Bevan sacked?

[GOALden Hawk]

Can anyone confirm this? :p

[GeeCat]

I can't find anything on the BaggyGreen site.

[corporal]

Where did you hear that? Why?

[Port01]

abc.net.au has the story

bevan, bichel, bracken, hauritz and noffke lose contracts.

[Tinker]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO



I love Andy Bichel, he is so unappreciated!!!!! This cant be happening!!!!

[Mickey]

Nothing on baggygreen but if its true, I agree on Bevan, Bracken and Hauritz but disagree on Bichs and Noffke. MacGill should have his contract torn up as well - he is absolute crapola!! Anyway, not having a CA contract doesn't mean you cant play for Australia, I think Kaspa didn't have one and he still did.

[Russian]

In: Elliot, Hodge, Tait, HusseyM, Kasprowicz, Katich

[bluechampion]

If true, that's very encouraging for Hodge and Elliott. They mightn't actually play at international level, but they still get paid!

Odd that the ins are mostly batsmen, and the outs are mostly bowlers.

[GOALden Hawk]

Still, doesn't mean anything - players have been picked without contracts plenty of times.

Good decisions all round by the ACB I reckon.

[Bombers_Forever]

Agree with all the "ins".

Bevan out? Big call but I kind of agree with it. Bracken- I agree. Noffke and Hauritz....I love them but no surprises there. Bichel...........NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! This guy is a champion who deserves better.

It may only be money but it is a big deal for all players.

[Insider]

How can Bevan not be offered a contract but Ian Harvey stills gets one ???????????

[The Spornstar]

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
Still, doesn't mean anything - players have been picked without contracts plenty of times.


True, especially for a guy like Noffke who can fight his way back into the side. But for a guy like Bevan? Most likely career over.

[DaveW]

Does this mean Lehmann will take Bevan's spot in the one-day side?

[Zeke]

Originally posted by Insider
How can Bevan not be offered a contract but Ian Harvey stills gets one ???????????

Especially now considering Harvey will become obsolete with the return of Watson.

[The Spornstar]

Originally posted by Zeke
Especially now considering Harvey will become obsolete with the return of Watson.

Watson needs to be able to prove that he's up to bowling consistently before he's recalled. When that happens, and I'm sure it will, he will take Harvey's spot. But not yet.

[Russian]

Originally posted by The Spornstar
Watson needs to be able to prove that he's up to bowling consistently before he's recalled. Is he playing anywhere over the winter to do that?

[GrahamH]

Bichel is extremely unlucky, considering McRubbish is still there. Agree with the rest though.

[Russian]

Originally posted by bluechampion
Odd that the ins are mostly batsmen, and the outs are mostly bowlers.Add Waugh to the outs list and effectively Warne to the ins list

[The invisible mullet]

Originally posted by Russian
Is he playing anywhere over the winter to do that?

I think Watson is a fill in player for one of the county sides when they don't have their overseas player available.

[The invisible mullet]

Marcus North must have been pretty close. Good decisions on Bichel and Bevan: the former is unlikely to play at an international level again and there will be fewer opportunities for the latter. Bracken, Hauritz and Noffke all deservedly go out as a result of poor form and have the time to return if they're up to it.

[CatManDo]

Interesting point about Harvey retaining his contract, but Bevan being dumped. Both specialist one day players - its a strange decision.

[CatManDo]

Hogg has retained his contract.

How did that happen?

[Russian]

Originally posted by CatManDo
Hogg has retained his contract.

How did that happen? Because he's our only one day spinner and we have a tour of India later this year? He saved himself in Sri Lanka. Having said that, he's lucky

[corporal]

Originally posted by CatManDo
Interesting point about Harvey retaining his contract, but Bevan being dumped. Both specialist one day players - its a strange decision.

Bevan = No6 Bastmen
Harvey= No8 Bowler

Completely different players

[Bombers_Forever]

Hohns basically said that Bevan is unlikely to play for Australia again. He can blame his own poor form this summer in the one dayers.

