jones had a tremendous influence on odi fielding and running between the wickets and to a certain extent you are right in the sense that more people copied dean jones and that he started a trend in one day cricket, but the main reason for that is that to copy jones, you mainly needed a reasonable dose of talent and exceptional athleticism while viv was a once-in-a-century cricketing genius who could only be watched in awe and rarely if ever copied....jones while being an exceptional one day batsman doesn't begin to compare with viv....
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Michael Bevan Retires - and Tribute Thread.
- Thread starter howardj
- Start date
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
No surprise that the same person rates Tendulkar above Bevan...
Jones could also be said to be a once-in-a-couple-of-decades (century is woefully over-egging it, you could make a case for Richards not even being the best batsman of his own age, ie Greg Chappell) genius... in ODI terms.
Just because something is the case in Test terms doesn't make it so in ODIs. I know very little of the Richards-Jones comparison in ODIs but I do know plenty of the Bevan-Tendulkar one and for me the attitudes seem similar - Tendulkar was a magnificent Test player, a good deal better than anyone in that format, so therefore it's unthinkable that anyone could possibly be better in ODIs, either. Yet IMO Bevan was - considerably, in fact.
Jones could also be said to be a once-in-a-couple-of-decades (century is woefully over-egging it, you could make a case for Richards not even being the best batsman of his own age, ie Greg Chappell) genius... in ODI terms.
Just because something is the case in Test terms doesn't make it so in ODIs. I know very little of the Richards-Jones comparison in ODIs but I do know plenty of the Bevan-Tendulkar one and for me the attitudes seem similar - Tendulkar was a magnificent Test player, a good deal better than anyone in that format, so therefore it's unthinkable that anyone could possibly be better in ODIs, either. Yet IMO Bevan was - considerably, in fact.
Slow Love™
International Captain
Bit of a sad story, Bevan's. You get the impression he's highly dissatisfied with being considered a one-day player exclusively, even though he would be at the top (or near it) of most people's lists when discussing the format.
There was a good article in the Age the other day regarding his change of approach when he relocated to Tasmania, where he decided to open up his technique and play more freely, like he apparently did as a teenager. It was somewhat surreal to watch his weight of runs for the tigers, knowing that an international recall was never going to happen.
FWIW, I actually think that by the time he was cut from the ODI side, it was a decent move, and I don't think we've really suffered as a result. But I feel bad for the fact that he was cut out of test contention permanently, as he almost definitely had a lot to offer in the longer game, and it's obvious that he conquered his short-ball demons quite some time ago.
Anyway, great player. It seems like he's got a bit of a rep not unlike Stuart MacGill for not quite fitting in socially and maybe having a bit of an air of aloofness about him. I really enjoyed his superhero like efforts when our backs were to the wall though.
There was a good article in the Age the other day regarding his change of approach when he relocated to Tasmania, where he decided to open up his technique and play more freely, like he apparently did as a teenager. It was somewhat surreal to watch his weight of runs for the tigers, knowing that an international recall was never going to happen.
FWIW, I actually think that by the time he was cut from the ODI side, it was a decent move, and I don't think we've really suffered as a result. But I feel bad for the fact that he was cut out of test contention permanently, as he almost definitely had a lot to offer in the longer game, and it's obvious that he conquered his short-ball demons quite some time ago.
Anyway, great player. It seems like he's got a bit of a rep not unlike Stuart MacGill for not quite fitting in socially and maybe having a bit of an air of aloofness about him. I really enjoyed his superhero like efforts when our backs were to the wall though.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
The fact that (like MacGill) others outperformed him in Tests had nothing to do with it? Hell, even Greg Blewett ended-up achieving more in Tests!
I really think people are being a bit hard on those who didn't pick Bevan more (no, Jesse, I will admit you stopped short of saying "he didn't get enough chances"), the simple fact of the matter is he had 2 or 3 chances and failed to take any. If you do that, you can't expect too many more with the calibre of the likes of Langer, Martyn, Blewett, Lehmann and Ponting knocking around.
