Cameron Green

Remove this Banner Ad

The Passenger

Bugman & Programmer Extraordinaire
Mar 25, 2003
33,526
23,687
127.0.0.1
AFL Club
West Coast
Bevan averaged 60 in shield cricket.
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.
 

cricketnut14

Club Legend
Jan 13, 2015
1,066
526
AFL Club
Sydney
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.

i think you are right.

given more time, he could've easily became a 40+ batsmen.

funny thing is though, he was picked as the 4th bowler in 2 sydney test matches and 3 matches in south africa.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

DaRick

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 12, 2008
6,395
5,799
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
(See avatar)
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.

From what I could tell, Bevan had three problems:
1) He was a rather moody, introverted, introspective character who wasn't very experiential and (from what others have told me) wasn't all that convivial, plus he was prone to temper tantrums - someone like that would at best be tolerated by most of his teammates when he's performing well, but when he isn't...with hindsight, it's not so surprising that they dumped him permanently after his poor run of ODI form in 2003/04.

2) As mentioned, he was in two minds regarding how to play the short stuff.

3) Not unlike Phil Hughes, he struggled to play the ball off his ribs, so a common trick was to tie him up and then throw out a nice, wide delivery for him to slash at.

He apparently fixed his issues against the short ball and became a more rounded player, hence why he scored heavily in the Shield, but that was after he was dropped for good.

RE Greg Blewett, I've always been surprised that he got as many Tests as he did when his South Australian compatriot, Darren Lehmann, was clearly a better batsman. I guess being able to throw down a few medium-pacers helped, but they were nowhere near useful enough to justify selection on that basis alone, and I can't understand for the life of me why they would select him to play in the subcontinent ahead of Lehmann or even Bevan (both of whom were much better players of spin). I've always believed that Blewett played about 25 Tests too many and Lehmann should have played at least 20 more. It's even more jarring because Lehmann was clearly a much better ODI player, even though ODI form is a dubious reason for selecting Test players.
 

Pippen94

Club Legend
Jun 12, 2019
2,383
846
AFL Club
Sydney
He would have come good just the depth was that good in his era he never got a extended run to come good.

Aussie batting was a rotating door from mid 90's onwards. Stints in length were similar to what handcomb, head etc get before getting ass.

A lot of times players need to go back to state cricket & work at their games & techniques. Run Steve Waugh got before coming good is the exception not the rule
 

Pippen94

Club Legend
Jun 12, 2019
2,383
846
AFL Club
Sydney
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.

Shield or fc average doesn't equal test average. Bevan is just one example. Doesn't matter why he didn't average more, only relevant that he didn't
 

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
30,463
32,782
AFL Club
Geelong
Amongst Englands mess he’s managed to get Root and Stokes out a couple of times each. Helps when the captain throws you the ball before it’s 60 overs old and you get more than 2 overs at a time


Yeah that’s all well and good but the whole point of a player like Green in a team where the 4 front liners have over 1000 test wickets between them is that you don’t. You get it when their rotation isn’t working.

That seems to be curiously overlooked when people look at the bowling of players like Kallis and Stokes and saying ‘oh they wouldn’t be good enough to play as a specialist.’ Well how many bowlers who ARE specialists would boast great records if they almost exclusively bowled at best second change with the new ball at the start, and thereafter was probably only used either to get to the second new ball, to bowl when the actual specialists can no longer get any movement or life from the ball or pitch, or to do donkey work?


Green has not done much wrong as a bowler in his brief test career to date but in the only matches he’s played where the opposition ever reached a position of power against the Australian bowlers, he went wicketless.

As an all rounder who is almost certainly destined to be bowling behind a legion of decent specialist quicks, his tests will come when the openers have put on 150 and the Aussies are going to rely on him to break himself to ease the load on the front liners and summon a 3-20-8 spell in the last session with the total on 2-340
 

PhatBoy

Hall of Famer
May 5, 2016
30,463
32,782
AFL Club
Geelong
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.


Bevan was a good player and he would have found a way but that series against WI flatters to deceive a little bit. He also made 70-80 at Adelaide in that series which he was actually criticised for at the time because of the snails pace at which he scored it - came in at 4-290 and faced 270 balls or something. The attack wasn’t nasty either: Walsh yes, Bishop was still a fine bowler but had become a line and length bowler due to injury not the frightening tear away he had been. Cuffy was very gentle and Patterson Thompson, while fast, had no radar whatsoever.
 

The Passenger

Bugman & Programmer Extraordinaire
Mar 25, 2003
33,526
23,687
127.0.0.1
AFL Club
West Coast
From what I could tell, Bevan had three problems:
1) He was a rather moody, introverted, introspective character who wasn't very experiential and (from what others have told me) wasn't all that convivial, plus he was prone to temper tantrums - someone like that would at best be tolerated by most of his teammates when he's performing well, but when he isn't...with hindsight, it's not so surprising that they dumped him permanently after his poor run of ODI form in 2003/04.
Yep, he definitely wasn't a guy that fit in super well.

They didn't hesitate to move on from him once given half a chance.
 

Westend

Premiership Player
Mar 28, 2009
4,766
2,551
AFL Club
West Coast
One day the young fella will be able to play a test in front of his home crowd one day ............... :huh:

Did wonders for Boland I wonder what it would do for Greenie
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
22,519
31,940
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
Did anyone catch / remember the 3/4 guys Ian Chappell said we're good enough in test history to open bowling / bat top4.

