ODI verdict list
Greatest ODI All-rounders of All Time
Andrew Flintoff rises above Shakib Al Hasan, and the edge holds. Shakib Al Hasan keeps the better average in ODI batting, 37.29 to 31.97. Andrew Flintoff's bowling average vs strong opposition in ODI bowling settles it, 26.30 to 38.92.
England
- ODI Batting
- 75.8
- ODI Bowling
- 83.7
Bangladesh
- ODI Batting
- 85.5
- ODI Bowling
- 66.1
Pakistan
- ODI Batting
- 72.5
- ODI Bowling
- 77.7
South Africa
- ODI Batting
- 63.6
- ODI Bowling
- 87.4
South Africa
- ODI Batting
- 87.5
- ODI Bowling
- 61.2
South Africa
- ODI Batting
- 81.9
- ODI Bowling
- 65.5
Sri Lanka
- ODI Batting
- 87.0
- ODI Bowling
- 57.6
Pakistan
- ODI Batting
- 53.4
- ODI Bowling
- 92.4
India
- ODI Batting
- 63.6
- ODI Bowling
- 76.8
Australia
- ODI Batting
- 86.7
- ODI Bowling
- 56.0
- Andrew Flintoff
- 75.8 — led by Strike rate (14.9 of it), then Average (14.2)
- Shakib Al Hasan
- 85.5 — led by Average (17.0 of it), then Volume (14.4)
- Imran Khan
- 72.5 — led by Average (15.2 of it), then Volume (12.7)
- Shaun Pollock
- 63.6 — led by Strike rate (13.6 of it), then Volume (12.2)
- Jacques Kallis
- 87.5 — led by Average (19.3 of it), then Volume (14.9)
- Lance Klusener
- 81.9 — led by Average (18.3 of it), then Strike rate (15.1)
- Angelo Mathews
- 87.0 — led by Average (18.1 of it), then Volume (13.8)
- Wasim Akram
- 53.4 — led by Strike rate (14.8 of it), then Volume (12.7)
- Kapil Dev
- 63.6 — led by Strike rate (16.2 of it), then Volume (12.7)
- Shane Watson
- 86.7 — led by Average (18.2 of it), then Strike rate (15.3)
- Andrew Flintoff
- 83.7 — led by Bowling average (17.9 of it), then Economy (12.6)
- Shakib Al Hasan
- 66.1 — led by Volume (13.8 of it), then Bowling average (12.7)
- Imran Khan
- 77.7 — led by Economy (15.9 of it), then Bowling average (15.7)
- Shaun Pollock
- 87.4 — led by Bowling average (17.5 of it), then Economy (16.4)
- Jacques Kallis
- 61.2 — led by Volume (13.3 of it), then Bowling average (10.0)
- Lance Klusener
- 65.5 — led by Volume (12.1 of it), then Bowling average (12.1)
- Angelo Mathews
- 57.6 — led by Volume (10.0 of it), then Economy (9.8)
- Wasim Akram
- 92.4 — led by Bowling average (18.1 of it), then Economy (15.8)
- Kapil Dev
- 76.8 — led by Economy (16.2 of it), then Bowling average (15.2)
- Shane Watson
- 56.0 — led by Volume (11.5 of it), then Bowling average (10.1)
Transparent by design
How this ranking was calculated
The list is computed from scorecards, not selected by an AI model. Every player is measured against the same qualified peer population, and the rules below determine the order.
- Build the eligible peer population using the selected format, time window and qualification bars.
- Calculate every batting or bowling factor directly from the matching scorecards.
- Convert each factor to a score against qualified peers, respecting whether higher or lower is better.
- Apply the published weights. If a factor is unavailable, its weight is redistributed across that player's recorded factors.
- Add the weighted factors to produce the verdict score out of 100, then rank from highest to lowest.
Compared with 867 batters who played at least 20 innings.
Compared with 441 bowlers who played at least 20 innings and bowled at least 1,500 balls.
Longevity: uses the square root of career span in years multiplied by matches selected. Match counts and first/last dates come from playing-XI appearances, so a did-not-bat or did-not-bowl match still counts.
Contribution: total runs or wickets measure output within the selected period.
Wicket magnitude: career and long-era wicket volume uses 85% peer position and 15% raw distance from the leading qualified wicket total. This preserves the difference between exceptional totals that sit together at the top of a percentile table. Run volume stays a pure percentile, because career run totals vary far more widely and blending raw magnitude there would penalise a short career of outstanding quality.
All-rounders: a player must clear both qualification bars. The batting and bowling verdicts are combined with a geometric mean, preventing one outstanding discipline from completely carrying a weak one.
ODI eligibility: this curated list includes players representing current ICC full-member teams. All of their recorded opposition still counts.
Editorial scope: this is a transparent judgement model, not an official record table. It does not insert or promote named players, and it applies no blanket era multiplier.