Well done ACB........:D

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by corporal
Bevan = No6 Bastmen
Harvey= No8 Bowler

Completely different players

:confused:

[corporal]

Originally posted by CatManDo
:confused:

:confused:

[Russian]

Jimmy Maher - lucky to keep his spot?

[Fall Out Boy]

Bevan's manager says he is "considering his future".

Perhaps a permanent move to England is on the cards.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CatManDo
:confused: You clearly don't know your cricket.

[bunsen burner]

I'm happy with all decisions. I'm not that keen on Hogg staying, but he's better than Hauritz.

Re Bevan:

One day cricket is about world cups - people only remember who wins the world cups. No one cares about what happens in between - they are like friendlies.

Bevan clearly won't be around come next world cup. Lehmann, Martyn, McGrath, Hayden, and Harvey are also doubtful. We also can't sack all these players one year out from the world cup and bring in a new bunch at once either. There has to be a transition stage. Some of these mentioned players will be given the boot over the next 3 years so new members can join a strong team at staggered timepoints.

[bunsen burner]

Also not keen on Jimmy Maher. If Elliot is in, then Maher becomes redundant. Maybe he's a good ODI back up keeper, but I still wouldn't give him a contract.

[Russian]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Maybe he's a good ODI back up keeper, but I still wouldn't give him a contract. I thought Hussey would've moved into that position.

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by Russian
Because he's our only one day spinner and we have a tour of India later this year? He saved himself in Sri Lanka. Having said that, he's lucky

Fair enough... he is still a part time team member though. Lucky, but I guess right place right time for Hoggy.

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
You clearly don't know your cricket.

Hmmm... ok, yes clearly.

No really, if you say so.

Maybe you can teach me, oh wise one?

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by corporal
Bevan = No6 Bastmen
Harvey= No8 Bowler

Completely different players

OK I'll actually type it out - I dont understand what you're getting at. All I said is that they are both specialist one day players... of course they do different things on the field, but I dont get the relevance.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CatManDo
Hmmm... ok, yes clearly.

No really, if you say so.

Maybe you can teach me, oh wise one? So how do you explain your comments about Bevan and harvey being similar players? And then being confused when someone pointed out that they were quite different?

I'll say it again - you clearly don't know what you're on about.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CatManDo
OK I'll actually type it out - I dont understand what you're getting at. yes, because you don't know much about cricket.


All I said is that they are both specialist one day players But you indicated that specialist ODI players had some sort of relevant and important link. Who cares if they are specialists? Whether they are specialists or not has absolutely no bearing on their selection credentials.

... of course they do different things on the field, but I dont get the relevance. So tell us what the relevance of being a specialist player is?

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
So how do you explain your comments about Bevan and harvey being similar players? And then being confused when someone pointed out that they were quite different?

I'll say it again - you clearly don't know what you're on about.

How do I explain it? I cant - because I didnt ever say they are similar players. D1ckhead.

Any half wit can figure out that one of them bowls and one of them bats - but quite clearly, some of the population has trouble reading posts properly and figuring out a point when it is being made. Im talking about you, in case the point is lost on you again.

I dont know whats got you so bloody agitated about my post.


Originally posted by bunsen burner
yes, because you don't know much about cricket.

Yep, clearly I dont know what a batsman is and what a bowler is. Idiot. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by bunsen burner But you indicated that specialist ODI players had some sort of relevant and important link. Who cares if they are specialists? Whether they are specialists or not has absolutely no bearing on their selection credentials.

So tell us what the relevance of being a specialist player is?

That the ACB would decide to give one of them a contract, and dump another. Its just a point of discussion buddy, dont know why its offended you so. Having a bad day?

[DaveW]

I'm not really surprised by this decision.

Lately Bevan was getting shunted down to number seven with the emergence of Clarke and Symonds.

Bevan looked the worst of the seven batsmen, he's getting on, and really has nothing else to add to the side now that he rarely bowls and his fielding is dire.

