Who is Australia's greatest ever ODI batsman?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

We've produced some outstanding ODI batsmen over the years.

Who deserves to be considered the best of them all.

Here are their numbers:

Adam Gilchrist:
222 matches
7542 runs at 36.43 with 12 centuries
S/R of 95.73

Ricky Ponting:
235 matches
8447 runs at 42.02 with 18 centuries
S/R of 78.30

Michael Bevan:
232 matches
6912 runs at 53.58 with 6 centuries
S/R of 74.16

Mark Waugh:
244 matches
8500 runs at 39.35 with 18 centuries
S/R of 76.83

Steve Waugh:
325 matches
7569 runs at 32.91 with 3 centuries
S/R of 75.91

Dean Jones:
164 matches
6068 runs at 44.62 with 7 centuries
S/R of 72.57

I don't think you can go past Ricky Ponting, but I'm sure others will disagree.

[Sidey_87]

Bevan was the one day master.

[The Negotiator]

Ponting. WC 2003 Final was just amazing.

[Alkaline]

Bevan is a champ.

[YOTC]

No Hussey?

He has won us about 6 matches by himself in his 18 match career.

[stmookeyj]

You can tell how biased I am by voting for Deano.

[Bartram_Class]

Bevan.

Wheres Watson?

[pluga_4]

geez, its hard to split those 6 batsmen. they are all different types of players, gilchrist being explosive, bevan being calculated, jones being exciting running between the wickets, ponting and m waugh's countless tons and steve waugh all round talents. i'd even include g marsh and g chappell up there as well. strike rates back then were acceptable when 220 was a par score. andy symonds may well end up in this category of our best in years to come.


i'll take punter....just!

[Drummond]

Ponting, followed by Bevan and Jones.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Unable to split Deano and Bevan.

Deano definitely of the top of the order batsmen(at #3). He stood up to the toughest bowling attacks(the Windies and Pakistan in their prime) and did not flinch. Tremendous average, extremely exciting to watch and perfectly suited to the attacking one-day format.

Bevan........ his average alone puts him at the top of the ODI tree. More than that his ability to build an innings, inspire his lower order team-mates, score to every angle on the ground and then lift the team to victory at the death.

[quam]

hussey is a freak but cant be considered as our best becasue he hasnt played enough cricket becasue bevan was just too good. Tugga was the best for mine, the ice man WC 1999.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

geez, its hard to split those 6 batsmen. they are all different types of players, gilchrist being explosive, bevan being calculated, jones being exciting running between the wickets, ponting and m waugh's countless tons and steve waugh all round talents. They scored 18 centuries each.

[Greg Miller= Messiah]

Ponting just
beven, gilly and junior waugh equal second :D
Never thought steve waugh was that great a One day player. Prolly a victim of his perfomances in tests

[billybrownless16]

D.C. Boon

[Ricketts]

Bevan from Ponting.

The rest can run along.

[bunsen burner]

1. Bevan
2. Jones
3. Ponting

[Mikes4]

Bevan when moved to bat at 4 was very much a shadow of his early career success. His inability to score at a suitable tempo early in his innings, and then if dismissed, put unnecessary pressure on the middle to lower order batsmen. Should have stayed between 6 and 7.

Gilchrist I thought as his ability to just demolish bowling attacks from the outset would lead to a victory more often than not if he fired.

[Stafford678]

Mark Waugh followed by Ponting and beven allthought beven


gilchrist doesnt have the average to back it up, steve waugh not as good as in the test arena, beven played for the average a few times but saved our ass's a fair few times.

Gilly is a tad overrated, he is a great batsman dont get me wrong but he is hit and miss, can eiether make a big one or not many, his average backs that up, but he is just a slogger and thats how he is, he can blast attacks away for sure but he has the advantage of having the field up and he just can slog over the top and has the advantage of facing the new ball which comes off better.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

beven played for the average a few times but saved our ass's a fair few times.A lot of people say that but when he won us the game he was a hero, and when he ran out of team-mates they then said he was only playing to protect his average.

