Australia's Post Ashes Blueprint

[chaminda_00]

Fair call, all im saying is that he would make most other teams regardless of off field problems or a so-called problem with the short ball. Australia had a choice because of their depth in the middle order, which wouldn't be the case at most other sides.

 

[Mister Wright]

Fair call, all im saying is that he would make most other teams regardless of off field problems or a so-called problem with the short ball. Australia had a choice because of their depth in the middle order, which wouldn't be the case at most other sides.

Agreed. But we're not talking about other sides, we're talking about Australia. He was given more than enough chances at test level. It just didn't work out for him. Allthough he can't be picky, he has a wonderful ODI record, and one that he should be proud of.

 

[aussie]

He was given more than enough chances at test level.

you sure about that Kyle?

 

[chaminda_00]

I have to agree with aussie, 18 Tests is not a lot these days, also half of them were as a spin bowling all rounder.

 

[Top_Cat]

I have to agree with aussie, 18 Tests is not a lot these days, also half of them were as a spin bowling all rounder.

I distinctly remember him being dropped after a really good tour of Pakistan in the home series against England when he played a horrible 'get-out' leg-glance off Darren Gough, not exactly express pace at the time. He managed to get back into the Test side and was dropped after a not-great tour of England in 1997 where Rick Ponting was pushing for selection. The perceptioon was that he wasn't much chop against the short ones and although most good judges said he was fine, he didn't ever look comfortable when a pace bowler was bowling short ones at him.

Also, the selectors seemed pretty worried about his capacity to turn 50's into 100's. He had a top Test score of 91 and also scores of 87*, 85* and 82. Yes they gave him the opportunity to be an all-rounder but as soon as the bovelty of his bowling started to fall away, his failures with the bat became very stark, especially against the pace-heavy bowling attacks of SA and England of the time. The rise of Ricky Ponting probably meant the death-knell for his Test career and I get the feeling they wanted to rid the team of a difficult character.

So did he get enough chances? Maybe. Hard to say. Either way, he just always appeared out-of-his-depth in Tests which contrasts markedly with just how 'in-control' he looked in ODI's. It's quite mystifying. Either way, he was definitely given opportunities to cement his place.

 

[SquidAU]

Yes they gave him the opportunity to be an all-rounder but as soon as the bovelty of his bowling started to fall away, his failures with the bat became very stark, especially against the pace-heavy bowling attacks of SA and England of the time. The rise of Ricky Ponting probably meant the death-knell for his Test career and I get the feeling they wanted to rid the team of a difficult character.

I have seen a couple of interviews and read Bevan's book and he says that when he was bowling reallywell and was getting selected as the bowling all rounder, he didn't enjoy it because he thought himself to be a batsman first and foremost.

Which brings us back to his attitude about his place in the side. If his thought processes were that he wanted to be in the side for his batting rather than his bowling, this would have caused conflict within the team and with the selectors.

 

[howardj]

Yeah, with Bevo, the damning thing for him was that of the 18 Tests that he played, he played six of them in a row (1994-95) and then when he was recalled, he played 11 Tests in a row (1996-97). Therefore, it wasn't as though he was being shuffled in and out of the team - he had two good goes at it, and came up short with an average of 29. Putting aside his character issues and his modes of dismissal ( too often caught from the short ball) his statistics alone justified the termination of his career.

 

[marc71178]

I have to agree with aussie, 18 Tests is not a lot these days, also half of them were as a spin bowling all rounder.

18 Tests is a lot of games - at least 2 years of normal loads (and remember that even 7 or 8 years ago there were less games played)

 

[SquidAU]

18 Tests is a lot of games - at least 2 years of normal loads (and remember that even 7 or 8 years ago there were less games played)

Plenty enough tests to show that Bevan wasn't quite there in the longer form of the game, despite the amount of runs he made in the Sheffield Shield/Pura Cup.

 

[Mister Wright]

you sure about that Kyle?

Very sure. He clearly wasn't up to test cricket at the time despite his first class and ODI record.

 

[Mister Wright]

So did he get enough chances? Maybe. Hard to say. Either way, he just always appeared out-of-his-depth in Tests which contrasts markedly with just how 'in-control' he looked in ODI's. It's quite mystifying. Either way, he was definitely given opportunities to cement his place.

Much the same with Brett Lee, except he continually gets selected.

 

[aussie]

Australia's team & Matyn's test future

Well i reckon most of us reckon this is Australia's best XI at present:

Langer
Hayden
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke
Watson
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
McGrath
Tait or MaCgill - Depending on Conditons

But now that Katich has batted so well in the super-series ODI's & probaly secured his place in the middle order & with Hodge knocking on the door it has really put pressure on Martyn's chances of getting back into the test side grhhhhhh , because at this stage at least i am not comfortable with Clarke at #4.

Also looking at Watson's position in the team he definately should be persisted with but his role should be has a Batsman all-rounder not a bowling one who in a day may be able to give Ponting 10-15 overs a day. Thus once Tait recovers i reckon MaCgill unfortunately will have to miss out because Watson bowling may be accurate but it wont get anyone out, but the more he bowls at the highest level i reckon he will be able to develop something in his bowling that will be able to make him effective.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Get Watson out of there, get Lee out of there, get MacGill in (if he carries on bowling like today), and, although it won't happen, they'd do well to drop Clarke IMO.