I really think people are being a bit hard on those who didn't pick Bevan more (no, Jesse, I will admit you stopped short of saying "he didn't get enough chances"), the simple fact of the matter is he had 2 or 3 chances and failed to take any. If you do that, you can't expect too many more with the calibre of the likes of Langer, Martyn, Blewett, Lehmann and Ponting knocking around.
Last edited:
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Richards and Tendulkar were the only better List-A players for me, if Hussey carries on the way he does, he could be equal to Bevan.
Slow Love™
International Captain
As to MacGill, I was just comparing them because it seems they're similar in that particular respect (I do sometimes wonder if MacGill hasn't missed selection sometimes due to this). Basically, you're right though, and Bevan just didn't do enough in the chances he was given, and he was given nearly 20 tests. I just think it's a shame, as he had a lot of talent, and (IMO) with the passing of time, probably showed he was good enough to be successful at test level. It's a career unfulfilled, rather than a standard he could never meet.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
If Hussey carries on the way he does he will be BY A DISTANCE the best ODI player ever and BY A DISTANCE the second-best Test player ever, and will also put-paid to C_C's theory about superman players only occurring once in a sport's history.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Hickesque.
In wildly different circumstances, having in common never managing to "belong" despite having talents most (even the Stephen Waughs of this World) could never dream of.
no surprise at all....
with very good reason in fact.... anyway, we've gone on this road so many times, no point in traversing it again....
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
But he won't, at least in Tests. His FC average is in the mid fifties. I reckon he'll end up somewhere there by the end of his career. Bradman had 95 as his FC average, so his Test success was only slightly better. I don't think he is 30 runs better in the Test arena than he is at the FC game.
Every player has a great patch that they go through, look at Ponting and Yousuf last year. The difference with Hussey is that he is already an experienced player so he has had time to work out his game at the lower level and he was selected at a time when he was in top form.
That can't last. Of course, if he ends up #2, then I won myself an all time Greigy...
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Hussey for me, won't ever be seen as agood a test player as Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Dravid etc. It's shame, but true.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Well that depends on his performances, obviously. But you're probably right. He has to approach something like 30-50 tests, or four-five years of cricket to have an accurate judgment.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
I reckon he could go on playing until 40 if he really wanted to. He seems a really fit bloke, and just someone who loves batting. I can't really seem him getting worse in the mid term future.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Well I dunno about so many times, but a few, but either way - wasn't suggesting we traverse it again, just saying that the link was palpable.no surprise at all....
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I've been thinking "this can't last" since about his 4th Test. It's incredibly unusual - even for a 30-year-old debutant - for such a patch-du-purpull to happen at the start of their career. Heck, I'm still thinking "this can't last" in both forms of the game, but it's kept lasting so far...
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
I've thought who-knows-how-many Australian players could go on till 40, far, far more of them than not tend to be extremely fit. Yet even Stephen Waugh was over a year from managing it. I can't see Hussey playing too far past 37-38 TBH.
oh yeah sure, i wasn't trying to hide "the link" if that's what you mean....i consider tendulkar and richards to be considerably better odi batsmen than either bevan or jones, there...satisfied?
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Yea, it is unusual that it has happened at the start of his career. But it happens to most good batsmen sometime, and he's been lucky that he has just started off that way. But really, FC average (usually Test figures are a bit worse) is a good indication of Test average and thats where I put him ability wise.
It is highly doubtful that an FC career lasting 10 years would lie that much about his abilities
.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
But most Aussie players (Steve Waugh a prime example) have been playing for at least 5/6 years by the time when they are 30. If Hussey came into the sid at 30, he is bound to have more appetite for runs, and want to play on longer. Wereas someone who has been playing for 10 years or so when they get to 35 might have lost the drive.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
No more or less than before... I didn't think you were trying to hide the link.oh yeah sure, i wasn't trying to hide "the link" if that's what you mean....i consider tendulkar and richards to be considerably better odi batsmen than either bevan or jones, there...satisfied?
Nonetheless, I'll always consider the methodology to come to said conclusion flawed.