Tom 1972
School Boy/Girl Captain
imho...might have not had the greatest batting style - wasn't terrible to watch imo though - but his innings were edge of the seat stuff. Can't see how you could say he had no entertainment value.
imho...might have not had the greatest batting style - wasn't terrible to watch imo though - but his innings were edge of the seat stuff. Can't see how you could say he had no entertainment value.
Agree entirely, hence my point earlier that some tend to place far more weighting on longevity than others. When comparing the test bowling records of Marshall & Walsh for example, I'm far more inclined to look at the difference in their bowling averages & strike-rates than the fact Walsh played for longer.The longeivity thing is harsh.
Viv played his first 1-dayer when he was 23 y.o. He was 39 when he finished playing ODIs. The thing is that WI only played two 1-dayers in 1973, none in 1974 and half a dozen in 1975. None before that....ever.
Overrated batsman. Hussey is as good as him, as well as Dhoni. The latter could be even better.Easy to classify Bevan: Awesome Legend.
Your opinion is your opinion; I just find it hard to fathom. How can batsmen falling around and having tense finishes with Bevan batting with the tail, rescuing us, be boring? What do you watch cricket for then?imho...
Disagree. Dhoni is as good as finisher as Bevan and unlike Bevan real power hitter too. Has won many matches playing different roles unlike Bevan who was only a finisher most of the time. Dhoni sets up targets, sets up chases, finishes or makes other guys to finish it easy by some brutal innings here and there. Bevan was never capable of that brutal innings that Dhoni could play. Because Bvan has played more ATM, I'd rate them similar. If Dhoni can play 240 ODI and keep that avg 50+ and SR 85+, I have no problem in Dhoni > Bevan.Hussey and Dhoni close but nope. Hussey I rate as a more complete batsman but last time we won the WC he was pretty much a non-factor. With Bevan that was pretty much the opposite.
Looking at this poll I'd say he's pretty underrated.
I'd rate them Bevan >> Hussey > Dhoni.Dhoni's good, but I'd still rate Bevan > him because....
1. Bevan did it for 10 years, Dhoni's only 5.
2. Dhoni played in a somewhat better era, particularly given how good batting's been in the subcontinent (and before you ask, no their international career's did not overlap)
This is hilarious stuff. Dhoni finished the game from higher up positions than Bevan. Stop clutching straws.You sound like you've never watched Bevan. When needed to, Bevan could smack the ball all over the park. He was just naturally conservative and batted with the least risk possible. That's probably why he has 2 WCs and Dhoni has 0. I'd agree with you that Dhoni was more capable of being a brutal batsman; but that doesn't make him better. The object of the game was to win; Bevan's approach was far more reliable.
Bevan is a much better finisher than Dhoni. From positions 6 and lower, Dhoni averages 36 @ 82 whereas Bevan averages 55 @ 78. Not even close.
FixedI'd rate them Bevan >> Hussey > Dhoni.
The extra > for Bevan because of the nationalistic bias
That's hilarious coming from you. I didn't know Hussey was non-Australian btw.Fixed
Unless you're counting positions from 1-4 as finishers then...nope. Batting that high, he is no more a finisher as Tendulkar or Ponting is.This is hilarious stuff. Dhoni finished the game from higher up positions than Bevan. Stop clutching straws.
TBF, Hussey was barely needed to contribute. Australia could have played 7 bowlers or something in that WC. Bevan would have been in a similar situation.Hussey and Dhoni close but nope. Hussey I rate as a more complete batsman but last time we won the WC he was pretty much a non-factor. With Bevan that was pretty much the opposite.
Looking at this poll I'd say he's pretty underrated.
Lol you can't tie the words position and finisher together. It doesn't matter where he bats as long as he finishes games off.Unless you're counting positions from 1-4 as finishers then...nope. Batting that high, he is no more a finisher as Tendulkar or Ponting is.
That's a good point; however since Bevan got the opportunity and was simply amazing I am going to give him credit for it. I actually think Hussey is overall the better player - he can certainly play a Bevan like innings as well as take apart an attack - but performances like that don't come around often. If I had to chase any target the first name on the teamsheet would be Bevan. He was that good for Australia. Sometimes I feel the neutrals didn't appreciate it as they tended to think "Aus are strong and will win anyway".TBF, Hussey was barely needed to contribute. Australia could have played 7 bowlers or something in that WC. Bevan would have been in a similar situation.
I guess Bevan helped Australia win against England in the 2003 wc when they were tottering at 135 for 8 chasing 205TBF, Hussey was barely needed to contribute. Australia could have played 7 bowlers or something in that WC. Bevan would have been in a similar situation.
Well, I am not sure if the term 'finisher' is widely defined, but having to bat basically most of his innings with the tail and help win a match isn't something batsmen from positions 1-4 will have to do very often.Lol you can't tie the words position and finisher together. It doesn't matter where he bats as long as he finishes games off.
Yeah he was great at batting with the tail but couldn't belt a team out of the game coming in to bat at the top order. An important part he lacked in his game. Thats why I think he wouldn't have been as good as some six hitting finishers we see these days like Yuvraj, Dhoni, Hussey, Symonds, etc, if he played atm.Well, I am not sure if the term 'finisher' is widely defined, but having to bat basically most of his innings with the tail and help win a match isn't something batsmen from positions 1-4 will have to do very often.
Agree to an extent.Disagree. Dhoni is as good as finisher as Bevan and unlike Bevan real power hitter too. Has won many matches playing different roles unlike Bevan who was only a finisher most of the time. Dhoni sets up targets, sets up chases, finishes or makes other guys to finish it easy by some brutal innings here and there. Bevan was never capable of that brutal innings that Dhoni could play. Because Bvan has played more ATM, I'd rate them similar. If Dhoni can play 240 ODI and keep that avg 50+ and SR 85+, I have no problem in Dhoni > Bevan.
Bevan is underrated in that aspect. If he had to; he hit out. His era didn't require it so much though. For most his career he didn't bat high enough for that to be an ask of him.Yeah he was great at batting with the tail but couldn't belt a team out of the game coming in to bat at the top order. An important part he lacked in his game. Thats why I think he wouldn't have been as good as some six hitting finishers we see these days like Yuvraj, Dhoni, Hussey, Symonds, etc, if he played atm.