 

[aussie]

Get Watson out of there, get Lee out of there, get MacGill in (if he carries on bowling like today), and, although it won't happen, they'd do well to drop Clarke IMO.

1. Their is no reason to get Watson out of their, dont get carried away with his bowling performace this morning it was always going to be difficult for him to bowl againts those top quality batsmen and be effective. Once his role is as a #6 batsman(because he looked very organised friday moring againts both pace & spin) that can give Ponting around 10 overs a day in a test match he will be just fine.

2. I have been backing Lee a lot but if he doesn't improve in his bowling in tests this summer his place must be questioned

3. Cant see Clarke being dropped, the fact that the selectors have batted him at #4 instead of Katich shows how highly they rate him.

 

[chaminda_00]

I don't have too much confidence in Clarke at 4 or 5 at this stage of his career he should be at six, but with Watson in the side and Katich not established there is not much you can do. Watson should be at 7, let him work his way into the batting line up and move up when his ready. The big question mark over those sides is having Tait and Lee or MacGill and Lee, you give away a lot of runs. So unless Watson can become a solid a defensive bowler who keeps runs down, they are going to struggle to keep pressure on teams when Warne or McGarth aren't on.

 

[Tom Halsey]

1. Their is no reason to get Watson out of their, dont get carried away with his bowling performace this morning it was always going to be difficult for him to bowl againts those top quality batsmen and be effective. Once his role is as a #6 batsman(because he looked very organised friday moring againts both pace & spin) that can give Ponting around 10 overs a day in a test match he will be just fine.

2. I have been backing Lee a lot but if he doesn't improve in his bowling in tests this summer his place must be questioned

3. Cant see Clarke being dropped, the fact that the selectors have batted him at #4 instead of Katich shows how highly they rate him.

1. Good talent no doubt, not ready yet.

2. His place must already be questioned.

3. Agree the selectors rate him, I don't though.

 

[aussie]

I don't have too much confidence in Clarke at 4 or 5 at this stage of his career he should be at six, but with Watson in the side and Katich not established there is not much you can do. Watson should be at 7, let him work his way into the batting line up and move up when his ready. The big question mark over those sides is having Tait and Lee or MacGill and Lee, you give away a lot of runs. So unless Watson can become a solid a defensive bowler who keeps runs down, they are going to struggle to keep pressure on teams when Warne or McGarth aren't on.

Numbers 3 or 4 is where your best or your most dependable batsman should be batting, thats why i say Martyn should be their over the past 2 year he has become the middle order rock & i miss his presence already. Clarke at #5 is quite allright. Katich may not be established but looking at how well he countered the R.O.W bowlers in the ODI's i reckon he will score a lot of runs this summer.

Having at Watson at 7 to me would be wrong he should be given a chance in the top 6 to show his worth, after all Gilly has done it all his career at 7 so i see no reason for him to go up at 6.Also I do believe Watson could become a good tie up bowler he is accurate enough but he wont for now he doesn't have any weapons in his bowling, but once he bowls accurate enough thats all Ponting will need.

 

[aussie]

1. Good talent no doubt, not ready yet.

2. His place must already be questioned.

3. Agree the selectors rate him, I don't though.

1. His bowling isn't ready but i reckon his batting can come to terms with test cricket

2. Well i say the end of the season since Lee seems to be a an automaticj selection with the side, so if he keeps bowling like he did in the first innings this morning when calls come for him to be dropped from the test side the selectors wont have much of an option, especially if Dizzy Gillespie has a great season for the redbacks.

3. well we'll have to live with that

 

[chaminda_00]

I think batting him at 7 will reduce his workload, if he is to bowl even just 10 or 15 overs each day, it significant workload. So by batting him at 7, his still plays as frontline batsmen, but has extra rest during innings. The only reason Australia have kept Gilly at 7 is to reduce his workload, but now they have another all rounder to manage, so its probably time for him to move one up.

 

[open365]

Numbers 3 or 4 is where your best or your most dependable batsman should be batting, thats why i say Martyn should be their over the past 2 year he has become the middle order rock & i miss his presence already. Clarke at #5 is quite allright. Katich may not be established but looking at how well he countered the R.O.W bowlers in the ODI's i reckon he will score a lot of runs this summer.

Having at Watson at 7 to me would be wrong he should be given a chance in the top 6 to show his worth, after all Gilly has done it all his career at 7 so i see no reason for him to go up at 6.Also I do believe Watson could become a good tie up bowler he is accurate enough but he wont for now he doesn't have any weapons in his bowling, but once he bowls accurate enough thats all Ponting will need.

but looking at what sehwag and kallis did to him,he needs something else IMO.

having clarke and martyn in the side is a lot better than having watson and clarke.

clarke just isn't a number 4,i'd rather have katich at 4,clarke 5,watson 6 and gilly 7.

or even better,hussey at 6 and no watson,watson isn't a good enough bowler to bat at 7.