Who would you rather have come in at No. 6 for your team with 15 overs to go?

[kiwiviktor81]

If picking a player to play for NZ I'd take Bevan.

Who would you drop from the current side for Bevan?

 

[wellAlbidarned]

this thread is equal parts painful and hilarious

 

[Flem274*]

Bradman

 

[marc71178]

Who would you drop from the current side for Bevan?

Any of them.

 

[Flem274*]

I've decided "A" and "B" in the poll is secretly saying we should pick AB de Villiers.

I'll take AB de Villiers to go with my Bradman and my Bevan (I'm reading the thread backwards and someone just offered a free Michael Bevan) thanks. I'll keep Maxwell to be my test match #3.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Any of them.

Well Bevan can't open, dropping Williamson and Taylor for him would be stupid, and we have hitters coming in from 6 down. It would have to be Elliott.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well Bevan can't open, dropping Williamson and Taylor for him would be stupid, and we have hitters coming in from 6 down. It would have to be Elliott.

Dropping Williamson or Taylor for him would only be stupid because they are worse players than Williamson and Taylor in the side you could drop instead; Bevan was definitely the better player. If one of the openers was dropped and Williamson opened so Bevan could fit in I'd still regard that as a better team than the current one too. Elliott is obviously the most obvious though.

 

[Prince EWS]

Elliott is obviously the most obvious though.

lol.

 

[Daemon]

It seems as though you're starting to get it.

So Maxwell is playing LO cricket more efficiently now and putting him back in Bevan's time would make him head and shoulders above most other players then?

 

[wellAlbidarned]

bevan scored at a SR of 75 chasing targets of 230ish on trickier pitches, it's only logical to assume he'd play exactly the same if confronted with different conditions and match situations. I mean it's not like he built his reputation around being a batsman who batted to the match situation or anything.

 

[NUFAN]

The ODI game left Bevan behind, it didn't leave behind Richards, Cairns, Dev, Pollock, Greatbatch et al.

Haha, what? I get the whole refreshing idea it was to get Greatbatch opening the batting, but surely this is taking it too far.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Bevan's SR for successful chases was 67. It was 69 in unsuccessful chases.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Haha, what? I get the whole refreshing idea it was to get Greatbatch opening the batting, but surely this is taking it too far.

Its a reference to the 1992 World Cup. Not to his career total. His career total would be too far given his 71 SR is below Bevan's 74 SR. But you're nit picking and splitting hairs over something not in issue.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Haha, what? I get the whole refreshing idea it was to get Greatbatch opening the batting, but surely this is taking it too far.

Nah, Greatbatch was one of the first modern hitters. Not a great hitter by any means, but one of the first to essentially play a modern role to good effect in the early nineties.

 

[NUFAN]

Nah, Greatbatch was one of the first modern hitters. Not a great hitter by any means, but one of the first to essentially play a modern role to good effect in the early nineties.

Bevan was one of the first modern finishes. He was a great finisher and one of the first to essentially play a modern role in winning matches to good effect in the mid nineties.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Bevan was one of the last old-school finishers. Really good at it though.

 

[CaptainGrumpy]

Bevan was one of the first modern finishes. He was a great finisher and one of the first to essentially play a modern role in winning matches to good effect in the mid nineties.

Did the match innings pre Bevan stop at the 25 or 35 over mark despite being billed as 50 over matches?

You have fallen for hype. There was always a finish to the innings.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Did the match innings pre Bevan stop at the 25 or 35 over mark despite being billed as 50 over matches?

You have fallen for hype. There was always a finish to the innings.

wut

 

[NUFAN]

Did the match innings pre Bevan stop at the 25 or 35 over mark despite being billed as 50 over matches?

You have fallen for hype. There was always a finish to the innings.

How on earth did a brain make a persons fingers type that after reading my post?

 

[marc71178]

Did the match innings pre Bevan stop at the 25 or 35 over mark despite being billed as 50 over matches?

You have fallen for hype. There was always a finish to the innings.

Yes, and more often than not Bevan was there, guiding his team to victory.