A tough gig but that's us fickle cricket fans :(

[Blues_Man]

Bevan was a great one day player ,and a very prolific accumulator of runs ...but he was nowhere near as enjoable to watch as Gilly or Ponting ..who both blast their way to big totals .
for me, Ponting wins with gilly close behind .

[oaksy]

can't split michael slater and mark taylor.

[- PC -]

Unable to split Deano and Bevan.

Deano definitely of the top of the order batsmen(at #3). He stood up to the toughest bowling attacks(the Windies and Pakistan in their prime) and did not flinch. Tremendous average, extremely exciting to watch and perfectly suited to the attacking one-day format.

Bevan........ his average alone puts him at the top of the ODI tree. More than that his ability to build an innings, inspire his lower order team-mates, score to every angle on the ground and then lift the team to victory at the death.
Yeh I would have Bevan just ahead of DJ... but your points are valid

[dan warna]

can't split michael slater and mark taylor.
lmfao for the worst player for aus to get games in ODI cricket????

didn't slats average about 22 or 24 in ODI cricket with an ordinary strike rate to boot?

[utility]

Deano. Batted in the top order against quality and was one of, if not the best ODI batsman for several years. To an extent he changed the way of batting in one-dayers and was renowned for his running between wickets... from memory he could run three runs in ten seconds. He was also the first player to wear sunglasses! If you compare stats you need to compare stats from the same era/years as ODIs have changed dramatically over the years.

Bevan was great in his role but he didn't have to face the new ball and wasn't able to tear open a game in the same way. The others were good but Gilly and Punter didn't face the Windies when they had a decent attack.

[~GURU~]

Bevan for sure, no contest! What a legend

[Milenko]

It is incomprehensible how overrated Bevan was. His game was suited to about 2 games a summer. Killed Australia's momentum time and time again when moved to number 4. Struggled to hit boundaries in the late overs. He was good, but not as good as people remember through their rose tinted lenses.

[belfast_bomber]

has to be dean jones, for the number of times he won us games while having to play catch-up after bloody geoffrey geoffrey geoffrey marsh stonewalled us into trouble

and for the shoulder-charge on the aforementioned marsh at the SCG one night ;)

"we love dean jones 'cause he's victorian"

[dan warna]

has to be dean jones, for the number of times he won us games while having to play catch-up after bloody geoffrey geoffrey geoffrey marsh stonewalled us into trouble

and for the shoulder-charge on the aforementioned marsh at the SCG one night ;)

"we love dean jones 'cause he's victorian"

1 Bevan was a flawed genuis by sheer weight of runs
2 Deano, excitement machine, awesome fielder
3 punter, rapidly becoming a legendary
4 m.waugh, the best ODI opener Australia has had

[Theseventhhamster]

Come on kids are you too young to remember Deano?????????

[Rocket23]

Come on kids are you too young to remember Deano?????????

Totally! Apart from a few posters in this thread every body seems to be either forgetting or weren't old enough to remember just how good Jones was.

Have a look at his average and then think about who was bowling to him at the time. Ambrose, Hadlee, Marshall, Botham just to name a few. He not only withstood these attacks but he also took it right up to them.

Who could forget when he asked Curtley Ambrose to take of his red armband because it was distracting!!

The man changed the way the game is played.

Although that list of 6 contains some fantastic batsmen Jones is easily the best!

[kaysee]

1st) Ponting ... consistancy, big scores in big games, can nudge and work it or blast it.

2nd) Dean Jones... did it well during our tough years against top class opponents, better then Bevan at building an innings, running between wickets, and blasting it.

3rd) Gilchrist... In no way overrated! He was moved to opener to give Aust a launch pad in the 1st 15 overs after Australia's initial gameplan was exposed by Sri Lanka's evolutionary gameplan of blasting over the top in the 1st 15 overs. Gilchrist has rarely failed in his job to all out attack in the 1st 15 overs even if he gets out for 20-40 runs they come so quickly it puts the fielding team on the back foot and allows the rest of the batters to build their innings with runs on the board. Then on the other hand when Gilly does go on with it... it is purely one of the best sights in cricket.

4th) Mark Waugh... Afgahnastan was a pure delight to watch although sometimes frustrating b/c he seemed lazy. Again he did it against better attacks in the early years. Sure he sometimes got out cheaply but often he would make big scores... 174 still a Aust record.

