-
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.
ODI ATG XIs
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
Top 5-6 pure bowlers for my money. The way not even the other greats spanked the icc ratings to nearly his extent tells a bit of a story.
Is this unusually good relative to his 79 in all 1st innings? I would expect most bats get a boost in NO innings
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It's not too unusual but it does discredit the theory he batted too cautiously when he ended up not out.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If memory serves, Bevan was guilty of making the occasional 10 (30) and getting out. Those are probably the knocks that really hurt his overall strike rate.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
At first glance, this game looks like he played a woeful innings, given he hit 24 off 83:
Full Scorecard of Australia vs Pakistan, Australian Tri Series (CB Series), 8th Match - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com
In reality it was a bowlers wicket and he almost got us home.
It was innings like this one:
Full Scorecard of Australia vs South Africa 3rd ODI 2000 - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com
This looks like a horrible innings, but when you look at the fall of wickets, it's pretty clear that he was trying to to steady the ship.
Full Scorecard of Australia vs Pakistan, Australian Tri Series (CB Series), 8th Match - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com
In reality it was a bowlers wicket and he almost got us home.
It was innings like this one:
Full Scorecard of Australia vs South Africa 3rd ODI 2000 - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com
This looks like a horrible innings, but when you look at the fall of wickets, it's pretty clear that he was trying to to steady the ship.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah ok I've been looking very hard trying to find some innings where Bevan has struck extraordinarily slowly and that cost Australia the match. I can't find any. In every case where he struck slowly there was some kind of collapse that his innings was trying to arrest.
I give up.
I give up.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
anti-Bevans are like anti-vaxxers. Their reasoning has nothing to do with facts or evidence, purely based on emotion and gullibility. Best to not take them too seriously, but kudos for going to the effort.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I was at that second game. Aus lost because they were docked 2 overs in the run chase for a slow over rate. Very controversial, nor surprising that rule was changed very quickly. Ironically IIRC SA bowled their overs even slower then Australia did. Go figure.
Assuming he is normal in this regard it does somewhat. Not completely though. The difference between his NOs and ABs (likely the best middle order pacer wrt maximising team 1st innings scores) is huge.
He's also a bit slow in general, at least by atg standards. Im not sure what other teams look like, but the rsa lower middle order stalwarts from the era (rhodes, kusenar, boucher, pollock) all went at over 80 (combined innings, not just 1st), and only klusener has a claim to being half the bat bevan was.
Last edited:
Victor Ian
International Coach
How many world cups did that net sa? Bevan batted as fast as was needed to win, rather than as fast as was needed to lose.
You dont know how many runs are needed in the 1st innings to win. You need to maximize. 79 is a bit slow from an atg bat in this regard. Definitely not slow enough to rule him out of aus xi, and arguably not enough to rule him out of world xi, but there is no denying its a bit of an issue when the rest of your bats are averaging 95 or whatever.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Yes, with eyes closed I would pick Bevan above any finishers from SA. Higher strike rate tells only half of the story. They might go bonkers in an odd chase finishing it in around 45th over while also choking in many others. Bevan on the other hand will finish it in 49th or 50th over. From the impact perspective, Bevan wins.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
For a large part of his career, I used to rate Dhoni above Bevan as a finisher. Last 3-4 years have changed it. Dhoni has lost India a no. of matches recently by miscalculating the chase or unable to rotate the strike, undoing lot of gun chases he did earlier in his career. 51(96) in the recent match vs Aus is one such example. A wonderfully illustrious career though.
As an overall cricketer I would rate Dhoni over Bevan, but given more reliability as a finisher, I would go with Bevan in my team with Gilchrist to open with Sachin.
As an overall cricketer I would rate Dhoni over Bevan, but given more reliability as a finisher, I would go with Bevan in my team with Gilchrist to open with Sachin.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Yes, Pollock has a good enough case to be among top 5-6 pure bowlers in ODIs. On the same note, Ambrose is criminally under rated in my opinion. Economy rate of 3.4 something. What a bowler he was.
Borges
International Regular
Probably not a miscalculation of the chase; more an overestimation of his own ability to turn it on at the death.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
This certainly happened a few times. One example early in his career. Couldn't stop fuming while seeing it live.
Full Scorecard of India vs Sri Lanka 2nd ODI 2007 - Score Report | ESPNcricinfo.com
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Yes, that rule made no sense. Talking about slow over rates, a different example was the infamous 1992 world cup semifinal. South Africa bowled only 45 overs in the allotted 3.5 hours and as the clock ticked over, umpires halted the innings. England were denied a late onslaught, yet most people remember only the rules in rain affected matches which denied SA 2 overs.
With you on Dhoni. He was clearly (slightly) ahead of Bevan as a bat a few years ago. Idk now, maybe bevan slightly ahead. Dhoni is a top (odi) keeper and the best captain ive seen enough of to make a call on, so i want him in.
Missing the point if you think there is a comparison between a bunch of ARs from a single team and an atg bat. And its not about him chasing, which nobody is questioning. Its about how fast his first innings scoring was when a whole team of ARs in comparable batting positions from his time score quicker than him.
Ya, ambrose is underrated. Did the same thing as pollock. Weapon early career, miserly later. I dont understand rating guys like donald and lee ahead of him. Pollock is still clearly above him though due to eras (although i would probably back ambrose if both of them were playing today).
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
You posted one, literally in the post above this one. The one against SA where he chewed up 80 balls of an innings making 33, while all the other bats managed to strike at 60-90.
Red
The normal awards that everyone else has
God your tone is woeful in conversations. Such a condescending dick.
I understand how averages work. Everyone does. My point is, clearly, averages dont matter in ODIs, RPI matter far more. Bevan is overrated because his average is inflated/higher/whatever because of a high proportion of not outs. My point was clearly "people who dont understand how averages work think he must be the best because his average is high, but it's high because of the not outs". But well done you for trying to make a big man out of yourself as usual and belittle others by comparing them to your under-12 team. ****ing hero you are.