Australia's Greatest ODI Team

[symonds_sixes]

Player (votes)
Adam Gilchrist 110
Mark Waugh 101
Ricky Ponting (vc) 107
Dean Jones 80
Steve Waugh (c) 72
Michael Bevan 83
Andrews Symonds 74
Shane Warne 109
Brett Lee 57
Dennis Lillee 89
Glenn McGrath 109
Greg Chappell (12th) 40

Source

Who would of thought Symonds would be in this team 4+ years ago

 

[rickyp]

try exactly 4 years ago, he was utterly useless before the 2003 world cup.

not completely sure if I agree on Lee, although I have no knowledge (as im only 17) of One day cricket before maybe 10 years ago, surely there is someone better.

 

[symonds_sixes]

I'm 17 as well and I feel Flemming or even McDermott deserves that spot more than him (at the moment).

 

[aussie1st]

Symonds always had the talent he just never fulfilled it until the WC in 03.
That 11 would be the one I would have gone with, very well balanced in batting, bowling and fielding. Lee has been a very good ODI bowler definitely deserves his spot.

 

[symonds_sixes]

Whilst thinking about Flemming, does anyone recall that time Australia played Zimbabwe at Harare (I think) in an ODI many years ago where the whole team was in the slips for the last batsman and he bowled him? That was hilarious!

 

[aussie_ben91]

Symonds deserved to be in there. I would've put him in there aswell.

Steve Waugh doesn't deserve to be in there. Was never a really successful ODI batsman & Chappell is probably on par with him as a batsman. By that logic Hayden should've gotten in over Waugh and to add to that not is only Hayden miles ahead of Mark Waugh as a batsman but he actually had a much better record. Chappell also has a better ODI record then Steve Waugh aswell by miles.

 

[WORLD CHAMPIONS]

I m very happy that Symonds got the place :happy He really deserves it :hpraise

Greg Chappel quite not deserve that place ,Hussey deserve more than him

 

[brad352]

. By that logic Hayden should've gotten in over Waugh and to add to that not is only Hayden miles ahead of Mark Waugh as a batsman but he actually had a much better record.

Their ODI records are almost identical and Waugh was an excellent part time bowler

 

[aussie_ben91]

Their ODI records are almost identical and Waugh was an excellent part time bowler, where's the logic?

LOL, Waugh's bowling was overrated, I'm supprised his record was as good as it was. To add to that Hayden's a way better batsman? And what are you talking about identicial? If you use decimials then Waugh's average is 39 and Hayden's is 42.
You get the impression some of the selections are based on overall performances aswell like the other forms like Test Cricket, otherwise why would've Steve Waugh been selected and Allan Border been considered? They were great fighters in Test Cricket but by no means great ODI batsman.

 

[puddleduck]

Considering Waughs captaining the side and despite his bowling being "overrated" it was effective and useful, so he beats Hayden hands down by a country mile, and it would appear that everyone who has played cricket for Australia in the last 30 years agree

 

[brad352]

LOL, Waugh's bowling was overrated, I'm supprised his record was as good as it was.

How much did you see him bowl?

To add to that Hayden's a way better batsman? And what are you talking about identicial? If you use decimials then Waugh's average is 39 and Hayden's is 42.

A much better batsman if you give him a flat track and a few medium pacers to have a slog at maybe. Hayden's career average was 39 when he should've been dropped mid-CB series, any difference that can be made up over a few games isn't substantial enough to conclude anything. Waugh played more cricket on grounds that weren't roped in 20m and against a few decent bowlers, a couple of runs isn't compelling.

 

[The_gas]

Im with puddles and Mr 352. Oh, and i dont agree with what your saying either Ben.

 

[aussie_ben91]

How much did you see him bowl?

Far bit to hold a fair opinion. Just rolled the arm over and bought wickets.

A much better batsman if you give him a flat track and a few medium pacers to have a slog at maybe. Hayden's career average was 39 when he should've been dropped mid-CB series, any difference that can be made up over a few games isn't substantial enough to conclude anything. Waugh played more cricket on grounds that weren't roped in 20m and against a few decent bowlers, a couple of runs isn't compelling.

Yeah, and that was when Waugh averaged in the mid 20s wasn't it? Hayden's average has always been over 40 while Waugh struggled to ever to get it over 40. To take Hayden's last 2 months off his career would be like taking Waugh's matches off him prior to making his highest ODI score as his average would be a mere 37.
You can't defend Mark Waugh. He was a lazy cricketer IMO who was allot talented that what he showed. Even more so then his brother.

Considering Waughs captaining the side and despite his bowling being "overrated" it was effective and useful, so he beats Hayden hands down by a country mile, and it would appear that everyone who has played cricket for Australia in the last 30 years agree

Which Waugh do you think I'm talking about and comparing?

 

[puddleduck]

Which Waugh do you think I'm talking about and comparing?

Ah yeah you said Steve Waugh shouldn't be there, and I just assumed all other mention of Waugh was him My mistake.

 

[The_gas]

Ah yeah you said Steve Waugh shouldn't be there, and I just assumed all other mention of Waugh was him My mistake.

Waugh'ta mistake to make.