The Best Finisher ever?

[King Pietersen]

Rightt, need some help people. I'm in the process of writing an article about this exact subject. I've narrowed down the batsmen to Bevan, Klusener, Inzamam, Lara, Pietersen and Kallis. But, the problem I'm finding is what stats to use when actually making the comparison. I thought I'd finished the article, but the only stats I've got are runs/average in wins when chasing, Strike rates when chasing, and their win percentage in this situations. I'm looking for some other categories to search for and find stats for, so do you have any ideas?

Thanks in advance.

 

[shravi]

Well, for one you could compare their averages when chasing to their teammates to show how he stands out.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Precentage of runs in boundaries/singles. Matches won in the second innings when they are not out. Average partnership with batsmen from positions 7-11. Runs scored/average/strike rate when batting with the tail in the second innings. Matches won in the last 10 overs. Average successful runchase (average number of runs scored when they come into to bat till when they get out in a win). Average score in the second innings.

 

[King Pietersen]

OK, cheers for the tips guys, if you see one of your ideas in the article you'll get credited (y). I hope you look forward to reading

 

[tassietiger]

Out of Bevan's 232 ODI's innings,Australia have won 155 matches where Bevan has scored 65 percent of his career runs with an average of 66.
Bevan has scored 6 centuries and on 5 occasions Australia won.Also out of his 46 half centuries 32 times Australia have won the match.
So thats easily prove him one of the best match winner player plus He has scored all his centuries and half centuries after 4th down and that makes him good finisher.
Regarding to his not outs,53 times he remained not out when Australia won but at a same time his 25 not outs were in 2nd innings.So laterally He has finished those 25 matches and remained not out.

You can still argue that He was not a Best finisher ever what thread is all about but ''He was just overrated'' is unacceptable.

Australia has been a good team for a long time. I'd like to see how many games Australia lost when one of their players made a century in the game. With McGrath, Warne and another host of talented bowlers, a big score was always easily defended, and Bevan getting a century or a half-century usually meant Australia would have a high score. (not rocket science, appliles for most players)

28 of his not outs, according to your stats, were in the first innings. The key thing in those innings were the strike rates. Sometimes the team needed him to pile on as many runs as he could in the last 10-15 overs and instead he would play a classic Michael Bevan 30 runs not out off 50 balls, to give us a score of about 270 rather than a possible 300+ score.

 

[Gunner786]

Australia has been a good team for a long time. I'd like to see how many games Australia lost when one of their players made a century in the game. With McGrath, Warne and another host of talented bowlers, a big score was always easily defended, and Bevan getting a century or a half-century usually meant Australia would have a high score. (not rocket science, appliles for most players)

28 of his not outs, according to your stats, were in the first innings. The key thing in those innings were the strike rates. Sometimes the team needed him to pile on as many runs as he could in the last 10-15 overs and instead he would play a classic Michael Bevan 30 runs not out off 50 balls, to give us a score of about 270 rather than a possible 300+ score.

this happens quite alot,
stats dont tell the full story unless you witness most of his career or actually do proper research on a players career

 

[aussie1st]

Australia has been a good team for a long time. I'd like to see how many games Australia lost when one of their players made a century in the game. With McGrath, Warne and another host of talented bowlers, a big score was always easily defended, and Bevan getting a century or a half-century usually meant Australia would have a high score. (not rocket science, appliles for most players)

28 of his not outs, according to your stats, were in the first innings. The key thing in those innings were the strike rates. Sometimes the team needed him to pile on as many runs as he could in the last 10-15 overs and instead he would play a classic Michael Bevan 30 runs not out off 50 balls, to give us a score of about 270 rather than a possible 300+ score.

The only time he actually scored 30 off 50 balls would be when the team needed him to stay in there. He may not have been the guy that lifted the strike rate to well above 100 but that never was his game and the guys around him were the hitters anyway. In the last 10-15 overs he was a guy that took the quick singles and kept his strike rate up around 100 allowing the other guy to do the hitting. If there was no batter at the other end then all the more reason for him to throw his wicket away stupidity and see our total go from 270 to 240.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

28 of his not outs, according to your stats, were in the first innings. The key thing in those innings were the strike rates. Sometimes the team needed him to pile on as many runs as he could in the last 10-15 overs and instead he would play a classic Michael Bevan 30 runs not out off 50 balls, to give us a score of about 270 rather than a possible 300+ score.

Well then I have his strike rate for you.

While batting first,Bevan has scored 1534 runs at an average of 109 with strike rate of 84 in the matches Australia have won.
Check this out.

While batting first,Bevan has scored 415 runs at an average of 140 with strike rate of 80 in the match Australia have lost.
Check this out.
All the stats are for batting positions for 4th-11th.

So the my point is that Bevan has always played at high averages and with an impressive strike rates in first innings.
Now there are only 6 innings where He scored more than 50runs while batting first and Australia have lost.
So It never has been the case where He had long stay on the pitch with poor strike rate and team lost.

There might be some matches where He scored 30 odds runs with poor strike rate but then again He used to come lower down the order when Spinners approaching with wide spread fielding.

Still Stat doesn't prove anything clear and I am saying these because they are tricky as always.
Look out the six matches where He scored 50+ and Australia have lost.

Check out the first match and you can see that Ponting has scored 123 runs in 138 balls with a strike rate of 89 in that match,so it is understandable that Batting would have been tough there.