I think there's every chance of Lehmann returning to the one-day side. His batting has always been ideally suited to one-day cricket and he can be a tidy bowler. Working against him is bunsen's point about looking to build a team for 2007.

The selectors could do anything with the number seven spot now. Will they continue with seven batsmen? Or will they go back to having an all-rounder there? I reckon there's a good chance of Watson going to number seven and Harvey keeping his spot at eight.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CatManDo

That the ACB would decide to give one of them a contract, and dump another. Its just a point of discussion buddy, dont know why its offended you so. Having a bad day? Who's the one having a bad day? You claimed that it was strange that one specialists being dumped and not another was strange (because they are similar). Since there actually isn't anything strange about this it was fair enought that someone assumed what they did. Then you posted a confused face. Seems to me you are the one who had a bad day.

[Bombers_Forever]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Also not keen on Jimmy Maher. If Elliot is in, then Maher becomes redundant. Maybe he's a good ODI back up keeper, but I still wouldn't give him a contract.

Maher would be the back up opener in the one dayers, can bat lower down and can keep as well. He did score the highest ING individual knock only a few months ago. He is one of the best batsmen going around.

Elliot would be the back up for the Test side- if Langer is dropped (or there is an injury), he would be the first picked.

Both deserve contracts.

[corporal]

Originally posted by CatManDo
OK I'll actually type it out - I dont understand what you're getting at. All I said is that they are both specialist one day players... of course they do different things on the field, but I dont get the relevance.

I don't see the relavance as to why they should both be dropped because they are one day specialist players?

Bevan is a 34 yo batsmen who hasn't been performing that well recently, and there is a huge pool of batting talent in this country at the moment.

Harvey is a 31 yo bowler, who's form has been ok when compared against his fellow bowlers, and there really isn't that many quality one day bowlers going around.

So it is not really suprising Bevan has been dropped and not Harvey. Even if they are both "one day specialists"

[Dogwatcher]

Why include Elliot in the list?
He is very unlikely to play international cricket again - from what I understand is not a great bloke in the changerooms. He's been tried and judged not up to it (if he wasn't why was his last game so long ago?)
Elliot had a great season, but so did players like Marcus North. Surely the contracts could be better used to give younger batsmen incentive to keep trying to improve their game?

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher
Why include Elliot in the list?
He is very unlikely to play international cricket again - from what I understand is not a great bloke in the changerooms. He's been tried and judged not up to it (if he wasn't why was his last game so long ago?)
Elliot had a great season, but so did players like Marcus North. Surely the contracts could be better used to give younger batsmen incentive to keep trying to improve their game?
If Langer fails in Zimbabwe Elliott is a good chance. Also sends a message to any of those 28+ year olds that there is still plenty of time and not to give up. Keeps the standard high across the board. North will have his chance soon.

In saying that, I wouldn't have been upset if North got the nod in front of Elliott.

[corporal]

Originally posted by DaveW
I reckon there's a good chance of Watson going to number seven and Harvey keeping his spot at eight.

The success of the Vic side this season with having recognised batting down to 8 with 3-4 recognised batting (Moss, White) and also bowling (Harvey, McDonald) allrounders in the side may be the format that the Australian side sticks with.

It certainly makes sense in one day cricket, where part timers can play there part by trying to keep the run-rate down.

Who would people classify as Batting & Bowling allrounders (who play a part with both the bat and ball in most games) in the Australian side?,

for me

Batting

Symonds
Clarke
Lehmann (if Included)

Bowling

Harvey
Hogg
Bichel (although prob won't play again)

Watson really is the only true allrounder and we are yet to see if his bowling will come back to pre injury potency

[DIG]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher
Why include Elliot in the list?
He is very unlikely to play international cricket again - from what I understand is not a great bloke in the changerooms. He's been tried and judged not up to it (if he wasn't why was his last game so long ago?)
Elliot had a great season, but so did players like Marcus North. Surely the contracts could be better used to give younger batsmen incentive to keep trying to improve their game?

