***Official*** Sri Lanka in New Zealand 2015

[kiwiviktor81]

Cairns and Vettori are a spot too high surely? Bevan, Symonds and/or Jones in please.

AFAIC the only Kiwi that would definitely make an ATG Oceania ODI XI is Bond, with Cairns and Hadlee possibles.

Which Aussie players are in your mind definites for an ATG ODI XI?

 

[morgieb]

Which Aussie players are in your mind definites for an ATG ODI XI?

I'd say:

Gilchrist
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Symonds
Warne
McGrath

Not sure who'd open with Gilchrist, and for the other two seamer spots Hadlee and Bond come into contention. Could make a case for Cairns if you opened with Waugh or Hayden.

 

[Athlai]

Bwahaha, wtf?!

They're both better Strike bowlers but I'd rate Vettori as one of the ATG stranglers. And he bats.

 

[Athlai]

Oh I totally forgot about Bevan. I'd have him ahead of Crowe Cairns or Vettori. Would change my lineup a bit.

 

[Athlai]

And FFS Vettori provides The much needed cake that is required for a proper icing cake ratio.

 

[harsh.ag]

Hayden
Gilly
Ponting
Jones/Crowe
Bevan
Hussey
Symonds
Hadlee
Warne
Bond
McGrath

And FFS Vettori provides The much needed cake that is required for a proper icing cake ratio.

Bevan is all the cake ever needed

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I'd say:

Gilchrist
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Symonds
Warne
McGrath

Not sure who'd open with Gilchrist, and for the other two seamer spots Hadlee and Bond come into contention. Could make a case for Cairns if you opened with Waugh or Hayden.

You reckon Ponting, averaging 42, is definitely better than Williamson, averaging 48?

Hard to split Dean Jones and Ross Taylor for me, both very similar batsmen in that they could both do it all.

Bevan's SR of 72 disqualifies him from any serious ATG ODI side.

 

[OverratedSanity]

You reckon Ponting, averaging 42, is definitely better than Williamson, averaging 48?

Hard to split Dean Jones and Ross Taylor for me, both very similar batsmen in that they could both do it all.

Bevan's SR of 72 disqualifies him from any serious ATG ODI side.

Lol this again?

 

[morgieb]

You reckon Ponting, averaging 42, is definitely better than Williamson, averaging 48?

Hard to split Dean Jones and Ross Taylor for me, both very similar batsmen in that they could both do it all.

Bevan's SR of 72 disqualifies him from any serious ATG ODI side.

Yes. Williamson has a lot of potential but Ponting has done a lot more so far, and it's hard to compare their averages given the era they batted in. I think you're falling into the trap of not taking into account inflation for eras too, batting is a lot easier than it was 10 years ago.

Jones pretty much wrote the book on ODI batting. He's an ATG in the format, Taylor isn't really.

And while 72 looks low by today's standards, by his standards it was fine. And for the most part he did basically exactly was required to win the game which affected his strike rate somewhat.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

kiwiviktor stahp

 

[kiwiviktor81]

And for the most part he did basically exactly was required to win the game which affected his strike rate somewhat.

This myth again. Let's look at some matches.

1. 5th Match: Australia v India at Brisbane, Jan 18, 2004 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Bevan comes in at 7 with Aussie needing 100 off 16 overs. An absolute doddle, you'd think, for a master like Bevan, but he fails to even score at a run a ball, hitting a pitiful 3 boundaries from 43 balls, and Aussie run out of wickets, losing by 19 runs.

2. 2nd ODI: Australia v Pakistan at Melbourne (Docklands), Jun 15, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Batting at 6, Bevan limps to 30 runs off 52 balls, scoring one solitary boundary in a one and a half hour long innings. Thanks to chasing such a low score Pakistan win with 2 wickets to spare. Probably would have been a win for Aussie if Bevan could have managed so much as a SR of 80 here.

3. 4th Match: Australia v New Zealand at Sydney, Jan 17, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Chasing an easy 236 against New Zealand, Bevan comes in at 4 and soaks up 98 balls (a third of the innings) for 60 runs (much less than a third of the target). Aussie end up having to slog out as the run rate climbs and they lose by 23 runs.

4. 3rd ODI: Australia v South Africa at Melbourne (Docklands), Aug 20, 2000 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

This one's a classic Bevan. Chasing 207 off 48 overs, a task so simple you'd almost default, Bevan wastes an astonishing 80 balls for a mere 33 runs. He scored one four in this innings, off 80 balls, and Australia ended up running out of overs 8 runs short.