5th) Bevan... I think is slightly overrated due to people remembering his herorics to win games. He was the best at run chasing and calculating where and when to score runs... however in other scenerios I don't think he was anywhere near as good and rather slow at scoring. When not run chasing he would continue to build his innings and protect his stats during the later overs instead of taking up the attack to raise the run rate IMO. But he was the best at chasing runs.

6th) Steve Waugh... the weakest of the bunch. Great captian, brave, hard working leader... but 3 centuries .... THREE.... from > 300 games... poor return.

[eddiesmith]

No Contest

Deano

[ThePope]

Whilst I understand the need to account for Not Outs in averages, comparing openers and middle/late order batsmen in ODIs gives results as skewed as this.

Looking at runs per innings played (ie excluding the not out effect) you get the following order
Dean Jones: 37.7
Ricky Ponting: 37.0
Mark Waugh: 36.0
Michael Bevan: 35.3
Adam Gilchrist: 35.1
Steve Waugh: 26.3

Gilly's average doesn't look that bad anymore does it.

But cricket is a team game..
so imagine if we ever had a team like this

Adam Gilchrist
Mark Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Dean Jones
Michael Bevan
Steve Waugh

We'd be unbeatable... oh that's right, we basically were!

[bombersno1]

I'd probally pick Gilchrist, just over Deano.

[Minotaur]

Bevan was a great one day player ,and a very prolific accumulator of runs ...but he was nowhere near as enjoable to watch as Gilly or Ponting ..who both blast their way to big totals .
for me, Ponting wins with gilly close behind .

Therein lies the problem with ODI - Michael Bevan. On statistical evidence he is clearly the best one-day batsman ever, unfortunately he was an incredibly boring player to watch. His entire game was pushes and probs and quick running between the wickets.

It might have been exciting when he pulled us out of the poo, but that was the situation of the match and not Bevan's batting that made it good watching.

[ThePope]

You have to wonder if we should allow for ODI averages to take into account not outs. Tests it makes sense, because most of the time, a batsman can score whatever he is able to. Not outs for top batsmen are fairly rare and don't affect the average that much. ODIs, as Bevan's 53 runs per out vs 35 runs per innings, can be drastically skewed.

What's more valuable, an opener scoring 40 every innings, or a lower order/tail ender scoring 10 every innings, but only getting out every 4th innings? And strike rate is vital too... hence I think Gilly needs a big plus for his near 100 SR.

So although I originally voted for Gilly, I reckon given the quality of the opposition, my new runs/innings average and the SR I'd rate them
Jones
Gilly
Ponting
Waugh, M
Bevan
Hussey, MEK
Waugh, S

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Therein lies the problem with ODI - Michael Bevan. On statistical evidence he is clearly the best one-day batsman ever, unfortunately he was an incredibly boring player to watch. His entire game was pushes and probs and quick running between the wickets.

It might have been exciting when he pulled us out of the poo, but that was the situation of the match and not Bevan's batting that made it good watching. What a complete load of bullshyt! :mad:

Bevan has a higher ODI batting strike-rate than Deano for starters. As far as the best Aussie ODI batsmen I rate them equal first(refer page 1, post #10 of this thread) so am not knocking either.

The reason Bevan had so many not outs(i.e. still batting at the end) is because he was so bloody good and on most occasions scoring the winning runs. When the time was right he could carve out 4's or smash 6's with the best of them.

Put it this way........ if you wanted a batsman to take up the attack against the very best ODI fast bowlers then Deano was THE MAN, and........... if you wanted a batsman to resurrect the team innings and steer it to victory there was NONE BETTER than Bevan. Two absolute ODI champions :thumbsu:

[pluga_4]

the best individual innings i watched was bevan when he played for a world XI against an asia XI where he hammered 185* (132) in dhaka in 2000. anyone who hasn't seen that game should try and get a copy of it. although it wasn't an official odi, its up there with one of the best one day games ever. the partnership with caddick was amazing , and on this occasion bevan fell one run short of winning, chasing a huge 320.

i'm just waiting eagerly for someone to notch up a double ton at odi level:)

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

the best individual innings i watched was bevan when he played for a world XI against an asia XI where he hammered 185* (132) in dhaka in 2000. anyone who hasn't seen that game should try and get a copy of it. although it wasn't an official odi, its up there with one of the best one day games ever. the partnership with caddick was amazing , and on this occasion bevan fell one run short of winning, chasing a huge 320. Same for me :thumbsu: .......... Minotaur ought to find a copy in order to fully appreciate just how great a ODI player Bevan really was.

