Avfc96 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Im going to do both an all time great ODI side and an Odi side made up of players I have grew up watching. All time- Gilchrist Sachin Kallis Ponting Richards Bevan Botham Waqar Warne Lee Donald My generation- Amla Sachin Kallis Ponting KP AB Sangakarra Flintoff Lee Murali Steyn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) Hmm, I like Gilchrist. He'd be my number one pick for a WK/batman in any form of the game, but AB still shades it for me, in ODIs. I take on board what you say about Gilchrist's World Cup record, and again if I was picking a World Cup XI, he'd be a shoe in. As we're talking about someone at the pique of their career, and someone who has retired, I guess we may well be able to judge better, when de Villiers is done in the game. I think AB is ahead of Gilchrist myself. When Bob Willis said he always thought that Viv Richards was the best batsman ever and and said AB is better that does it for me. AB is one of the greatest batsman of all time. Gilchrist is a great but not in that league. Edited February 4, 2015 by PaulC 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Hmm, I like Gilchrist. He'd be my number one pick for a WK/batman in any form of the game, but AB still shades it for me, in ODIs. I take on board what you say about Gilchrist's World Cup record, and again if I was picking a World Cup XI, he'd be a shoe in. As we're talking about someone at the pique of their career, and someone who has retired, I guess we may well be able to judge better, when de Villiers is done in the game. I think AB is ahead of Gilchrist myself. When Bob Willis said he always thought that Viv Richards was the best batsman ever and and said AB is better that does it for me. AB is one of the greatest batsman of all time. Gilchrist is a great but not in that league. He has 3 50s in World Cup finals including a century, im pretty sure he is way ahead of AB in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 AB still has another two world cups in him. I know it doesn't prove everything but if you look at their respective averages in both formats AB - 52 in tests 52 in odis Gilchrist 48 in tests 36 in odis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Akram and Gilchrist have to be in every all time ODI team IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Think Gilchrist Test average hard to judge as he came in at 7 every game and only had 137 innings from his 96 tests compared to AB 162 from 98 IM not saying AB isnt a great player but its ok smashing a mediocre West Indies team around in whats a relative friendly but id like to judge on the bigger occasions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 To be fair any batsman will tell you its easier to bat at 7 than the top of the order but I do accept that Gilchrist has done it on the biggest occasions. I'd have both players in the world X1 anyway. AB doesn't have to keep. This world cup is a big one for AB. He does need to show he's the man for the big occasion. South Africa are one of the favourites, they may lack a top class spinner but there again nobody has a top class spinner. I don't see India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka winning it. I think its between South Africa and Australia with England and New Zealand dark horses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 (edited) Theoretical "your're the umpire" question that just popped into mind while watching some old clips... There's a very narrow mid on or mid off, which ever you prefer, almost straight on from the batsman. Bowler bowls his delivery and the batsman drives it straight back. The fielder we mentioned earlier dives for the ball and catches. Just at the very millisecond the ball hits his hand, he also breaks the runner's stumps, and he's out of his crease. Who's out? *edit* To clarify here ahead of time, I have no idea what the answer is Edited February 6, 2015 by P3te Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 7, 2015 Moderator Share Posted February 7, 2015 The batter is out, I'd guess. Reason being that the ball makes contact with the palm of the hand before the wicket is broken. If the ball made contact with the hand after the wicket was broken, then the run out is invalid because the wicket would have been broken without the ball in the hand. So as long as the fielder had the ball under control, it's a catch. (Breaking the wicket is a process which takes a finite time, so the whole catch/ runout thing can't be absolutely simultaneous) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 The ball hitting the hand doesn't make him out though, he has to be in control of the ball to be deemed to have caught it. So, just like the breaking of the stumps, there's a period of process for a catch too, so they technically could be simultaneous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 Guess its down to the umpires interpretation. Whichever he thinks comes first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 8, 2015 Moderator Share Posted February 8, 2015 The ball hitting the hand doesn't make him out though, he has to be in control of the ball to be deemed to have caught it. So, just like the breaking of the stumps, there's a period of process for a catch too, so they technically could be simultaneous yeah, however I think as long as he didn't drop it, he would be deemed to have been in control of it from the moment of contact., whereas the wicket isn't broken at the same moment of contact, if you see the logic, there. Guess its down to the umpires interpretation. Whichever he thinks comes first. definitely. I know a few who'd give it "not out" as well 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I know the Windies have been pretty terrible of late, but we absolutely thrashed them today. 5/19 from Woakes is a brilliant come back, after being smashed all over by Australia. Good to see. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 The ball hitting the hand doesn't make him out though, he has to be in control of the ball to be deemed to have caught it. So, just like the breaking of the stumps, there's a period of process for a catch too, so they technically could be simultaneous yeah, however I think as long as he didn't drop it, he would be deemed to have been in control of it from the moment of contact., whereas the wicket isn't broken at the same moment of contact, if you see the logic, there. makes sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 good victory for Ireland today, hope we can claim a scalp again in world cup as if we do I think we can get results vs UAE and Zimbabwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I was surprised Scotland beat you so easily and they did come close to beating the windies. I hope Porterfield comes good for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 yeah but that could be a good thing as maybe some players were a bit overconfident as best associate side and kick them a kick up the arse. As for Porterfield im not a big fan, always seems to go for a duck or a very low score against top teams though I think Stirling is a very good player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 yeah but that could be a good thing as maybe some players were a bit overconfident as best associate side and kick them a kick up the arse. As for Porterfield im not a big fan, always seems to go for a duck or a very low score against top teams though I think Stirling is a very good player Yes he had a better season in all formats last season for Warwickshire and was outstanding in the t20 semi. I would like to see him have a good world cup because I think he;s better than what his stats say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 on another note because a lot of AB fans on here he is 14/1 be top runscorer in World Cup, maybe you guys should back him e/w going to go McCullum myself at 12/1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 As a bears fan, Porterfield is a little bit marmite. In the t20 semi against essex (?) He was absolutely immense and the main reason we went through to the final. But he has days where it just doesn't go for him and makes himself look silly. Overall though, great guy and very good leader for the bears when chopra and bell aren't around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts