Clash of the titans, Dhoni vs Bevan

[Migara]

The short ball isn't a big weakness for Bevan either. Anybody that says that is being a stereotype that believes in stupid myths based a few limited chances he got in his short test career. He has an average 57 in FC cricket in an era where Australia dominated the cricketing world. You don't do that by being a poor player of the short ball. His problem with the short ball he had in tests seemed more mental than anything else.

I don't remember much of the of ODI's but Dhoni sure didn't comfortably play against any short pitched bowling in England or Australia in the test series. If we are bringing up test performances here those should be brought up too.

confirms he had a problem.

/end of argument

 

[Migara]

A) The fact that it was a "managable" target because of good bowlers is exactly why Bevan played at a slow strike rate without taking any risks which could have caused him to get out. The fact that he strikes at 80 in the first innings (which is pretty good for his era) when he doesn't know the target while averaging 52 proves that he can play aggressively when needed.

No it doesn't mean it. He had the chance to do it by playing slow while Dhoni never had that chance. Dhoni did finish them in a flurry. Bevan didn't because he didn't have the chance. Assuming that he could do so (when he has not been tested) is biased thinking ta best.

B) I can't believe how someone would even take this seriously. Obviously the required rate isn't gonna be the same from the beginning of the innings as opposed when Bevan comes out to bat as Australia has aggressive batsmen like Gilchrist, Hayden etc who usually give them an aggressive start in the beginning even if they get out and don't get big scores.

Yeah, we are looking ar Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virat Kholi, Yuvraj Singh and Sehwag, who combinely boast of a SR over 85. Dhoni's batting support > Bevan's batting support.

In fact how have we not mentioned the fact that an aggressive batsmen with a high SR is more likely to get out playing a rash shot. Like that stupid helicopter shot Dhoni tires to play. I don't know how many times I have seen him get out trying to play that shot when it was completely unnecessary. I'll bet that puts pressure on the remaining batsmen as well. Seem to remember quite clearly that even Ganguly was criticizing him just a year ago for doing that.

But averages suggest that Dhoni got out similar percentage of times as Bevan. So what you mean is if Dhoni did not play stupid shots that he'' average more?

 

[benchmark00]

Bevo used to rock the floppy on occasion:

+1

 

[marc71178]

On other hand Bevan was never tested on his achilles heel in ODIs.

Make your mind up - earlier in this thread you were saying how he was tested by it Adam Hollioake and failed. Now you're saying he wasn't tested?

 

[benchmark00]

 

[Dan]

I still have all of those lying around somewhere. Yeah, I was a cool 6-year-old who collected those cards from my Weetbix. My Bev-love started young.

Showing my age (or substantial lack thereof).

 

[Trichromatic]

Is that a playing card? We used to have cricket cards in late 90s. It was fun and interesting. I still remember Bevan card used to among the top with guaranteed win because of his average of 62.

 

[honestbharani]

My point was that although Dhoni may not be the best against short stuff, but he somehow manages to score, and he has been tested enough times with it. On other hand Bevan was never tested on his achilles heel in ODIs.

So basically we were preaching to the choir

 

[uvelocity]

argument

 

[Shri]

 

[Migara]

Make your mind up - earlier in this thread you were saying how he was tested by it Adam Hollioake and failed. Now you're saying he wasn't tested?

Meh! Adam Hollioke did greet him with few short balls, knowing ALL of them would be called no ball under the law of that time. Now you bounce people, and will not be no balled if that's the only bouncer for the over. Even if Bevan gloved one to the keeper he would have been not out unlike Dhoni.

 

[Pup Clarke]

My point was that although Dhoni may not be the best against short stuff, but he somehow manages to score, and he has been tested enough times with it.

wat

 

[Dan]

Inventor of helicoptor shot MS DHONI, not MICHAEL BEVAN - YouTube

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Inventor of helicoptor shot MS DHONI, not MICHAEL BEVAN - YouTube

Gold

 

[Inferno]

confirms he had a problem.

/end of argument

A mental problem is something that about all quality batsmen deal with and eventually figure out and overcome when given enough chances. Bevan wasn't. It had nothing to do with his skill set.

Can’t make argument when you don't listen to logic.

No it doesn't mean it. He had the chance to do it by playing slow while Dhoni never had that chance. Dhoni did finish them in a flurry. Bevan didn't because he didn't have the chance. Assuming that he could do so (when he has not been tested) is biased thinking ta best.

And thinking a he played slower in the 2nd innings just for the sake of it or somehow lost ability to do that when he plays pretty aggressively in the 1st innings is just being obtuse.

Plus assuming he could “finish in a flurry” in Bevan’s era by going for big hits without any powerplays is also biased thinking at best.

Yeah, we are looking ar Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virat Kholi, Yuvraj Singh and Sehwag, who combinely boast of a SR over 85. Dhoni's batting support > Bevan's batting support.