[-VC-]

I was at the G the day Mark Waugh scored 173 and that is something that stuck with me since. He had the ability to consistently make a big score for Australia and this is highlighted by his 18 centuries.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'm staggered that so many people have voted for Bevan ahead of Ponting.

Ponting's record is clearly superior, and by the end of his career he'll be miles in front of the next Australian batsman in terms of runs scored.

Ponting has 8613 runs at 42.22 at a S/R of 78.65.

Just because Bevan has a better average, it doesn't mean he was a better, more damaging batsman.

Ponting bats at #3. That's the most demanding position in the order.

Ponting is clearly our best ever ODI batsman.

[MUFC442]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v406/manutd04/wmplayer2006-01-1210-31-49-15.png

[Bentleigh]

Clarke will be the best.

Beven was pretty special.

[eddiesmith]

I cant believe how many morons have Ponting ahead of Deano

[eddiesmith]

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/PICTURES/DB/012005/057925.jpg

Another Durham and Victorian legend :thumbsu:

[Ysaye]

Bevan at number six (Not four) was the best - IMO it is important to remember that he did what he did against much better bowlers. Deano and S Waugh were good too. Mark Waugh was the best of the top order batsmen.

Agreed that Michael Clarke will a one-day great, maybe at the expense of his test career.

[Darky]

Unable to split Deano and Bevan.

Deano definitely of the top of the order batsmen(at #3). He stood up to the toughest bowling attacks(the Windies and Pakistan in their prime) and did not flinch. Tremendous average, extremely exciting to watch and perfectly suited to the attacking one-day format.

Bevan........ his average alone puts him at the top of the ODI tree. More than that his ability to build an innings, inspire his lower order team-mates, score to every angle on the ground and then lift the team to victory at the death.


Agree enitrely.

Jones is almost the prototype around which the modern-one day batsman is taught, but he a had similar average and S/R to today's players in an era when scores of 230 were considered good, and 300 was a rarity.

Maybe compare it to a Gordon Coventry or Bob Pratt who kicked centuries of goals when 60-80 usually topped the league previously.

[Bentleigh]

Agreed that Michael Clarke will a one-day great, maybe at the expense of his test career.

I doubt that.

ODI cricket will help him confidence wise. He is too talented not to become a very good test player. The lay off from the side will only make Clarke and when he gets another shot in the Test 11 he will be a better player for it ie. Ponting, Hayden, Langer etc.

[m.diddy]

Bevan was the one day master.
IMO if ponting was given a similar position in the order he would have done an equal job, however if Bevo was up at #3 he wouldn't have done as well as Punter.

However that's if's/buts.

If Bevo kept up his bowling I would have voted for him. But instead i went for punter.

I reckon Hussey and Symmonds will push for it in about 3-4 years.

[Bentleigh]

Clarke, Hussey & Symo can all play his ODI gme abit.

[andrew_embley]

Bevan

masterful player :cool:

[tazhawk]

1. Ponting............ by a fair way even now
2. Bevan
3. Gilly
4. M. Waugh
5. Jones

[Star]

Bevan from Ponting.

Yep, agree

Ponting seems to have re-invented himself in the last few years trying to go one-a-ball from the outset. I like it ;)

[spell_check]

Give it a year and I reckon it will be Hussey.

[demon21]

I think D.Jones is by far the best ODI batsman Aus has every had he played against much tougher bowlers and dominated the attacks.

[bucksisbest]

Gilchrist-Jones-Ponting-Bevan.

[Andrew Mc]

IMO if ponting was given a similar position in the order he would have done an equal job, however if Bevo was up at #3 he wouldn't have done as well as Punter.

