Ian Harvey--a hack?

[Fat Red]

ONE-DAY INTERNATIONALS (including 17/01/2002)
37 matches
Batting average 19.5 at strike rate of 87.

Bowling economy rate of 4.5

Andy Bichel

Batting 13 at 59

Bowling 4.72

Brett Lee

Batting 8 at 67
Bowling 4.81

Shane Watson (state games)

Batting 26 at 57
Bowling 5.96

(Harvey state games, batting 23, strike rate not given, bowling 4.21)

Damien Fleming bowling 4.41

Brendon Julian 5.21

Darren Lehmann batting 40.75, bowling 5.39

Damien Martyn batting 51.63, bowling 5.32

Andrew Symonds batting 30, bowling 4.93

Mark Waugh bowling 4.78
Steve Waugh bowling 4.55

 

[Fat Red]

Now I'm not trying to prove that Harvey should be first picked. But for someone who bowls at the death, his figures are pretty good. His batting has not been so good, but remember, if the top order do their job, his batting isn't needed, but you always need at least 5 bowlers.

 

[Spogs]

The stats probably show that bowlers are overrated. If you compare say Darren Lehmans Economy rate of 5.39 against Gen McGrath of 3.96, you are only conceding an extra 14 runs over 10 overs.

If you then take Boofs batting average of 40.75 against McGrath's 4.42, Boof is 22 runs per game more valuable.

I know it's oversimplified but looking at stats alone can be misleading.

 

[Briedis]

Can't bat under pressure.... can bowl in the last few overs, but only as a containing bowler.

He IS supposed to be an all-rounder. As an all-rounder I would rank him just above Agit Agarkar....

 

[dogboy23]

Originally posted by Briedis
Can't bat under pressure.... can bowl in the last few overs, but only as a containing bowler.

He IS supposed to be an all-rounder. As an all-rounder I would rank him just above Agit Agarkar....

All good points(besides the agarkar comment )but is there a better option in Australia?I dont think so.

 

[Briedis]

There was a little tongue in cheek there!

I'm not sure we should pick an average all-rounder just because he may be the best in the country, we have to pick people who can perform at the highest level consistently....

 

[dogboy23]

Originally posted by Briedis
There was a little tongue in cheek there!

I'm not sure we should pick an average all-rounder just because he may be the best in the country, we have to pick people who can perform at the highest level consistently....

Agreed but I think we need a 5th bowler so maybe Watson should be groomed for the world cup.

 

[Dippers Donuts]

I've always felt that Harvey should play as a specialist bowler and bat at number 8.

I think his bowling is good enough to sustain him in the side as a bowler alone. Batting at 8 would then mean a): we are not reliant on him to score runs b): any runs he does score are a bonus.

Gees Warney is getting tonked today!

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by dogboy23
Agreed but I think we need a 5th bowler so maybe Watson should be groomed for the world cup.

Yep, agree with Watson. He might be a good option. I'm sure he will get a run in next years WSC.

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by Dippers Donuts
Gees Warney is getting tonked today!

Hmmmmmm He's let them off the hook again....

 

[wagstaff]

Originally posted by Fat Red
Now I'm not trying to prove that Harvey should be first picked. But for someone who bowls at the death, his figures are pretty good.

Yeah, he was brillant in the final over today, only conceding a modest 14 runs, somehow letting that superstar Andre Adams hit him for 10 runs in two balls.

Perhaps next time he'll have a better economy rate then Steve Waugh.

 

[goal_umpire]

Originally posted by Fat Red
ONE-DAY INTERNATIONALS (including 17/01/2002)
37 matches
Batting average 19.5 at strike rate of 87.