Elliot fully deserved his contract. Never mind that he hasn't played for Australia for so long, his awesome summer where he was a class above everyone else (including North) showed that he's one of the batsmen in the country at the moment. As much as the future is important, you can't always pick youth over pure class, and if our openers get injured or Langer can't hold his spot - right now Elliot's the logical replacement.

" not a great bloke in the changerooms" - how do you know that??

"He's been tried and judged not up to it" - plenty of players have had more than one crack at test level - Hayden, Langer, Martyn, S. Waugh, Kasprowicz etc. Would you have preferred us to ditch the above players for good when they were first dropped?? How crap would we be now if we had a "one-chance policy" in place and had never seen Hayden (for instance) again?

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Who's the one having a bad day? You claimed that it was strange that one specialists being dumped and not another was strange (because they are similar). Since there actually isn't anything strange about this it was fair enought that someone assumed what they did. Then you posted a confused face. Seems to me you are the one who had a bad day.

Whatever you want to go on about mate. You keep saying I said they are similar players - for what reason I dont know. Go have a whinge somewhere else.

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by corporal
I don't see the relavance as to why they should both be dropped because they are one day specialist players?

Bevan is a 34 yo batsmen who hasn't been performing that well recently, and there is a huge pool of batting talent in this country at the moment.

Harvey is a 31 yo bowler, who's form has been ok when compared against his fellow bowlers, and there really isn't that many quality one day bowlers going around.

So it is not really suprising Bevan has been dropped and not Harvey. Even if they are both "one day specialists"

Its not surprising to me Bevan has been dropped from the squad, thats not what I said. Harvey shouldnt be dropped. However, they are both one day specialists the wrong side of 30... Harvey is actually 2 days shy of his 32nd birthday.

So if they have dropped Bevan because he might be too old come the next one day world cup, you could argue that the same criteria could be applied to Harvey - particularly as to this point he has never been as secure in the side as Bevan.

Harvey has payed well over the last year, but IMO he's not an out and out regular in the one day side. He's battling with a few others and Watson coming back adds more pressure, whereas to this point, Bevan has been an automatic selection.

It just surprised me, given Bevan's automatic selection last summer, that they would suddenly dump him. But I also think its a good move - a departure from what I expected. The selectors have seen past Bevan and thats good.

Im also surprised Hogg retained his spot, but I can see their reasoning.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CatManDo
Its not surprising to me Bevan has been dropped from the squad, thats not what I said. Harvey shouldnt be dropped. However, they are both one day specialists the wrong side of 30... Harvey is actually 2 days shy of his 32nd birthday.

If you just explained yourself instead of posting a confused smilie at the start there would be no need for you to dig this whopping great canyon.

[CatManDo]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
If you just explained yourself instead of posting a confused smilie at the start there would be no need for you to dig this whopping great canyon.

If, then, if, then...

If you hadnt started off with such a pathetic dig at me, then I might have explained myself to you.

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by corporal
The success of the Vic side this season with having recognised batting down to 8 with 3-4 recognised batting (Moss, White) and also bowling (Harvey, McDonald) allrounders in the side may be the format that the Australian side sticks with.

It certainly makes sense in one day cricket, where part timers can play there part by trying to keep the run-rate down.

Who would people classify as Batting & Bowling allrounders (who play a part with both the bat and ball in most games) in the Australian side?,

for me

Batting

Symonds
Clarke
Lehmann (if Included)

Bowling

Harvey
Hogg
Bichel (although prob won't play again)

Watson really is the only true allrounder and we are yet to see if his bowling will come back to pre injury potency

You forgot Katich?

[corporal]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
You forgot Katich?

Katich Potentially,

I'm waiting for Katich to makes some runs/take some wickets in internationals before I put him with this lot.
Also I think Katich's bowling is more suited to test match's where you can have fielders round the bat, also he serve's up his fair share of "4" balls and might be a bit expensive.

[corporal]

Originally posted by CatManDo

It just surprised me, given Bevan's automatic selection last summer, that they would suddenly dump him. But I also think its a good move - a departure from what I expected. The selectors have seen past Bevan and thats good.