When talking about greens potential ceiling. Was quite interesting
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Jinglebells32

All Australian
Jul 2, 2014
808
1,417
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Woodville West Torrens, Flinders Pk
I reckon given enough time he would have sorted his issues out with the short ball and had a decent enough test career, though such a weakness was more than likely to prevent him from replicating his shield success in the test arena. That being said, Steve Waugh just took the hook and pull shot out of his repertoire to great effect.

But such was our batting strength we never had to go back to him, though he could probably be justified in asking why he was discarded after 18 tests and seemingly red lined straight away without the chance to rectify a weakness, but Greg Blewett was persisted with for 46 tests without having much better performances on the board.

Funnily enough Bevan had no problem handling Ambrose and Walsh in Australia (series average 55 in 96/97, with 87* in Perth coming in at 4/40-odd the highlight), but got undone by the Poms bowling short in England in 1997. Bizarre really.

The overall point is correct though. Success in shield cricket is no guarantee for success in test cricket, although it certainly gives one a lot more confidence in taking the next step.
I think Blewett got an extended run due to making back to back tons in his first 2 tests, along with a brilliant 214 against a strong South African attack away.
 

The Falcon Strike

Hall of Famer
Nov 18, 2008
35,886
27,771
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Yeah that’s all well and good but the whole point of a player like Green in a team where the 4 front liners have over 1000 test wickets between them is that you don’t. You get it when their rotation isn’t working.

That seems to be curiously overlooked when people look at the bowling of players like Kallis and Stokes and saying ‘oh they wouldn’t be good enough to play as a specialist.’ Well how many bowlers who ARE specialists would boast great records if they almost exclusively bowled at best second change with the new ball at the start, and thereafter was probably only used either to get to the second new ball, to bowl when the actual specialists can no longer get any movement or life from the ball or pitch, or to do donkey work?


Green has not done much wrong as a bowler in his brief test career to date but in the only matches he’s played where the opposition ever reached a position of power against the Australian bowlers, he went wicketless.

As an all rounder who is almost certainly destined to be bowling behind a legion of decent specialist quicks, his tests will come when the openers have put on 150 and the Aussies are going to rely on him to break himself to ease the load on the front liners and summon a 3-20-8 spell in the last session with the total on 2-340

His bowling is good enough not to wait that long.

I understand he is behind the battery of 3 specialist quicks - but the benefit of a quality 4th option is you don't have to "overbowl" the top guys and by allowing Green to bowl earlier - the main guys can remain fresher and bowl better. It helps the whole team out.

Smith and Paine don't rate all rounders - Cummins appears to rate it and Green is bowling better.

When MMarsh used to bowl - it would be in the 70th over with an old ball against set batsman. WHat is he expected to do?
 

DaRick

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 12, 2008
6,395
5,799
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
(See avatar)
I think Blewett got an extended run due to making back to back tons in his first 2 tests, along with a brilliant 214 against a strong South African attack away.

Blewett was pretty good against pace bowling, and he had a terrific pull shot and cover drive.

He couldn't play spin to save his life though, so I have no idea why they made him tour India, of all places. It's like they were setting him up for failure.

It's more galling because Lehmann was the better batsman overall and was an excellent player of spin.
 

revo333

Premiership Player
Jan 7, 2018
4,479
3,782
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I think Blewett got an extended run due to making back to back tons in his first 2 tests, along with a brilliant 214 against a strong South African attack away.

He did ok in the 97 ashes series when our backs were against the wall early in the series.
 

revo333

Premiership Player
Jan 7, 2018
4,479
3,782
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I'd nearly not take him to Asia.

Seems he is a confidence cricketer and if he makes no runs there it could set him back years.
 

Marshland

Club Legend
Nov 12, 2011
1,617
634
Napier
AFL Club
Collingwood
I'd nearly not take him to Asia.

Seems he is a confidence cricketer and if he makes no runs there it could set him back years.

Keeping him out of 3 countries (4 if you include the test vs Afghanistan) is a tough gig.

He should definitely begin the series vs Pakistan, and should at least be in the squad throughout all tours so he gets a clue.
 

revo333

Premiership Player
Jan 7, 2018
4,479
3,782
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Keeping him out of 3 countries (4 if you include the test vs Afghanistan) is a tough gig.

He should definitely begin the series vs Pakistan, and should at least be in the squad throughout all tours so he gets a clue.

Yes I was going to edit my post.

I'd take him but probably only play him if injuries opened up a spot for him.
 

Around the Wicket

Club Legend
Dec 8, 2021
1,013
728
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Whenever its almost game over for a Australian star Pakistan let them off the hook and revive there career so he'll score big in Pakistan, its a given.

Recent examples.

Ponting in a long long form slump, skies one to fine leg first ball and Amir "somehow" drops a sitter and Ponting scores 200.

Nathan Hauritz under the pump in the media about failures on final days of Test match.. Pakistan dominate Sydney Test and are set 176 to win Hauritz gets 5/53 and bowl Pakistan out for 129.

Both fixes imo. Green will be paying well to top score or most runs so its bound to happen v Pakistan lol
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad