Dhoni vs Bevan

[Muloghonto]

i disagree. dhoni is much better at rotating strike and a very strong runner between the wickets. he is a great judge of a run and can score at over run a ball without hitting a single boundary. that's what makes him an effective ODI batsman, and not the big hitting (which is what he does LATER in his innings). bevan couldn't do a single thing better than dhoni. oh, except maybe bowl chinaman. i'll give him that.

I don't think there has *ever* been a better runner between the wickets than Bevan. Yes, i am serious. I seriously don't think you remember how freakishly good bevan was, pinching singles at will against even the overwhelmingly dominant RSA fieldign of the 90s.We think Dhoni is top notch, Hussey is top notch at running between wickets and no doubt, they would easily make the top 10 list of the best runners between wickets. However, Bevan was simply, day in & day out the best runner of them all, a cut above the rest, akin to how Jonty & ABDV are a cut above the rest in fielding, day in and day out. Bevan was also, IMO, better at taking singles at will and IMO, he is the best man for taking six straight singles in six balls against any bowler in a tight chase. However, where Bevan glaringly fell short, was power-hitting, which Dhoni does better than almost anyone in the history of the game (I say almost, because Sehwag, Sachin, Viv, Ponting, Yuvraj, Razzaq, Jayasurya, etc. are in the same bracket).

[CG]

Bevan Innings against some of the best attacks in wc 2003.where he single handedly won some lost causes is one which is hard to replicate.

[saneindian]

If you need 90-100 off last 10-12 overs, Dhoni will be your man. If you are chasing 230-240 and are 100 for 5, Bevan will be your man. In the 1st innings, for setting a total, Dhoni IMO is ahead primarily due to his power hitting ability. Overall , Dhoni has a slight edge over Bevan IMO.

[kevinpp24]

I maybe wrong but the bowlers of Dhoni's era were crappier than before and the trend of 300+ scores started after Bevan's era. Bevan averaged 55 out of 250+ scores whereas Dhoni averaged 52 out of 30+ scores. So basically Bevan scores 22% of the teams runs whereas Dhoni scores 17% of the teams runs. We don't even have bowlers with potential to be a legend. Even Steyn, the only legend in the making, wasn't that great in ODIs. Adding power plays and field restrictions, Dhoni had his fair share of advantages. At the same I don't think Bevan would've scored quickly with power plays. Even other finishers like Klusner has 19 MoM awards in 171 matches, Symonds 21 in 198 matches. But Dhoni has 18 in 216 matches whereas Bevan has an ordinary 12 in 230 matches. Even Yuvraj has 25 in 279 matches, a little better than Dhoni. I guess these stats suggest there are far better match winners than Dhoni against far better bowlers in almost similar batting positions. Dhoni's runs are valued only when others like Sehwag, Gambir, Yuvraj, Raina contributed. When these guys falls Dhoni usually stays there and score his useless runs.

[CG]

I maybe wrong but the bowlers of Dhoni's era were crappier than before and the trend of 300+ scores started after Bevan's era. Bevan averaged 55 out of 250+ scores whereas Dhoni averaged 52 out of 30+ scores. So basically Bevan scores 22% of the teams runs whereas Dhoni scores 17% of the teams runs. We don't even have bowlers with potential to be a legend. Even Steyn, the only legend in the making, wasn't that great in ODIs. Adding power plays and field restrictions, Dhoni had his fair share of advantages. At the same I don't think Bevan would've scored quickly with power plays. Even other finishers like Klusner has 19 MoM awards in 171 matches, Symonds 21 in 198 matches. But Dhoni has 18 in 216 matches whereas Bevan has an ordinary 12 in 230 matches. Even Yuvraj has 25 in 279 matches, a little better than Dhoni. I guess these stats suggest there are far better match winners than Dhoni against far better bowlers in almost similar batting positions. Dhoni's runs are valued only when others like Sehwag, Gambir, Yuvraj, Raina contributed. When these guys falls Dhoni usually stays there and score his useless runs.

No you are right on that count.

[Number]

Klusenar was an AR, had 6 5fers and because of that he won 6 Motms. A lot of his motms are due to 3-4 wickets he took. Symonds was a middle order bat and a batting all rounder. He scored big centuries while batting first and has some motms for his bowling performances too. Also just like Dhoni has support of Raina, Yuvraj. Bevan had a the best top order of his time, was supported a lot by Aussie tail who were more than decent bats. Also a lot of times whatever he took his team to was defended by McGrath, Lee etc. I rate Dhoni as Bevan of 2nd innings, Symonds of first innings.

[NareshK]

Bevan is not even comparable to Dhoni when it comes to power hitting. Bevan is mostly an accumulator and capable of knocking a few boundaries over at the end with a cool mind under pressure. He cant score 10-12 runs an over like Dhoni or hit sixes and boundaries at will at the death.

[kevinpp24]

Bevan is not even comparable to Dhoni when it comes to power hitting. Bevan is mostly an accumulator and capable of knocking a few boundaries over at the end with a cool mind under pressure. He cant score 10-12 runs an over like Dhoni or hit sixes and boundaries at will at the death.

