• 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.

The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
TheJediBrah said:
**** can we not get into "not outs boost average" again

btw unless I used statsguru wrong then Tendulkar averaged 43 in the 90s, not 47

nb: I'm not claiming that Bevan > Tendulkar in any capacity, except maybe jawline
Click to expand...
I didn't say not outs boost average. I meant that sample size is small. Less than 4K runs in fact.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
h_hurricane said:
47@90 is clearly better. If you dig a little deep into 60@77, you will find that it was not as much about runs.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Click to expand...
In the time period in question, against the best opposition, Bevan was clearly ahead of Tendulkar.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Against the best bowling attacks (i.e WI, Pak, SA and Aus) it gets even more ridiculous.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Clearly during this time period Tendulkar scored more runs but Bevan wins on every other objective measure and comprehensively too.

It's like trying to argue that Warner is a better ODI player than Kohli. It just isn't the case.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
TheJediBrah said:
**** can we not get into "not outs boost average" again

btw unless I used statsguru wrong then Tendulkar averaged 43 in the 90s, not 47

nb: I'm not claiming that Bevan > Tendulkar in any capacity, except maybe jawline
Click to expand...
I was giving Tendulkar the advantage by only making it during the overlapping parts of their career.
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
jimmy101 said:
The depth the Australian side had during the late 90's/early-to-mid 2000's was insane so it can't really be held against Hayden that, no matter how effective he was, there was always going to be some form of competition for his spot. The fact that he forced his way into the side when Gilly & Mark Waugh were firing on all cylinders says quite a bit. Let's also not forget that Hayden won the AB medal for ODI player of the year in 2008 in the twilight of his career.

If you compare the fortunes/structure of the Australian side from then to now, Hayden would be pretty much an automatic lock for the team. Warner/Hayden would be unmoveable, with Finch, Carey & Uzzy most likely getting pushed down the order to accommodate him. If we rewind the clock, again Hayden would be a shoe-in, most likely leapfrogging ahead of players such as Taylor, Marsh & Boon in the pecking order.
Click to expand...
Had a crazy 2007 WC. 650 plus runs at over 70. Disapointing in that he only made a couple of 40 odds in the two KO games, of course, but at least he was contributing something to his side when it mattered.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
A good way to compare these guys would be measuring how much better they were than the next best in the 90s

Who was the next best top-order bat after Tendulkar (avge 43 @ 90)?
Who was the next best no. 6 bat after Bevan (avge 60 @ 77)?
 
jimmy101

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
Burgey said:
Had a crazy 2007 WC. 650 plus runs at over 70. Disapointing in that he only made a couple of 40 odds in the two KO games, of course, but at least he was contributing something to his side when it mattered.
Click to expand...
Yeah Hayden was in scintillating form throughout that tournament. Was incredible watching him & McGrath turn back time & dominating the opposition. Somehow the team managed to outdo themselves, reaching even loftier heights than in 2003.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It was a bit boring to watch at times. They were unbeaten in 2003 but at least had some scares (England, NZ, SL semi-final). 2007 there wasn't even a close game.
 
sunilz

sunilz

International Regular
In 90s
Man of the match awards
Tendulkar 35 Bevan 4

In WC
Tendulkar 1000@58 Bevan 390@ 43

We should completely ignore WC record when it suits us

The standout ODI batsman of 90s has only 4 man of the match awards :laugh::laugh:
 
jimmy101

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
TheJediBrah said:
It was a bit boring to watch at times. They were unbeaten in 2003 but at least had some scares (England, NZ, SL semi-final). 2007 there wasn't even a close game.
Click to expand...
Yeah the game vs England when Bevan & Bichel pulled off that rescue job was highly enthralling. Symonds' innings against Pakistan was quality viewing too. Plus that semi was pretty edge-of-your-seat for a while there.
 
sunilz

sunilz

International Regular
Wisden Top 5 ODI batsman list released in 2001
Richards 1
Tendulkar 2
Bevan 3
But Bevan was the standout ODI batsman of the 90s
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
TheJediBrah said:
A good way to compare these guys would be measuring how much better they were than the next best in the 90s

Who was the next best top-order bat after Tendulkar (avge 43 @ 90)?
Who was the next best no. 6 bat after Bevan (avge 60 @ 77)?
Click to expand...
If you make it 94-99 (so as not to unfairly disadvantage players for early 90s performances), Lara averaged 44@87 during the period and he was probably the closest statistically to Tendulkar. Though he only batted 1-3 for 2/3 of this time period.

Here are the stats for top 3 batsmen during that time period: Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Lara actually had a better record than Tendulkar when filtered like that (though I think it's fairer to go by overall average/SR).

Batting at 4 or below, the next best was Carl Hooper, who averaged 47@85 but over a small sample size. The next best who played a decent chunk over that period was De Silva (40@82):

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I'm not backing Bevan here but bringing in stats like Wisden rankings and MOM awards doesn't exactly make the case look strong

edit: didn't realise it was sunilz lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top