We agree on something!

It appears that the Mark Waugh era where the Australian side would retain players on past records rather then current merit has come to an end.

I never liked Bevan (did anyone) dating back to a shefield shield game at Punt Road oval in Victoria when he tried to get me ejected from the game (just because of a bit of friendly banter about his test prospects from the sidelines)

Neverless he has resecued many games for Australia and will be remembered as a great player.

[The_Flying_Egg]

I think its bull**** that Bevo has been sacked. He deserves more after what he has done for Australia in the One Dayers. He at least deserves a contract and the chance to get back to the form that made him the best one day player in the world

I'd be dissapointed if they don't keep him in mind for the future, if he doesn't retire. In the Domestic One Dayers he'll murder them

[Dogwatcher]

Originally posted by DIG
Elliot fully deserved his contract. Never mind that he hasn't played for Australia for so long, his awesome summer where he was a class above everyone else (including North) showed that he's one of the batsmen in the country at the moment. As much as the future is important, you can't always pick youth over pure class, and if our openers get injured or Langer can't hold his spot - right now Elliot's the logical replacement.

Sure Elliot made plenty of runs in shield cricket. No arguement there - but so did plenty of others. Australian cricket is in a reasonably strong position and doesn't always have to use the expected option.

" not a great bloke in the changerooms" - how do you know that??

Verifiable fact. Been reported in teh press more than once. Particularly when discussion about his absence from test cricket has cropped up. I have also heard it in private through other media sources.

"He's been tried and judged not up to it" - plenty of players have had more than one crack at test level - Hayden, Langer, Martyn, S. Waugh, Kasprowicz etc. Would you have preferred us to ditch the above players for good when they were first dropped?? How crap would we be now if we had a "one-chance policy" in place and had never seen Hayden (for instance) again?

Yes, i agree. All of those blokes have had more than one opportunity - so has Elliot. Also none of those blokes had as long away from the side as Elliot has.
Asking for Elliot to be back in the side again would be like asking for Blewett to get another shot.

[corporal]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
I think its bull**** that Bevo has been sacked. He deserves more after what he has done for Australia in the One Dayers. He at least deserves a contract and the chance to get back to the form that made him the best one day player in the world

I'd be dissapointed if they don't keep him in mind for the future, if he doesn't retire. In the Domestic One Dayers he'll murder them

I think he's domestic one record is pretty average (the odd 75 ball 50) but I'm to slack to back it up with statisical data!

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
I think its bull**** that Bevo has been sacked. He deserves more after what he has done for Australia in the One Dayers. He at least deserves a contract and the chance to get back to the form that made him the best one day player in the world

I'd be dissapointed if they don't keep him in mind for the future, if he doesn't retire. In the Domestic One Dayers he'll murder them Why keep a guy around who is clearly on the wane and will be 37 when the next WC comes around?

[The_Flying_Egg]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
Why keep a guy around who is clearly on the wane and will be 37 when the next WC comes around?

McGrath and Warne won't be around there either. Bevo has hit a bad patch, but he at the very least deserves the chance to get back into form. Dropping him is one thing (I wouldn't do that), but not even offering him a contract is too far

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
McGrath and Warne won't be around there either. Bevo has hit a bad patch, but he at the very least deserves the chance to get back into form. Dropping him is one thing (I wouldn't do that), but not even offering him a contract is too far

1) Warne is a spinner and spinners can play up until they're 40. Will most likely be around for the next world cup.

2) McGrath is in an entirely different league than Bevan. He'll probably reitre from ODI's in a year or two to try and prolong his test career.

3) Plenty of players will go before the next world cup, but you can't drop them all now, or all later - they have to be staggered. Bevan is not only out of form, but the one who is most likely not to be playing in the next WC.

