Clash of the titans, Dhoni vs Bevan

[blahblahblah]

sorry but , always bevan

hes the finisher i knew and the finisher he will be

 

[Prince EWS]

I'd rather have Bevan in a chase but I think I'd prefer Dhoni down the order in the first innings. I find it hard to separate them as finishers or lower order players but as overall OD batsmen I think I'd take Bevan, because he showed at various times throughout his career that he could bat 4 and set up the game as well. I know Dhoni has a couple of really fast centuries up the order too, but he was promoted as a pinch hitter in those circumstances because of the pitch conditions/India's start rather than being selected as a genuine top order batsman.

 

[Senile Sentry]

Bevan always tend to be viewed with rose tinted glasses, with some merit behind it, as he was the original finisher and made that term trendy. However I think over the last 3-4 years, Dhoni has pipped him. Bevan's match winning innings are legendary, but there were aso some instances where his slow SR proved fatal for Australia as well.

 

[Dan]

Bevan always tend to be viewed with rose tinted glasses, with some merit behind it, as he was the original finisher and made that term trendy. However I think over the last 3-4 years, Dhoni has pipped him. Bevan's match winning innings are legendary, but there were aso some instances where his slow SR proved fatal for Australia as well.

Care to provide any examples? From my memory, I can't remember a single game where Bevan scored too slowly and cost Australia a match.

 

[Senile Sentry]

Care to provide any examples? From my memory, I can't remember a single game where Bevan scored too slowly and cost Australia a match.

I don't really want to look like a guy looking to nitpick, as I really admire Bevan, but since you asked, here you go:

5th Match: Australia v England at Sydney, Jan 17, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Came in at 152/4 in the 30th over, plodded along and made 45 from 59 balls without a single boundary, yet stayed not out. From the accompanying Wisden article :

Australia were accused of mismanagement after finishing eight short with four wickets in hand. Commentators asked why they hadn't burnt more wickets in pursuit of victory, while Bevan, normally one-day cricket's pin-up, was under fire for not scoring a single four in 45 not out.......But Gough was thrifty, conceding 16 in his final four overs, and Australia, needing 15 off the last, could not hit Giles to the boundary.

A lesser instance would be this match

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

Again when faced with a asking rate of over 6, couldn't get the momentum going and stayed not out at the end with a SR below what was required.

 

[Senile Sentry]

Just listing some more instances :

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

Chasing a target of 207 in 49 overs vs SA, Australia was crippled by Bevan's slow innings of 33 from 80 balls, and ended up just 8 short when the overs dried up.

1st Match: India v Australia at Kochi, Apr 1, 1998 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

At Kochi in 1998, when Australia were in a dominating position chasing 310, were 2/106 in 12 overs, and 204/4 in 31 overs, Bevan plodded along at his SR, the momentum was lost and Tendulkar tore through the lower order to win India the game.

 

[smash84]

Just listing some more instances :

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

Chasing a target of 207 in 49 overs vs SA, Australia was crippled by Bevan's slow innings of 33 from 80 balls, and ended up just 8 short when the overs dried up.

.

Bevan had a lower SR no doubt. His innings was built on 1s and 2s mainly.

Didn't watch the above match butLance Klusener and Neil McKenzie played pretty slowly too in that match?

 

[Dan]

Andrew Hall wicketkeeping? What the hell?

Bevan wasn't finishing in that SA game anyway - I have no idea why Australia got him to bat at 4.

In the England match, Lehmann was striking at 87, and had a big partnership with Bevan. Whilst he should have got Australia over the line, I'd hardly say his overall innings strike rate was a problem - especially given Blewett was rattling along nicely as well.

In the 2004 India match, I would hardly describe a SR of 95 being 'too low' for a nudger/nurdler batsman in a team with a big-hitting top order. Would sooner have a crack at lee for conceding 83 in his 10 overs, not Bevan's strike rate.

1998 India match, I think the rest of the team let Bev down a little bit - for once he had too much to do.

Even so, you've given 2-3 matches in 232 from which Bevan's strike rate may have been an issue. I'm sure Dhoni has a similar proportion as well (that one in the 2011/12 CB series where he struck at 40-ish, or whatever). The amount of times either of them 'screw up' in terms of SR is rather negligible IMO.