However that's if's/buts.

People forget (or just don't know) that Bevan batted a good deal of his career (53 of his 196 innings batted) at 4. He averaged 59.60 at this, and did an awesome job. I don't doubt though that Ponts could do a great job lower down the order though. Bevan still number 1 for me, but only by a hair from Ponting, who seems to improve with every innings.

[red+black]

Poll is flawed as Allan Border is not on the list. Border has more MOTM's than both Jones and Bevan. I wouldn't rate Border the best, but he should be on the list.

Ponting for me.

The great Viv was MOTM every 6th match he played. Ponting and Deano average 1 every 10 to 11 matches.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Poll is flawed as Allan Border is not on the list. Border has more MOTM's than both Jones and Bevan. I wouldn't rate Border the best, but he should be on the list.
You're my hero.

[Bombers_Forever]

Boonie!

[king_Brown]

Bevan was the OD king!

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Fantastic knock from Ponting today.

We lost early wickets in a must-win match, and Ponting responded in a way that few players are capable of.

[Quinz]

Ponting/Bevan that I've seen.

[Bentleigh]

3/10 in a final.

Punter & Roy are special.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Clearly Ponting.

[Calcium Man]

Punter proved it today!!! Awesome!!!

Suggestion for smith, dont taunt the australian captain!!

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Of the 9 players to have scored 9,000 ODI runs, Ponting's average is 2nd only to Tendulkar's.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Batting/BattingCareerRuns_ODI.asp?Stat=5000

Doesn't that settle the argument?

Ponting currently sits 8th on the all-time list. But I would expect him to be 5th before the start of the next VB series. He should be 4th by the time the WC rolls around.

By the time Ponting's career is over, he, Tendulkar and Richards will stand alone as the 3 greatest ODI batsmen of all time.

This thread will mock those who voted for Bevan and Jones.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'm staggered that so many people have voted for Bevan ahead of Ponting.

Ponting's record is clearly superior, and by the end of his career he'll be miles in front of the next Australian batsman in terms of runs scored.

Ponting has 8613 runs at 42.22 at a S/R of 78.65.

Just because Bevan has a better average, it doesn't mean he was a better, more damaging batsman.

Ponting bats at #3. That's the most demanding position in the order.

Ponting is clearly our best ever ODI batsman.I agree.

[Browney2006]

Gunnar your an idiot, why do you only bump your own threads up? Is it about honour? Is it about you having the longest threads? I dont get it....seems kinda sad though, its like you always want to be heard, but no one wants to listen. I dont mind your threads and i dont care if they are bumped, but why do you do it?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunnar your an idiot, why do you only bump your own threads up? Is it about honour? Is it about you having the longest threads? I dont get it....seems kinda sad though, its like you always want to be heard, but no one wants to listen. I dont mind your threads and i dont care if they are bumped, but why do you do it?Is there an expiry date on this thread?

It's an ongoing discussion.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

BRING BACK BEVAN

[PAFC2004]

I picked Bevo because he really stood out in ODI's. I remember the game against the windies when we needed 4 runs off the last ball, and he hit a straight drive down to the boundary. Awesome stuff.

[Browney2006]

Is there an expiry date on this thread?

It's an ongoing discussion.
You failed to answer my questions, and i entirely agree with your points, but answer my questions :)

[danzan22]

based on those stats, would have to say punter

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Hard to believe that Punter has such a small share of the votes.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Batting/BattingCareerRuns_ODI.asp?Stat=2000

His record is clearly superior to everyone else's.

[dont bowl there]

Hard to believe that Ponter has such a small share of the votes.

http://www.howstat.com.au/cricket/Statistics/Batting/BattingCareerRuns_ODI.asp?Stat=2000

His record is clearly superior to everyone else's.

Probably Ponting, but my all time fav would be M.Waugh. He dominated so many matches and was the best batsman to watch in the world. I didnt really like Bevan at all, good player though.

[Bentleigh]

Bevan, M G Australia 232 196 67 6912 108 6 46 53.58 74.16
Ponting, R T* Australia 261 255 29 9411 164 20 55 41.64 79.20

Look, I know alot of people don't like Beven, but he was simply the ODI master.