Well still Practically you can't prove with stats that He has been the best finisher ever,but him being over rated again is not acceptable.

vaibhav mehta added 15 Minutes and 58 Seconds later...

Australia has been a good team for a long time. I'd like to see how many games Australia lost when one of their players made a century in the game. With McGrath, Warne and another host of talented bowlers, a big score was always easily defended, and Bevan getting a century or a half-century usually meant Australia would have a high score. (not rocket science, appliles for most players)

There are 16 matches where Australia lost despite one of their player made a century in the game with either of Mcgrath or Warne playing.
Actually Ponting has scored 4 of them in the matches where Australia lost.

S Waugh has scored 17 half centuries with strike rate of 82 in the matches Australia lost while batting first including 3 not outs where Bevan has scored 12 with a strike rate of 78 including 4 not outs!!
But again that proves nothing.

 

[tassietiger]

Australia have never lost a match where Gillespie has scored a double century. These stats don't mean a great deal. I just remember growing up, watching Australia hoping we could crack that magical 300 every time we had a good start (300 used to be the magical figure, those were the days) and Bevan would be batting while we still had 5-6 wickets in hand, just making sure he was there at the end. He wasn't the sort of guy who could smash boundaries, he was quite good at knocking it around for a single or a two when it was there, but he got bogged down too easily in my opinion. If there are only 5-10 overs left in a match, and you have plenty of wickets in hand, you may as well hit out or get out, and Bevan seemed to choose to just stay in.

The problem with just showing his overall strike rate is that it doesn't show what we needed at the time. At the end of an innings you quite often want big overs of 10+ runs, but Bevan tended to just aim at 6 an over. He wasn't the one day international god that he is made out to be.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

The problem with just showing his overall strike rate is that it doesn't show what we needed at the time. At the end of an innings you quite often want big overs of 10+ runs, but Bevan tended to just aim at 6 an over. He wasn't the one day international god that he is made out to be.

Well you can't explain that in the form of Stats then.Anyway I think it is entirely your personal opinion and I am not against it but still the difference between Gillespie's 200 and Bevan's knocks is consistency.
Bevan has maintained high average of 55+ throughout his career and that is something not easy to do.
At last staying not out is also a tough job.

 

[aussie1st]

The problem with just showing his overall strike rate is that it doesn't show what we needed at the time. At the end of an innings you quite often want big overs of 10+ runs, but Bevan tended to just aim at 6 an over. He wasn't the one day international god that he is made out to be.

He certainly wasn't the best setter upper of a game (i.e batting first inns), there are a lot better but when it comes to finishing a match there is none better. Also if you look at some of our efforts in the ODI recently you will see we have collapsed because we had 6 wickets left but the batter went for it and the next guy coming in was unable to follow instead also falling setting the downward spiral. You need that anchor to ensure you see out the overs, there is no bigger crime in ODI cricket than not finishing your overs. You have to remember 4 of those 6 wickets are bowlers that will struggle to even get singles.

Lastly why wasn't the guy at the other end trying to go for it if we have 5-6 wickets left? If it's because he got out trying to slog it then all the more reason for Bevan not to throw his wicket away to bring two new batsmen in.

 

[stereotype]

How can Bevan be questioned. He saved Australia from defeat so many times i lost count, he wasnt an aggressive batsman but he was a specialist finisher, often played at his best when a score was needed to be posted in reply, he didnt suit setting totals but that isnt "finishing"

I have to say when Andrew Symonds is on song he is a great finisher, also Adam Gilchrist in tests was a master

 

[tassietiger]

How can Bevan be questioned. He saved Australia from defeat so many times i lost count, he wasnt an aggressive batsman but he was a specialist finisher, often played at his best when a score was needed to be posted in reply, he didnt suit setting totals but that isnt "finishing"

I have to say when Andrew Symonds is on song he is a great finisher, also Adam Gilchrist in tests was a master

Name more than 5 games Bevan saved from defeat. I'd be surprised if you can. Two of them are easy, from then on you'll struggle.

 

[encounter88]

well as u said modern day cricket so it gotta be

Yuvi aka Yuvraj Singh and Dhoni aka Mahendra Singh Dhoni

 

[stereotype]

Name more than 5 games Bevan saved from defeat. I'd be surprised if you can. Two of them are easy, from then on you'll struggle.

Lets see 1996 v West Indies at SCG scoring 78 not out is the standout Australia 6-38 at one stage with A ball to spare
2002 v New Zealand at MCG Australia 6-82 at one stage scored 107not out with balls to spare
2001 v India in Nehru Top scored in Australia's chase with 87 not out with a little over an over to spare
1997 v Pakistan at MCG Top scored in reply with 79 not out (next highest scorer was Stuart Law with 28) with balls to spare
2003 v England in the World Cup scored 74 not out and guided his team to victory with 2 balls to spare.

This is just 5, there are more and there are others where he got out but his innings won Australia the game, and others where he fought valiantly when he team was on the ropes and couldnt quite pull it off.

stereotype added 5 Minutes and 50 Seconds later...

Also if you would like one when Australia were setting a total, Bevan top scored with 72 off 65 balls v Sri Lanka at the WACA in 1999 as Australia made 274/7, he also had the best strike rate of all the Australian batsman including guys like Gilchrist and Mark Waugh.