 

[smash84]

yeah......and it would be difficult to blame Bevan in the 95 SR match

 

[Migara]

What Dhoni is fantastic at is playing a large number of roles. Can come in at 3 and basically kill the opposition (remember his first 2 sensational centuries). Can come in slog overs to set a big target or chase down 8-9 rpo. And can also build an innings from tatters. In terms of big hitting, he definitely scores over Bevan (that exhibition match aside)

The reason I've voted for Bevan is that he did it for little longer than Dhoni has done so far, and Bevan had hardly any holes. Dhoni did well in last tours of England and Australia, but hasn't done as much in SA. It's pretty close though.

Wasn't flashy on SL soil IIRC. Was not comfortable at all against spinners on SL pitches.

 

[ankitj]

Interesting to see their records in detail...

Michael Bevan
MS Dhoni

Dhoni has weak record in SA, Bevan in SL. Everywhere else they both have really, really great records.

 

[Dan]

Bevan's strike rate in Australia is higher than Dhoni's.
ITSTL.

 

[Top_Cat]

Bev but it's close.

 

[Trichromatic]

Bevan's strike rate in Australia is higher than Dhoni's.
ITSTL.

Not surprising really. Someone mentioned that he has looked sluggish in Australia.

1st Match: Australia v India at Brisbane, Feb 3, 2008 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

37 from 61 after India was reduced to 94-5.

4th Match: Australia v India at Melbourne, Feb 10, 2008 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

17 from 54 to win a low scoring game.

10th Match: Australia v India at Sydney, Feb 24, 2008 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

36 from 66 after being 4 down in a high scoring game.

He has shown ability to hold one end in case of failure of top order (not as good as Bevan probably) and ability to score quickly also.

 

[Ikki]

Bevan, and I don't think it's as close as some others do. Mainly because I see them both as finishers and for me the pinnacle of ODIs is the World Cup. Dhoni had a great finals knock but was carried there the rest of the tournament. Bevan had several WC knocks alone, against superlative attacks, where he carried Australia. Made the heart weak to watch such nail biting finishes but makes you appreciate the kind of cement-block-crushing-pressure Bevan could withstand. Bevan made Disney-movie like finishes to games where if you hadn't seen it yourself you'd think it was a made up story for kids.

 

[Ikki]

That's not quite true. When Bevan had no choice he could reach the boundary with monotonous regularity. His 185 runs (chasing 320) against an 'Asia XI' featuring Kumble and a young Razzaq has to be seen to be believed;

Michael Bevan 185* vs ASIA XI - 2000 Dhaka - YouTube

Incidently, Andrew Caddick should be prosicuted by the police and sent to gaol IMO.

(Thanks 'Ikki' for the video!)

Not just Razzaq and Kumble...but Vaas, Wasim and Murali. It is an unbelievable innings and he almost pulled off the ****ing impossible.
Asia XI v Rest of the World XI at Dhaka, Apr 8, 2000 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Shri]

Bevan's only role was to bat and very rarely bowl. Dhoni captains the side, keeps wickets 99% of the time and then bats as well and is infinitely more important to any team he plays for than Bevan ever was. And as for the WC performances, you just need to perform when you are required to and he did that. And that becomes a fault now. Sound logic.

I like Bevan but the numbers do not lie. Dhoni averages marginally less at a much better strike rate and keeps wickets and captains his team to boot. His hair has gone white at 32 ffs!

 

[Prince EWS]

Bevan's only role was to bat and very rarely bowl. Dhoni captains the side, keeps wickets 99% of the time and then bats as well and is infinitely more important to any team he plays for than Bevan ever was.

I think the thread implied we were just supposed to compare ODI batting. It doesn't even specific ODIs though so I considered being a smartarse and voting for Bevan based on his outstanding Sheffield Shield record in the golden era for the competition.

 

[Mike5181]

What were the opposition bowling attacks like during their careers? 94-04 had some pretty awesome bowlers.

 

[Shri]

I think the thread implied we were just supposed to compare ODI batting. It doesn't even specific ODIs though so I considered being a smartarse and voting for Bevan based on his outstanding Sheffield Shield record in the golden era for the competition.

Well Dhoni's test record > Bevan's. So...