4) Why would you offer a player a contract if you had no intention of playing him? Seems you have that Western Bulldog "chip on your shoulder/underdog/loyalty/give everyone a fair go" mentality. Sorry, but you don't pick teams on loyalty.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
Bevo has hit a bad patch, but he at the very least deserves the chance to get back into form. He's 34. What do you think the chances are of his form getting much better? What do you think his chances of playing WC are?

Or do you think Michael Bevan is more important than the World Cup?

[The_Flying_Egg]

Originally posted by bunsen burner


4) Why would you offer a player a contract if you had no intention of playing him? Seems you have that Western Bulldog "chip on your shoulder/underdog/loyalty/give everyone a fair go" mentality. Sorry, but you don't pick teams on loyalty.

I don't want him picked on loyalty, I want him picked because what I believe he is still capable of. I don't think he's finished as a one day player just because he's in a bad patch.

He's still a very talented player as shown by what he does in Pura Cup matches. I know thats a different game but I think it shows hes not washed up as a batsmen. And despite the criticism his one day average for the 03/03 season was over 39.

Whevever anyone who is old hits a bad patch people assume he's finished, never that he's just out of form. I think he's out of form, but not finished

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
I don't want him picked on loyalty, I want him picked because what I believe he is still capable of. I don't think he's finished as a one day player just because he's in a bad patch.

He's still a very talented player as shown by what he does in Pura Cup matches. I know thats a different game but I think it shows hes not washed up as a batsmen. And despite the criticism his one day average for the 03/03 season was over 39.

Whevever anyone who is old hits a bad patch people assume he's finished, never that he's just out of form. I think he's out of form, but not finished So do you think they should keep him for the next world cup? (He'll be 36/37?)

I really think because you are a Bevan fan that you're not thinking about this clearly and looking at the big picture (ie The WC and the fact that there are plenty of other ageing players).

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by The_Flying_Egg
Whevever anyone who is old hits a bad patch people assume he's finished, never that he's just out of form. I think he's out of form, but not finished Percentages say that at 34 he'll never get back to his best. When the WC comes around he'll be 36/37 and the odds are that a younger player will be better. It'll be too late to blood a new player that close to the WC.

If they drop him now they have a couple of years to find a replacement and have them solidify their spot in the team.

[SaInts SKill]

Here are 300 reasons why Watson is better than Ian Harvey.

Watsons triple double (http://www.cricket-online.org/news.php?sid=3964)


Former Australian and Tasmanian all-rounder Shane Watson has shown his immense talent once again with an unbelievable effort with both bat and ball in a TCA grade match.

With Australian selectors keeping a permanent eye over proceedings at both State and grade level, Watson struck 300 not out while captaining club side Lindisfarne and followed it up with a brilliant spell of 7-29 from 14.2 overs to complete a single-handed destruction of North Hobart at the TCA Ground.

Watson was forced out of the Australian one-day team by stress fractures in his back which prevented him from bowling until early January this year. His progress has been watched eagerly by those who believe the 22-year-old will become a fixture on the international cricket scene in time to come.

After resuming the day on 228 not out, Watson raced to his 259-ball triple-century which included 27 fours and ten sixes on the sizeable ground before declaring the innings closed.

Such was the havoc Watson was wreaking, North Hobart and Tasmanian skipper Dan Marsh resorted to having every fieldsman on the boundary - partly as tribute to Watson's majestic knock, but also as a real tactic to reduce him to singles.

His innings was the highest score made in the TCA grade competition since former Australian all-rounder Charles Eady's 566 for the now defunct Break O'Day club against the also defunct Wellington over a century ago in 1901-02.

Watson's scalps were no mugs with the bat either; Tasmanian team-mates Michael Dighton, Marsh, Michael Di Venuto and Sean Clingeleffer were all victims of Watson's bowling.

Watson is currently out of contract and the subject of many prospective trade discussions abounding between various states, after he was almost wooed to current Pura Cup finalists Victoria and Queensland - his home state - last year.

[vicpride99]

HAHHA Watson better than Harvey you have to be kidding. Tell wato to do that at state level mate and then maybe we can talk about it. Not some ****ty tassie state game.