232 ODI matches for an average of neally 54 (average of 50+ is unheard of in the ODI form of the game)! At a rate of 75, very healthy.

Streets ahead of the next best.

2nd best - Richards: 47
3rd - Greenidge: 45
4th - Jones: 44

[Gunnar Longshanks]

232 ODI matches for an average of neally 54 (average of 50+ is unheard of in the ODI form of the game)! At a rate of 75, very healthy.

Streets ahead of the next best.

2nd best - Richards: 47
3rd - Greenidge: 45
4th - Jones: 44Bevan was undismissed in over a third of his innings. That's why his average is so high. The number itself is misleading.

The reality is that he passed 50 in 52 of 196 innings. Just over a quarter.

So it's not like he scored half-centuries in a significantly higher proportion of his innings than other batsmen. His average is inflated, and it appears as though he scored a half century with exceptional regularity. He didn't.

When you take this into account, it's silly to argue that his higher average automatically makes him the best. It just reflects the fact that he came in late and didn't get dismissed.

Bevan gets props for being undismissed so many times, but comparing his average to others' should not be the definitive way of assessing his standing.

[mbuck]

Bevan was undismissed in over a third of his innings. That's why his average is so high. The number itself is misleading.

The reality is that he passed 50 in 52 of 196 innings. Just over a quarter.

So it's not like he scored half-centuries in a significantly higher proportion of his innings than other batsmen. His average is inflated, and it appears as though he scored a half century with exceptional regularity. He didn't.

When you take this into account, it's silly to argue that his higher average automatically makes him the best. It just reflects the fact that he came in late and didn't get dismissed.

Bevan gets props for being undismissed so many times, but comparing his average to others' should not be the definitive way of assessing his standing.

ponting may of got us off to great starts and won matches but bevan defintinly saved us more times than ponting won us matches which makes him a superior odi batsman..

[Cooldude]

Gunnar your an idiot, why do you only bump your own threads up?

It's about seeking attention

[Andrew Mc]

Bevans Avg is so high Because he batted at 7 all the time and had alot of not outs and when he did bat at 4 hes avg dropped heaps

How wrong can someone be:

Opening 1 1 1 40 40* - - - 0 0 0
3rd position 3 3 1 94 77* 17 0 47.00 0 1 1
4th position 53 53 15 2265 108* 107 106 59.60 3 17 0
5th position 33 33 5 1165 103 101* 82 41.60 2 5 1
6th position 87 87 34 3006 102* 84* 83 56.71 1 23 2
7th position 18 18 11 339 42* 41* 37 48.42 0 0 1
8th position 1 1 0 3 3 - - 3.00 0 0 0

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It's about seeking attentionYou're so desperate to score points against me - you just come across as a try-hard.

To me, you're merely another muppet struggling to keep up.

To you, Longshanks is the elusive scalp which you're always hunting without success.

It's pathetic.

[heals]

Michael Hussey:thumbsu:

[Bentleigh]

Bevan was undismissed in over a third of his innings. That's why his average is so high. The number itself is misleading.

The reality is that he passed 50 in 52 of 196 innings. Just over a quarter.

So it's not like he scored half-centuries in a significantly higher proportion of his innings than other batsmen. His average is inflated, and it appears as though he scored a half century with exceptional regularity. He didn't.

When you take this into account, it's silly to argue that his higher average automatically makes him the best. It just reflects the fact that he came in late and didn't get dismissed.

Bevan gets props for being undismissed so many times, but comparing his average to others' should not be the definitive way of assessing his standing.

Erm.. how can I explain this..

Not going out is a good thing for a batsman

Beven won/saved Australia many cricket matches.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Not going out is a good thing for a batsmanOf course - but it's not the be-all and end-all.

The statistical reward for consistently punching out an unbeaten 20 in the dying overs is disprortionately high. I'm not saying that that's the only kind of innings Bevan played, but there's no doubt his record benefitted from him playing that role pretty regularly. That kind of innings does wonders for a player's numbers, but 9 times out of 10 it's a cameo that doesn't determine the result.

The statistical kudos embellishes the real value of that type of innings.