That just proves that you either just don't know what you are talking about or clearly have a biased agenda here. Just because they thrash around Sri Lanka like crazy doesn’t mean they are the best batting team ever.

Bevan has had Ponting, Mark Waugh, Gilchrist, Martyn, Hayden, Lehmann, and Symonds in his team. At best I would say they are equal even ignoring the fact that the same Indian batting has managed to look just pathetic a whole lot when they have toured South Africa, England, and Australia in recent times.

But averages suggest that Dhoni got out similar percentage of times as Bevan. So what you mean is if Dhoni did not play stupid shots that he'' average more?

If we are bringing results into this then it should be noted that Bevan’s overall strike was not a problem considering how many games he eventually led his team to a victory. He might not have gotten the job done a very few times but the same could be said about Dhoni. He’s gotten out before playing rash shots leaving his team in the same dilemma only with less wickets at hand.

 

[ankitj]

There is far too much hair splitting. That Bevan was a great, great ODI batsman is not to be disputed. He was superb at playing according to the situation and was good in almost all conditions. That's why he has the record that he has. Don't think anyone here puts him anywhere except the top league.

OTOH, he wasn't a Superman or else he would never get out for single digit . He could have a few "limitations", which weren't that huge to affect his assessment but don't have to be constantly denied. His strike rate is lower and that's a fact. He wasn't ever one of the big hitters in the league of Dhoni, Symonds, Gilchrist etc. There is no point trying to argue that he was. And also check that Dhoni and Hussey also have better strike rates in first innings, so that's not unique to Bevan. In a long career there are going to be instances where this "limitation" would have affected the result for his team but acknowledging that does nothing to diminish his great batsmanship on most other occasions as is borne out by his overall record and a number of memorable match winning performances.

 

[Trichromatic]

At best I would say they are equal even ignoring the fact that the same Indian batting has managed to look just pathetic a whole lot when they have toured South Africa, England, and Australia in recent times.

Not in England if you're talking about ODIs.

 

[Inferno]

I don't think anybody is saying that Bevan was some kind of robot that could just go from Dravid mode to Gilchirst at a moments notice. Neither was Dhoni. He did cost his team from time to time by playing rash shots like every other aggressive batsmen out there and playing with powerplays has helped him get away with some of those which batsmen in Bevan's era never had. Denying that is just dull.

 

[Inferno]

Not in England if you're talking about ODIs.

Well this was a pretty ordinary performance considering the whole 50 overs was batted. 234 is hardly a good score in today's era.

3rd ODI: England v India at The Oval, Sep 9, 2011 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Senile Sentry]

A) The fact that it was a "managable" target because of good bowlers is exactly why Bevan played at a slow strike rate without taking any risks which could have caused him to get out. The fact that he strikes at 80 in the first innings (which is pretty good for his era) when he doesn't know the target while averaging 52 proves that he can play aggressively when needed.

B) I can't believe how someone would even take this seriously. Obviously the required rate isn't gonna be the same from the beginning of the innings as opposed when Bevan comes out to bat as Australia has aggressive batsmen like Gilchrist, Hayden etc who usually give them an aggressive start in the beginning even if they get out and don't get big scores.


In fact how have we not mentioned the fact that an aggressive batsmen with a high SR is more likely to get out playing a rash shot. Like that stupid helicopter shot Dhoni tires to play. I don't know how many times I have seen him get out trying to play that shot when it was completely unnecessary. I'll bet that puts pressure on the remaining batsmen as well. Seem to remember quite clearly that even Ganguly was criticizing him just a year ago for doing that.

A. Not sure since when teams scoring at a run rate of 4.8 started to get termed as aggressive, but that is the run rate Bevan managed batting first. Most of the time, he came down the order remember. Even at no.6 position, where he batted for majority of his career, his SR was 80 only, which suggests he couldn't really up the accelerator. Such slow-go indeed helped boost his career average though. He stayed not out 22 times out of 58 innings at no.6.

Dhoni on the other hand never really cared about averages batting first, and that shows in his SR as well, 94. Batting at no.5-7, Dhoni averages 47 but with a SR of 92. And he didn't have not outs to boost his average, just 16 out of 72 completed innings. By contrast, Bevan averaged 52 at the same positions, but with a SR of 80 and had 33 not outs (out of 87 innings).

There is absolutely no comparison between effectiveness of Dhoni and Bevan batting first. Dhoni is miles ahead of Bevan. The only comparison is in their effectiveness as good chasers. But statistics suggest that is also in Dhoni's favor.

B. Precisely. But his almost complete lack of noteworthy performances in any run-rate wise tough chase (>275) shows that whereever he could not just rely on the illustrious top order to contribute and him to just knock the ball around and canter to a win, he invariably couldn't step up.

Regarding helicopter shot, please show me instances of how many times he threw his wicket away playing that. I suspect barring circumstances where he HAD to throw his bat around (the death overs batting first) I don't recollect him getting out playing that ever.