What was so special about Ian Harvey that he ended up playing 73 ODIs as a medium pacer?

[Major]

I remember watching Ian Harvey in the ICL and was just going through his stats when i notice how bad they were for an all rounder and on top of that he was a medium pacer. But yet he ended up playing 73 games for an Australian side that used to dominate cricket.

What was soo special about him? Was he better than what his stats suggest?

 

[Cricket Warrior]

now Lord Faheen Ashraf is carrying forward his legacy lol

 

[Rana]

When he was playing the Australian commentators would rave a lot about him. They all loved him as a player/teammate. Just got along well with the whole team + Australian set up in general.

 

[Rana]

now Lord Faheen Ashraf is carrying forward his legacy lol

Na mate this guy was a good cricketer. Way more charisma and Personality than Bobsy and Rizzy put together

 

[Muhammad Saad]

Faheem can only dream about having 30 odd bowling average in ODI.

 

[Rana]

He was Australia’s first ever T20 specialist prototype if I’m not wrong @Ice Man

They saw him as the T20 package

 

[Major]

When he was playing the Australian commentators would rave a lot about him. They all loved him as a player/teammate. Just got along well with the whole team + Australian set up in general.

was he actually a medium pacer? and was he threatning or not?

 

[AZulfi]

His performances (or lack of) probably went unnoticed because the other Australian players were so good, and he was part of a winning team

 

[Rana]

was he actually a medium pacer? and was he threatning or not?

Stump to stump medium pacer at 70-80mph, had plenty of tricks with the ball. Handy batsman at 7-8. Good fielder too. He bowled like Pollard or Pandya does now

 

[Rana]

His performances (or lack of) probably went unnoticed because the other Australian players were so good, and he was part of a winning team

It’s also a culture. They are not looking to hound our players like we have in the sub continent. Once you are selected, you will be backed to the fullest. Over here we have DHs like Ramiz and Aamir Sohail, then the Ramys like Basit Ali and the journalists doing their level best to get rid of players

 

[Rana]

was he actually a medium pacer? and was he threatning or not?

No he did a utility job for them as the 5th-6th bowler in the middle

 

[AZulfi]

It’s also a culture. They are not looking to hound our players like we have in the sub continent. Once you are selected, you will be backed to the fullest. Over here we have DHs like Ramiz and Aamir Sohail, then the Ramys like Basit Ali and the journalists doing their level best to get rid of players

Agree. Basit thinks that if Pakistan beats Afghanistan, it will be an upset

 

[sweep_shot]

LOL. Very random. Didn't expect a thread on Ian Harvey.

He was a bits and pieces player. Someone who could bat and bowl a bit. He did okay with the ball (85 wickets from 73 games).

Ian Harvey was like Imad Wasim, Michael Yardy, Mark Elham, Robin Singh, Gary Brent etc.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Totally random thread... Who cares about him???

WHat has he done recently that we have to talk about him

 

[Ice Man]

He was Australia’s first ever T20 specialist prototype if I’m not wrong @Ice Man

They saw him as the T20 package

IIRC, he scored the first ever century in t20 format too. He also displayed the characteristics of today's white ball bowlers (slower balls, change of pace, etc.) back then. A very handy all rounder.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Before 2003, there was a theory that bowling 70-80 mph and dead straight was a useful skill in ODI cricket.

England and NZ in particular had quite a few bowlers/bowling allrounders in this mould .

As pitches got faster and truer with less seam movement, these bowlers completely vanished.

Australia themselves were better off plugging the extra batsman at 7 and the likes of Harvey, Chris Harris, Larsen, Ealham etc. completely vanished sometime after the 2003 World Cup.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Stump to stump bowling was seen as an asset and lower order runs a massive bonus. The concept of bowlers who could bat a bit was quite rare, so if you were one of those players you were worth your weight in gold, and you add good fielding in an era where it wasn't the most athletic and you had a really handy player.

He also smashed it in county cricket. If he was around now he would be picked in most of the leagues.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Dibbly-dobblers had their own aura. That kind of bowling is a lost art in ODI cricket. Flat pitches have made them irrelevant. Though Ian Harvey was probably slightly quicker than the average dibbly-dobbler

 

[sweep_shot]

Dibbly-dobblers had their own aura. That kind of bowling is a lost art in ODI cricket. Flat pitches have made them irrelevant. Though Ian Harvey was probably slightly quicker than the average dibbly-dobbler

He was poor man's Chris Harris.

Aussie team at that time was the peak ATG team. So, good for him that he managed to get 73 ODI games under his belt.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

He was poor man's Chris Harris.

Aussie team at that time was the peak ATG team. So, good for him that he managed to get 73 ODI games under his belt.

Not talking about him specifically but about bowlers who bowled that style

 

[Mamoon]

Yes this is true.

Ganguly had 100 ODI wickets but if he played today, he would barely get a chance to bowl.

Someone like Faheem Ashraf would have been a very useful ODI bowler in the 90s and 2000s.

 

[Varun]

Yes this is true.

Ganguly had 100 ODI wickets but if he played today, he would barely get a chance to bowl.

Someone like Faheem Ashraf would have been a very useful ODI bowler in the 90s and 2000s.

Equally, Ganguly averaged 41 with the bat but if he played today he would be close to 50.