You can't just compare Bevan's average to a guy who batted higher up while ignoring the reasons that stat might be skewed or misleading.

You can't just say "Bevan's average is freakishly high, while Ponting's is merely excellent - Bevan must have the edge".

Of course, I acknowledge that Bevan played plenty of match-winning innings to complement those little record-sweetening cameos. No-one's bagging Bevan or denying his unique abilities.

He was a brilliant finisher, and was exceptional in a demanding, highly-specialised role.

That's why he comes in at #2 behind Ponting.

[dmc333]

Craig McDermott, when he used to pinch hit at 3 :D

[wce4premiership]

none better then gilchrist.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

none better then gilchrist.Oh please.

Gilly has never been required to demonstrate any versatility.

He was given a job that suited his strengths and was given full license to attack.

Gilchrist is incredibly damaging and there's no doubt he's in the top bracket, but Ponting and Bevan have excelled in far more demanding roles and have played their great innings under far more pressure.

[Bentleigh]

Of course - but it's not the be-all and end-all.

The statistical reward for consistently punching out an unbeaten 20 in the dying overs is disprortionately high. I'm not saying that that's the only kind of innings Bevan played, but there's no doubt his record benefitted from him playing that role pretty regularly. That kind of innings does wonders for a player's numbers, but 9 times out of 10 it's a cameo that doesn't determine the result.

The statistical kudos embellishes the real value of that type of innings.

You can't just compare Bevan's average to a guy who batted higher up while ignoring the reasons that stat might be skewed or misleading.

You can't just say "Bevan's average is freakishly high, while Ponting's is merely excellent - Bevan must have the egde".

Of course, I acknowledge that Bevan played plenty of match-winning innings to complement those little record-sweetening cameos. No-one's bagging Bevan or denying his unique abilities.

He was a brilliant finisher, and was exceptional in a demanding, highly-specialised role.

That's why he comes in at #2 behind Ponting.

I didn't see Beven as a finsher so much.

I rated him more a guy which would build a knock from over 20 onwards, dominate the middle over period of a ODI match.

2265 @ 59.60 batting @ 4 proves this. Quite a large chuck of his runs.

[starz]

Bevan from Ponting and Jones.

[bombersno1]

Bevan was good, Hussey at the end of his career will be deemed better as he has a superior S/R.

[eddiesmith]

Michael Hussey:thumbsu:
Well if you want to talk about average boosting not outs then lets talk about Hussey

Still love to see Gunnars reasoning that Pontings record is far and above any other challengers

[Bentleigh]

Well if you want to talk about average boosting not outs then lets talk about Hussey

Still love to see Gunnars reasoning that Pontings record is far and above any other challengers

Hussey swings his bat like a mad man. Look at his strike rate.

How the hell does he increase his average?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Ponting must surely be swaying some of the naysayers.

[tazhawk]

Ponting >>>>>>Jones>>>Beven>>> Waugh >>Gilly

[Dingo - Alpha]

Here are their numbers:

Adam Gilchrist:
222 matches
7542 runs at 36.43 with 12 centuries
S/R of 95.73:thumbsu:

Ricky Ponting:
235 matches
8447 runs at 42.02 with 18 centuries
S/R of 78.30:thumbsd:

I don't think you can go past Ricky Ponting, but I'm sure others will disagree.

GILLY IS WAY PAST PONTING!!!!!:thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu:

[Gunnar Longshanks]

GILLY IS WAY PAST PONTING!!!!!:thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu:Maybe.

If you're dumb enough to compare players on strike rate alone.

[NYE TTTT]

GILLY IS WAY PAST PONTING!!!!!:thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu: :thumbsu:

Totally agree:thumbsu:

[Embley]

Tough choice out of Gilchrist, Ponting and Jones.

Hard to go past Ponting for quality but Gilchrist and Jones really enjoy/ed dismantling attacks and humiliating bowlers.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Tough choice out of Gilchrist, Ponting and Jones.

Hard to go past Ponting for quality but Gilchrist and Jones really enjoy/ed dismantling attacks and humiliating bowlers.Jones' S/R is not very impressive by modern standards.