Shane Watson or Shakib Al Hasan?(ODI)

[Raynman]

I see many are claiming that bowling is tougher for Shakib because he does not have capable partners to keep pressure on the other end and of course the item most chose not to talk about : Bad keeping.

A lot of people on the other hand will claim that Hadlee and Kapil got as many wickets and were as great because they didn't have to share the wickets with a more capable bowler.

I'm pretty sure that if you take the emotional aspect of Shakib being our own out of the equation, most will pick Watson before Shakib when starting an ODI team. In most cases, both could coexist in an XI together.They only way Watson misses out is if there is only one slot open and a spinner is required but most likely Watson is probably in the squad at that point anyway.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by Eshen
...But if I am selecting a world ODI XI at this point, Watson would be hands down my first choice as the allrounder.

Originally Posted by yaseer
...
Think neutrally, if anyone picks a World XI and needs an all-rounder, Watson would be picked ahead of Sakib. It one requires a spin-bowling all-rounder, Vettori would be picked...

Gotcha!!

Now you try to think neutrally. If you are making a world XI:

1) Bravo, Flintoff, Kallis are way ahead in the World XI in the middle order as an alrounder. They have more bite in their bowling and Kallis is 10 times better batsmen than Watson. There are also much better openers (top order to chose from) for ODIs for world XI. Dilshan, Shewag, Smith, Strauss, McCullum etc.

2) Vettori is not ahead of Shakib. Statwise or other wise. We can agree to disagree on this one.

3) Combination of World XI is subject to change on who the selectors are. Since all this is arbitrary. I would choose a spinning alrounder and give 4 Fast because my top order would have solid players. Aameer, Roach, Steyn, Broad, Johnson and so many others to choose from.

IMO, Watson just doesn't make the cut at this point. He is good but not that good to walk in to any World XI.
+++
Coming back to our team, I wouldn't want it any other way.

[Baundule]

I would choose Shakib ahead of Watson. Individual performances depend on the strength of the team as well. Compared to Watson Shakib always has tougher job to do.

It seems many people are underestimating his batting-abilities, may be, just because of his reckless batting recently. But in the beginning he was a perfect choice to bat at #4. He had similar approach like Roqibul; but he has the ability to score quickly as well.

[aklemalp]

when watson was shakib's age at 22,was he even in the top ten allrounders list or was he sitting in the bleachers,shakib has been there and is still there,whereas watson is not there at the top,that speaks volumes alone about shakib's class entirely different,if they switched teams you would see the difference,decline in watson and improvement in shakib,shakib is under tremendous pressure right now,give the man a chance,didn't he got a 4 wicket haul in the final odi?form is temporary,while class is permanent,same way ipl franchises wasted their monies on pollard and roach,these guys are very inexperienced in the international level,the money will fool their eyes,and i call this prostitution of international cricketers

[Raynman]

Originally Posted by aklemalp
when watson was shakib's age at 22,was he even in the top ten allrounders list or was he sitting in the bleachers,shakib has been there and is still there,whereas watson is not there at the top,that speaks volumes alone about shakib's class entirely different,if they switched teams you would see the difference,decline in watson and improvement in shakib,shakib is under tremendous pressure right now,give the man a chance,didn't he got a 4 wicket haul in the final odi?form is temporary,while class is permanent,same way ipl franchises wasted their monies on pollard and roach,these guys are very inexperienced in the international level,the money will fool their eyes,and i call this prostitution of international cricketers

I misread the poll I guess. I thought the question was to pick between Shakib and Watson in 2010, not the top form Shakib of 2009 vs. a 22 year old Watson who had yet to debut.

[bharat]

Originally Posted by Eshen
In last two years, in ODIs against G7 -

Watson scored 1052 runs @ average 50.09, took 30 wickets @ average 22.30 (statsguru).

Shakib scored 677 runs @average 29.43, took 26 wickets @ average 37.03 (statsguru).
So, statistically, verdict clearly goes in favor of Watson to be a better ODI allrounder.

However, it's safe to say Shakib is a much better Test bowler while Watson is a much better Test batsman.

If you had asked me mid of last year I would have picked Sakib without blinking my eye ! I didnt think much of Watson then ..fget Sakib I would have even picked Afridi in my team in place of him.

But look at the average guys !!
@ average 50.09, took 30 wickets @ average 22.30

With those numbers forget Sakib , I would pick him ahead of Yuvrai.In fact I would pick him ahead of all the Indian players except Shewag,Ghambhir and Dhoni.He can walk (or run) into any team in the World and even into World X1

[Eshen]

T_E, I think you are being nostalgic (or desperate to discredit Watson). Based on last two years performances, Watson is way ahead of both Kallis and Bravo as an ODI allrounder. Why would anyone consider Flintoff for any team in his current condition?!

[MohammedC]

I am biased

[Rabz]

Sakib can not be compared with Shane Watson.

Mind you, Sakib comes from a struggling team where he is the first "super" star in per with international standard.
Shane Watson is the last few warriors that played with the invincible Aussie side that dominated the world cricket for over a decade and a half.

Where Sakib is the beacon of hope in his team and also carries the burdon of captaincy at such a tender age, Shane Watson is just another player in his team and can be replaced at any given moment. Offcourse Watson adds an extra dimension to his team, but his availability is nowhere as important as Sakib's.

