Greatest ODI XI of all-time

[Gingerfinch]

The BBC team is a joke - picked by a bunch of kids brought up on T20 presumably.

That's what I thought, until I remembered which experts gave us the players to choose from.

[shankycricket]

Anyone who picks Chris Gayle in anything other than IPL should be banned from watching the sport!

[sussexpob]

Gayle in, no Garner. A young persons team,me thinks.

Even a young person's team wouldn't have Gayle over Amla and Gilly surely?

Well, you're young, so maybe you're right.

Even as a young man, Garner and Viv would be the first two names on my list. Garner's ability to deliver yorkers at will from that height at that pace is kinda unimaginable. You wouldn't want to bat against a guy who can hit you on the head as well as crush your toes. His phenomenal stats only add to his case.

Viv's SR of 90 (average of 47) in that era of low scoring ODIs, red balls, world class attacks and bowler friendly pitches, without helmets defies cricketing boundaries. A true genius.

Strangest thing about it was he never scored a 100 in the Windies in ODI cricket, in fact his away record was immense, his home record respectably average..... Richards was slightly before my time, so I cant give a reason why this is the case, but maybe those pitches were fast bowling paradises in those days?

[sussexpob]

Anyone who picks Chris Gayle in anything other than IPL should be banned from watching the sport!

Yeah, his selection makes the process even more of a mockery

[Gingerfinch]

Only played 33 matches, but you'd expect a couple of tons, given that he scored 11 in 187 matches.

[sussexpob]

Only played 33 matches, but you'd expect a couple of tons, given that he scored 11 in 187 matches.

And especially when most teams playing those ODI tours would probably just had the mental juggernault of being systematically destroyed by the Windies in a test series.... you would think by the time the ODI's came, most teams wanted to pack up and go home long before it started.

[GarlicJam]

Gayle in, no Garner. A young persons team,me thinks.

Even a young person's team wouldn't have Gayle over Amla and Gilly surely?

Well, you're young, so maybe you're right.

Even as a young man, Garner and Viv would be the first two names on my list. Garner's ability to deliver yorkers at will from that height at that pace is kinda unimaginable. You wouldn't want to bat against a guy who can hit you on the head as well as crush your toes. His phenomenal stats only add to his case.

Viv's SR of 90 (average of 47) in that era of low scoring ODIs, red balls, world class attacks and bowler friendly pitches, without helmets defies cricketing boundaries. A true genius.

Strangest thing about it was he never scored a 100 in the Windies in ODI cricket, in fact his away record was immense, his home record respectably average..... Richards was slightly before my time, so I cant give a reason why this is the case, but maybe those pitches were fast bowling paradises in those days?

I got to see Viv score a century v. Aus at the MCG in the early/mid 80's - before a then world record crowd of 86,000 (plus a couple, I'm sure). The day was immense, watching Viv in his pomp was something to behold. Everything that folk in the media have to say about him these days - the swagger, the presence/aura, the intimidation, the confidence that the man possessed in abundance - is very true. how can he not be selected in this team, I don't know.



imo, it isn't that conditions in the 70's and 80's were so bowler friendly (although they were slightly more in the bowlers' favour than these days), but the expectations of acceptable scores were lower as well as the batmens' tactics weren't as developed - the fine glance past 1st slip, the slog-sweep and the rampshot, for example, are all shots that have come to be commonplace only in the past few decades.

I would guess that these three things: pitch/playing conditions/rules and bats; expectations; and tactics/batting skills, have lifted the average scores by about 50 runs per innings, or 1 run per over on average.

[Gingerfinch]

I wonder how many times he had the chance of a ton, with him coming in behind Greenidge, Haynes, and sometimes Gomes, and Richardson. Haynes scored a few tons at home, so I'm guessing it was a bit of a lack of opportunity.

[sussexpob]

I wonder how many times he had the chance of a ton, with him coming in behind Greenidge, Haynes, and sometimes Gomes, and Richardson. Haynes scored a few tons at home, so I'm guessing it was a bit of a lack of opportunity.

I guess another point to note with a similar nature, is how many runs they targeted at home? Cant imagine many teams put much more than 200 on the board with that bowling attack in their prime, so he might have been left with little runs to play with or opportunity to score

[rich1uk]

yeah wont score a lot of 100s if your bowlers are consistently bowling your opponents out for 200

[Gingerfinch]

yeah wont score a lot of 100s if your bowlers are consistently bowling your opponents out for 200

That's Ravi's excuse

[GarlicJam]

That one is more likely, imo, Sussex.Viv was in at 1st and 2nd drop, wasn't he? He was around a heck of a long time before his son came onto the scene, and Gomes was a lower order batsman.

[Gingerfinch]

That one is more likely, imo, Sussex.Viv was in at 1st and 2nd drop, wasn't he? He was around a heck of a long time before his son came onto the scene, and Gomes was a lower order batsman.

Gomes batted at three for a while.

[GarlicJam]

was that after Viv's retirement?

[rich1uk]

according to cricinfo stats viv batted 81 times at #4, 51 at #3 and 29 at #5