world cup shows exactly how bad he was.
Stats are not just plain simple average, they comprise of many other things. Like how often he went big, what was his average in wins, how many supporting knocks he played.

No 3: Bumrah is not in their league. The bowlers you mentioned are amoung the top 7 greatest bowlers of all time, and I never said that he was in their league. I said he was an ATG bowler and that's a fact.

Bumrah is an ATG bowler because he's the greatest bowler of his era with no one coming close to him except for maybe shami in Odi otherwise everyone else is world's apart from him in every format.

However statistics would not show you that, especially considering he had to sit out for nearly 2 years due to injury.

I highlighted this example to show you that HEAD is not in the same league as Warner just like how Bumrah is not in the league of those ATG bowlers yet. You might have forgotten but Warner has an impressive record in world cups and always had a healthy str rate, he will be opening with Gilchrist in Australia's ATG ODI team. Travid HEAD is not there yet.

No 4: You can be a more complete batsmen then someone, but that doesn't mean you're inferior and don't deserve to be in their class or superior to them.

Babar is a more complete batsmen then fakhar Zaman who is mostly just a terrific legside player and slogger with a few shots to the offside. Babar sucks against spin but against Pace he has more shots, better footwork, and his stats are miles superior to Fakhar.

However Fakhar Zaman when onsong is near Saeed Anwar levels of batting and demolition.

Warner and Travis is the same comparison however the difference is that Warner is actually a good batsmen unlike bobby and is just more consistent.

However Travis has surpassed Prine Warner in terms of impact. IF Travis head stays, then unless your bumrah, 99% chances are it's game over for the opposition whereas that isn't the case with warner. Warner can dominate and bully you but their chances of him getting out and you winning the game, While Travis doesn't perform as much but if he does he's taking the side home.

 

[mominsaigol]

Gills innings was definitely impactful, I dont know why you are trying to argue against that, 80(66) in a semifinal is always great, yes he got outdone by Kohli and Iyer but his innings still remains impactful.

Babar Azam was not even amongst 20 highest run scorers in this world cup, had an average of 40 but didn't even hit one century, how do stats suggest that he did well? Thats what I am trying to tell you, stats reveal the true picture if you look at them properly, his stats of 2023 world cup shows exactly how bad he was.
Stats are not just plain simple average, they comprise of many other things. Like how often he went big, what was his average in wins, how many supporting knocks he played.

I highlighted this example to show you that HEAD is not in the same league as Warner just like how Bumrah is not in the league of those ATG bowlers yet. You might have forgotten but Warner has an impressive record in world cups and always had a healthy str rate, he will be opening with Gilchrist in Australia's ATG ODI team. Travid HEAD is not there yet.

1) I'm not arguing against it, However be 110% honest, Will you remember this innings 10 years from now?

Babar actually has more 50's then Gill during this tournament. Yet no one gives a kahoot.

A player is always remembered for the impact they created, not some random innings.

If you look at sanath jaysuria's stats, you'd think he's some Sri Lankan umar akmal who only has more centuries then UA because he played 445 games.

But that's completly untrue for anyone who's actually watched jaysuria play, They'd know why he's the best Sri Lankan opener they've ever had and why he easily walks into ATG teams.

2) As I said, no one ever looks at these things or even remembers them. Kohli is considered an atg because he's India's greatest chaser, and his exploits specifically from 2014-2016 which was his ultimate prime.

No one cares what Kohli averages in the same way no one cares that Imad has a 42 avg and sr of 110 or that Imad happened to play psl atg innings lol.

3) Please wrap your head around the fact that being in the same class as someone does not mean that you are superior to them, Sachin and Rohit are likely going as openers in an ATG Indian 11, Why? Because No one has more double Hundreds, More PP exploits and more brutal demolition of teams then Rohit has as an opener and no one is as complete as Sachin when he's batting.

That does not mean Sehwag is a bad batsmen and isn't an atg himself. He gets overshadowed by Sachin but he was a gun opener for years and is easily in top 10 atg openers in odi.

Just because Gilchrist and Warner get a go ahead does not mean Travis wouldn't be the 3rd choice.

Also I don't understand your argument? How does any of this relate to Ricky Pointing? Are you telling me that Pointing does not merit an automatic no 3 in an aussie odi team? Or that any Tom, dick and Harry just walk into atg no 3 positions over him in odi?

The only person who's in any contention vs Pointing at no 3 in odi is Kohli, that alone should already warrant him in the class of People like Sachin lol.