One was groomed by the best of the best lot, where the other having to set the standard for his entire nation.

One goes out there just to enjoy his game and play his part, whereas the other carries the burdon of 160 million people's expectation everytime he goes into the 22 yards.

One is already No 1 ODI allrounder in the world, other one is not.
Period.

[Eshen]

Rabz, in Bangladesh team Ashraful is still irreplaceable, but that does not make Ashraful a great or even a decent batsman in international standard.

[Spitfire_x86]

Watson - Better than any of our batsmen, better than any of our pacers.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by Eshen
... Based on last two years performances, ...

There lies the problem. Last two years he is played in the top order most of the time. Those positions are already occupied by better deserving players. His only place is in the middle most likely #7 because he can't get in from 8-11 (4 bowlers). I hope you will agree Bravo is a better bowler. @ #7 the game becomes a SR game with that many quality (solid) batsmen in 1-6. Bravo is clear cut favorite in my book in SR as well. Clean hitter, demands attention.

As for Flintoff, I don't have to prove any one what he can do with the bat and ball @ #7.

Kallis's recent SR, adaptibility puts him up for consideration. Nothing nostalgic about that.
+++
I only mentioned those three just to show that Watson has others to fend off before he can walk in to a W-XI. My choice is already there. I would take a spinning alrounder. With W-XI playing, the pitch wouldn't be like anything where you would need five fast bowlers and no spinners.

[Rabz]

Eshen, had a player of Sakib's ability played in a team like Australia or India, he would be much much better player than what his stat's suggest at the moment.

If you had senior players to rely on at younger age, you can concentrate more on your game and try to improve day by day. Thats what happened with Shane Watson. He struggled at the beginning but lucky for him, Ponting put a great faith on him and was instrumental in what Watson is doing today.
The potentiality of Watson was brought out by the captain.

The very moment Sakib started to pick, he had to take the added responsibility of captaining a underperforming, inconsistent and a struggling team like Bangladesh. Doing 3 fulltime jobs (batting,bowling and captaining) at 22 is not easy.

It would be harsh to compare Sakib at this point with Watson.

[dolcevita]

when SHAKIB will be 29 , believe me he will establish as the world's best all-rounders , but I have to recognaise today Waston is the best

[Beamer]

Agree there with Rabz. Right now Watson is having better numbers. But with him, injury is always a concern. In the long run, Sakib will end up having a better career. Watson is still a stop gap solution as an opener despite being among runs. Once he falters, Australia will find a regular opener. He is an underrated cricketer though. I prefer a comparison with Vettori more appropriate for Sakib. Both are captains, leading spinners and bat in simmilar positions. Vettori is ahead of Sakib right now.

[Eshen]

Mijan bhai, if you look at requirements for #7, the argument for Shakib fails right there and then, the guy rarely survives the pressure of scoring runs in death overs!

He is not good enough batsman to be considered in top 6 of world XI either. Only way he can make the team is as a spinner, and it's arguable whether he can make the cut ahead of Vettori.

Back to Watson, considering his current form, imo he is good enough to compete with other leading ODI openers, namely Sehwag and Dilshan, as a batsman alone. Not saying it will be easy to pick two from those three, but he is well into the contention. If he is not picked as an opener, his record as the #7 for Australia is still way better than those of Shakib or Bravo.

[Eshen]

Rabz and Beamer, yes we can talk about all kind of hypothesis how Shakib would play for Australia or Watson would play for Bangladesh, or how Shakib will be at age of 29 and Watson will be at age of 36 (yes, I am pretty sure too that he will be gone by then). But here, I (and few others talking) am talking about facts that we see now.

[Miraz]

Shakib is a very good player in Bangladeshi setting, but he would have been a much better player in Australian setting.

Shane Watson's career would have ended like Mushfiqur Rahman if he was a Bangladeshi.

Now make up your mind.

[Eshen]

Miraz, yes, we all know that Ashraful would have been next Bradman if he grew up in Australia, and Ponting would have some political cadre if he grew up in Bangladesh, but what's the point of discussing this kind of hypothesis?!

[Miraz]

Eshen, can you please tell me is there any point to discuss the topic of this thread at all?

Forget about the country, you can't compare two very different player. Vettori or even Shahid Afridi can be compared with Shakib, not Watson or Flintoff.

[Eshen]

^^ Miraz, to my understanding the point of the thread is who is better ODI allrounder based on facts we currently see in reality (as opposed to how our players seem to us in our fantasy world). But then again that's my perspective, your perspective can be always different.

I agree with you though, at this point Shakib is more comparable with Vettori and Afridi - a bowler who can make significant contributions with bat on occasions.

[dolcevita]

Men vettori's sucks hard with bat in ODI : his average after 251 games is ONLY 16,50...

Posted via BC Mobile Edition (iPhone)

[dolcevita]

And Afridi's ODI batting average is 22 so SHAKIB is better than afridi and vettori

Posted via BC Mobile Edition (iPhone)

[khalek]

What a flippin stupid comparison. Watson's far far far far better than Shakib but I am not surprised Shakib's leading the poll

Watson can make the Bangladesh side for his fielding alone.

[Eshen]

Well, I am happy to see 20 members here can make an objective judgment as pure cricket fans. The number is much higher than I expected.