Bowling economy rate of 4.5

Andy Bichel

Batting 13 at 59

Bowling 4.72

Brett Lee

Batting 8 at 67
Bowling 4.81

Shane Watson (state games)

Batting 26 at 57
Bowling 5.96

(Harvey state games, batting 23, strike rate not given, bowling 4.21)

Damien Fleming bowling 4.41

Brendon Julian 5.21

Darren Lehmann batting 40.75, bowling 5.39

Damien Martyn batting 51.63, bowling 5.32

Andrew Symonds batting 30, bowling 4.93

Mark Waugh bowling 4.78
Steve Waugh bowling 4.55

No way Fat Red

Ian Harvey is a freak and not a hack as u call him.

 

[Visro]

Well Harvey's going to be in the thick of it now with this batting!

 

[Visro]

He doesn't last long and Australia look screwed...

 

[Santos L Helper]

Re: Re: Ian Harvey--a hack?

Originally posted by suzi_olsen


No way Fat Red

Ian Harvey is a freak and not a hack as u call him.

Very intelligent comment and you added a great deal to the discussion.

Harvey has proved to be average, at best, again. Why do they continue to bat him at seven, when he clearly is not up to it? I will not bag him for that disastrous last over, because it's not going to make any difference now.

 

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by Briedis


Yep, agree with Watson. He might be a good option. I'm sure he will get a run in next years WSC.

So he's moving to NSW next season is he ?

 

[Darky]

Originally posted by Dippers Donuts
I've always felt that Harvey should play as a specialist bowler and bat at number 8.

I think his bowling is good enough to sustain him in the side as a bowler alone. Batting at 8 would then mean a): we are not reliant on him to score runs b): any runs he does score are a bonus.

Good suggestion, DD. At the moment, I don't think his bowling is quite front-liner status... but it's adequate.

With some work, concentrating specifically on being a bowler, he may yet be able to become a specialist bowler.

I'd rather we find out at domestic level though.

 

[Santos L Helper]

Originally posted by Darky


Good suggestion, DD. At the moment, I don't think his bowling is quite front-liner status... but it's adequate.

With some work, concentrating specifically on being a bowler, he may yet be able to become a specialist bowler.

I'd rather we find out at domestic level though.

Oi, I think this has been suggested, re Harvey batting at 8, by another resident expert right here

 

[Darky]

Originally posted by Santos L Helper


Oi, I think this has been suggested, re Harvey batting at 8, by another resident expert right here

Yes... but that still seems to be in the guise of an all-rounder. I think this idea that he can bat should be abandoned.

I reckon he should forget about being a batsman, he has had enough chances at ODI level, and can't belt around mediocre Tasmanian medium pacers, and Test-depleted Shield attacks to get his average up. Even at domestic level, his scoring is very inconsistent with one or two decent scores generally balancing out a lot more failures.

In 30-odd innings with the bat he has shown very little at ODI level, suggesting the gulf is a bit too big.

 

[Santos L Helper]

Re: Re: Re: Ian Harvey--a hack?

Originally posted by Santos L Helper


I will not bag him for that disastrous last over, because it's not going to make any difference now.

Thank you very ****ing much Mr Hack!!

 

[Briedis]

I think it is time to upgrade Harvey from just a mere hack to -

CRICKETER IMPOSTER....

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by JUBJUB


So he's moving to NSW next season is he ?

Not a bad idea! Up here he'll learn how to carry the weight of the nation on his shoulders and win games from impossible situations to put Australia into the finals - ala Bevan, instead of having to change his underwear whenever the going is bit tough - ala THE HACK!

 

[The invisible mullet]

Harvey and Symonds appear to be suffering from the Flintoffs - average bowlers who have forgotten how to bat. Time to think about giving them a rest and letting B Lee and S Warne go some way to playing the allrounder roles.

 

[Fat Red]

As the point of this thread states, Harvey's ODI bowling record is better than Lee's. Change them in the batting order if you like.

 

[Briedis]

But one difference between Lee and Harvey is that Lee is being groomed for the future, whereas Harvey should have started to perform by now.....

All we need now is someone in the team names Oswald and we would have a KILLER team!

And Lee, Harvey, Oswald are next in....