If the Bowlers batted first and managed to see out all 50 overs because the batsmen cannot get them out. the target low as it might be the bowlers would know that they have to bowl good consistent overs to get the batsmen out in less than 50 overs.
If the Batters are in first and put a massive score on the board they will know that the bowlers will never reach. they will have 50 overs to bowl them out.
But I did reach a conclusion whoever bats first will win so if the bowlers win the coin toss and put the batsmen in the batsmen will win and vice versa. or if the batsmen win the toss and decide to bat they will win and vice versa.
its simples gents whoever bats first wins. which is decided on the toss of a coin.
In the current era, the Bowlers.
Batsmen have lost the ability to stick it out in the way Mike Atherton did in SA all those years ago. Cricket is more exciting for it than the days of say Chris Tavare hanging around scoring 10 runs an hour.
If you go back in time then say to the Richards, Greenidge era it would be batsmen that would shave it.
The Bradman era batsmen would walk it.
Now, will you STFU @saintbletch and let me die in peace.
OK, I would suggest that the 11 best bowlers in the world would, very likely, get through the 11 best batsmen or at least restrict their run rates.
There seems to be a good mix of spin and fast bowling in the bowling line up so, given it’s a ODI, the captain would be able to mix up the bowling quite easily.
Best batsmen, apart from Root, I don’t think bowl so even if the bowlers couldn’t bat, and I think a few of them can, then they would be able to chase/set a score. I should imagine quite a few runs would be quite streaky too.
So, if it were a 10 match ODI series I would suggest that the batsmen would come out of top 6-4.