5. 1st ODI: South Africa v Australia at Durban, Apr 12, 2000 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Limping to 31 runs from a 57 ball innings, Bevan ensures Aussie end up losing with 12 balls to spare. Just imagine if Bevan had scored an extra 20 runs like a normal batsman - probably an Aussie win here.

Bevan seems to be remembered mostly for being not out when matches were won by Aussie. For this reason he's been mythologised to ****. All five of the matches I linked to were lost pretty much entirely by Bevan's poor strike rate and inability to hit boundaries. In all of these matches Aussie would have been better off if Bevan kicked his stumps over first ball and let someone with a higher strike rate bat instead.

Bevan in ODIs is the single most overrated thing in cricket. I'd seriously pick Luke Ronchi in an Oceania ATG side before I picked Bevan.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I invite anyone to look at No. 4 in that list in particular and ask yourselves if anyone other than Michael Bevan could possibly have lost the match from there.

 

[cnerd123]

I invite anyone to look at No. 4 in that list in particular and ask yourselves if anyone other than Michael Bevan could possibly have lost the match from there.

Chris Martin

 

[cnerd123]

Also, heh Sri Lolka.

 

[Zinzan]

Bevan's SR of 72 disqualifies him from any serious ATG ODI side.

Wait, didn't you end up conceding the point about Bevan's SR last time we went over this?

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Chris Martin

Wrong - Chris Martin would have gone out in far fewer than 80 balls, leaving other batsmen to score the runs.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

Wait, didn't you end up conceding the point about Bevan's SR last time we went over this?

I conceded that his first innings strike rate of 80 might fairly suggest that he could bat quicker than 72 if he needed to.

But this is an ATG side we're talking about here. In the lower middle order we want guys hitting at 90-100+

 

[Zinzan]

This myth again. Let's look at some matches.

1. 5th Match: Australia v India at Brisbane, Jan 18, 2004 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Bevan comes in at 7 with Aussie needing 100 off 16 overs. An absolute doddle, you'd think, for a master like Bevan, but he fails to even score at a run a ball, hitting a pitiful 3 boundaries from 43 balls, and Aussie run out of wickets, losing by 19 runs.

2. 2nd ODI: Australia v Pakistan at Melbourne (Docklands), Jun 15, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Batting at 6, Bevan limps to 30 runs off 52 balls, scoring one solitary boundary in a one and a half hour long innings. Thanks to chasing such a low score Pakistan win with 2 wickets to spare. Probably would have been a win for Aussie if Bevan could have managed so much as a SR of 80 here.

3. 4th Match: Australia v New Zealand at Sydney, Jan 17, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Chasing an easy 236 against New Zealand, Bevan comes in at 4 and soaks up 98 balls (a third of the innings) for 60 runs (much less than a third of the target). Aussie end up having to slog out as the run rate climbs and they lose by 23 runs.

4. 3rd ODI: Australia v South Africa at Melbourne (Docklands), Aug 20, 2000 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

This one's a classic Bevan. Chasing 207 off 48 overs, a task so simple you'd almost default, Bevan wastes an astonishing 80 balls for a mere 33 runs. He scored one four in this innings, off 80 balls, and Australia ended up running out of overs 8 runs short.

5. 1st ODI: South Africa v Australia at Durban, Apr 12, 2000 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Limping to 31 runs from a 57 ball innings, Bevan ensures Aussie end up losing with 12 balls to spare. Just imagine if Bevan had scored an extra 20 runs like a normal batsman - probably an Aussie win here.

Bevan seems to be remembered mostly for being not out when matches were won by Aussie. For this reason he's been mythologised to ****. All five of the matches I linked to were lost pretty much entirely by Bevan's poor strike rate and inability to hit boundaries. In all of these matches Aussie would have been better off if Bevan kicked his stumps over first ball and let someone with a higher strike rate bat instead.

Bevan in ODIs is the single most overrated thing in cricket. I'd seriously pick Luke Ronchi in an Oceania ATG side before I picked Bevan.

He played almost 200 ODI innings and you cite 5 examples? Ironically, most of them he was the best performing batsman, only not getting any support.

 

[Dan]

Its almost as if conditions in ODI cricket in 2000 and conditions in ODI cricket in 2015 are...different.

 

[kiwiviktor81]

He played almost 200 ODI innings and you cite 5 examples? Ironically, most of them he was the best performing batsman, only not getting any support.

Note the dates. They were just the first ones I looked at, in order, in which Bevan played a definitive role in an Australian loss because of his poor strike rate. Probably there are another five, at least. Which would make for 10 single-handed losses out of 200 innings, quite high really.