But Dhoni hardly faced quality bowlers rather never faced quality bowlers. There's hardly any death over specialists in world cricket in this era. Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Gough, Vaas, Donald, Pollock, McGrath, Lee, Bond were the lethal death bowlers in the previous era but more over finished when Dhoni established himself. I'm not blaming Dhoni here but you can't just leave out the fact that bowlers nowadays are nothing compared to these above mentioned guys. ICC is doing everything to make ODIs a batsman's game. When bowlers started to use the 34 over old ball in a better way, ICC came out with a new ball from either end, invented power plays. I'm pretty sure Bevan would've converted those 1s and 2s into 4s if the field restrictions were available those days.

[CG]

But Dhoni hardly faced quality bowlers rather never faced quality bowlers. There's hardly any death over specialists in world cricket in this era. Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Gough, Vaas, Donald, Pollock, McGrath, Lee, Bond were the lethal death bowlers in the previous era but more over finished when Dhoni established himself. I'm not blaming Dhoni here but you can't just leave out the fact that bowlers nowadays are nothing compared to these above mentioned guys. ICC is doing everything to make ODIs a batsman's game. When bowlers started to use the 34 over old ball in a better way, ICC came out with a new ball from either end, invented power plays. I'm pretty sure Bevan would've converted those 1s and 2s into 4s if the field restrictions were available those days.

Regarding death bowling dhoni did face malinga and gul who are very good.But on a whole the bowling attacks are bare in odis.You can attribute that to rule changes like 2 powerplays,flat pitches,shorter boundaries, and most important of all 2 new balls which killed reverse swing.

[Number]

2 new balls rule is still quite new and Dhoni had done well before it came.

[SLICKR392]

TBH..he might have not faced any good bowlers but as CG said..Malinga is as good as a death bowler as the so called great bowlers were. There is no point who he faced, I'm pretty sure he would have hammered anyone in the deaths. This guy goes mentally retarded in the deaths.

[CG]

2 new balls rule is still quite new and Dhoni had done well before it came.

I was talking about the earlier one where the ball was changed after 35th over.

[saneindian]

But Dhoni hardly faced quality bowlers rather never faced quality bowlers. There's hardly any death over specialists in world cricket in this era. Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Gough, Vaas, Donald, Pollock, McGrath, Lee, Bond were the lethal death bowlers in the previous era but more over finished when Dhoni established himself. I'm not blaming Dhoni here but you can't just leave out the fact that bowlers nowadays are nothing compared to these above mentioned guys. ICC is doing everything to make ODIs a batsman's game. When bowlers started to use the 34 over old ball in a better way, ICC came out with a new ball from either end, invented power plays. I'm pretty sure Bevan would've converted those 1s and 2s into 4s if the field restrictions were available those days.

Please also add Bevan would have averaged 75+ in the current era!

[Number]

I was talking about the earlier one where the ball was changed after 35th over.

Wasn't an unused ball, iirc it used to be a cleaned ball with better visibility almost same wear and tear. not sure how much it would have affected reverse swing. Anyway reverse swing argument puts the debate in MSD's favour, as usually in Aus/SA/Eng(where Bevan played most of his games) it doesn't reverse much, SC bowlers use it more than others in SC conditions where Dhoni has great record.

[CG]

Wasn't an unused ball, iirc it used to be a cleaned ball with better visibility almost same wear and tear. not sure how much it would have affected reverse swing. Anyway reverse swing argument puts the debate in MSD's favour, as usually in Aus/SA/Eng(where Bevan played most of his games) it doesn't reverse much, SC bowlers use it more than others in SC conditions where Dhoni has great record.

For reverse swing to happen you have to work on the ball and get one side roughed up and keep shine on another.You cannot replicate that with a old used ball.It did affect but still bowlers got some late movement now it is extremly hard.

[kevinpp24]

TBH..he might have not faced any good bowlers but as CG said..Malinga is as good as a death bowler as the so called great bowlers were. There is no point who he faced, I'm pretty sure he would have hammered anyone in the deaths. This guy goes mentally retarded in the deaths.

I don't know how you can compare Malinga with the legends. Malinga is a minnow bully, he got his recognition after bullying some domestic batsmen around the globe in T20 leagues. You can easily count his best performances in ODIs. TBH Gul is better than Malinga at death in ODIs but way too inconsistent, both of them. Interestingly both Dhoni and Bevan has the most ugliest techniques and style among their team mates but still managed to out do everyone. Maybe the lesser talented guys understands their limitations and focuses more than the others.

[The Outsider]

Klusenar was an AR, had 6 5fers and because of that he won 6 Motms. A lot of his motms are due to 3-4 wickets he took. Symonds was a middle order bat and a batting all rounder. He scored big centuries while batting first and has some motms for his bowling performances too.

Dhoni has won Man of Match awards for kaanphidence boost. :winky:

[kevinpp24]

Please also add Bevan would have averaged 75+ in the current era!

May have, but most of them would've been in lost cost if happened.

[Sidhoni]

May have' date=' but most of them would've been in lost cost if happened.[/quote'] He was being sarcastic

[saneindian]

Dhoni has won Man of Match awards for kaanphidence boost. :winky:

Dhoni scored 36 in that match. Bevan once got a MoM for scoring 45*..a lot of similarities with that 3rd ODI, a spinner took 4/27, two guys scored 50s , Hogg scored 14* and took 2/32...:--D http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65637.html