 

[Mamoon]

Equally, Ganguly averaged 41 with the bat but if he played today he would be close to 50.

No doubt. He was a terrific ODI player, vastly underrated by even Indian fans of today. I rate him higher than Saeed Anwar because he didn’t have the luxury of feasting on Indian bowlers of the 90’s and had to combat the likes of Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib instead.

 

[RexRex]

No doubt. He was a terrific ODI player, vastly underrated by even Indian fans of today. I rate him higher than Saeed Anwar because he didn’t have the luxury of feasting on Indian bowlers of the 90’s and had to combat the likes of Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib instead.

He ruined his legacy somewhat with the whole Chappell episode and being a proponent of the seniority culture in Indian team.

 

[pratiktc]

In the pre -Watson and Symonds era in mid 90s and early 00s Aus actually struggled to find allrounders for ODI cricket once Steve Waugh stopped bowling.

Although specialist batters and bowlers were excellent, none of the available Aussie allrounders were in the class of a Cairns/Pollock/Kallis.

So you would see quite a few bits and pieces players trialled like Brendon Julian, Tom Moody, Shane Lee, Andy Bichel and Ian Harvey. The idea being to have one seamer who could bat a bit to add depth to batting and a batter who could bowl some seam up and then club them along with likes of Lehmann/Mark Waugh etc. to do 5th bowlers job

Ian Harvey took commission as a batting allrounder reknowned for slower ball variety (he had offcutter, back of the hand and could bowl yorkers accurately) and death bowling in the 35-45 over phase. Batting wise also for that era he was a reasonably quick batter with ability to hit gaps and sweeps. He was also excellent fielder who could throw with both hands.

Once Watson came onto the scene, Harvey was dispensed with.

He had some good success at English domestic list A level winning several Lords finals for Gloucestershire.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

He ruined his legacy somewhat with the whole Chappell episode and being a proponent of the seniority culture in Indian team.

I blame Chappell more for that whole episode than Ganguly. Chappell went about that whole thing in a really heavy-handed manner, and tried to impose himself on the team, with little to no respect for what Ganguly and John Wright had built with that team. He also seemed largely ignorant of the fact that the cricketing culture is sub-continental countries is far different to the culture in a country like Australia. There was a far more diplomatic way in which he could have handled that situation, rather than going behind Ganguly's back and burying him to the board.

 

[RexRex]

I blame Chappell more for that whole episode than Ganguly. Chappell went about that whole thing in a really heavy-handed manner, and tried to impose himself on the team, with little to no respect for what Ganguly and John Wright had built with that team. He also seemed largely ignorant of the fact that the cricketing culture is sub-continental countries is far different to the culture in a country like Australia. There was a far more diplomatic way in which he could have handled that situation, rather than going behind Ganguly's back and burying him to the board.

I think it had more to do with indian culture of how elders are to be put on a pedestal. That's all great but in a sports team, professionalism and current performance is what should count. Chappell's idea of giving youngsters more chances, emphasis on fitness and sharper fielding is what rubbed the lazy entitled seniors the wrong way. I remember reading many news reports back then of how Ganguly didn't bother attending the fielding drills laid down by Greg. Wright was too timid to say anything.

 

[Suleiman]

Only true allrounder connoisseurs will be able to see talent that is Ian Harvey for what they are capable of truly, kids these days don’t respect how difficult cricket was back then where Harvey Saab’s incutters would nip by the batsman’s nose off the pitch on a green mamba with actual mambas and snakes in the outfield as well potentially.

 

[Bhaijaan]

He was faster and more useful than current Pakistani frontline pacers.

 

[RexRex]

The only thing I remember about Ian Harvey is his run-up was faster than his actual delivery. He was the aussie version of Ronnie Irani - expendable bits and pieces player.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I think it had more to do with indian culture of how elders are to be put on a pedestal. That's all great but in a sports team, professionalism and current performance is what should count. Chappell's idea of giving youngsters more chances, emphasis on fitness and sharper fielding is what rubbed the lazy entitled seniors the wrong toway. I remember reading many news reports back then of how Ganguly didn't bother attending the fielding drills laid down by Greg. Wright was too timid to say anything.

I get that and I'm sure Ganguly was no saint either. But Chappell seemed to have come with the mindset of uprooting the culture of Indian cricket overnight and replacing it with how he thought things should have been run. You can't do that. The change has to happen gradually. How can you expect the team to follow your vision when you're actively alienating the players with your actions? I'm sure he had the right intentions in mind but I don't think he went about it in the right way at all.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

The only thing I remember about Ian Harvey is his run-up was faster than his actual delivery. He was the aussie version of Ronnie Irani - expendable bits and pieces player.

I feel like New Zealand was the assembly line for these kind of cricketers: Chris Harris, Gavin Larsen, Nathan Astle, Craig McMillan..

England had a few useful ones too: Irani, Adam Hollioake, Mark Ealham

 

[ElRaja]

wait till u discover gavin larsen, chris haris, etc, with one new ball there was a lot of benefit to having a wily dibbly dobbly bowler bowling stump to stump with a soft grey old ball, especially one who could bat a bit and was a very good fielder.

aus were so dominant in odis because they chose players on how they complimented the team as a whole and added variety, ian harvery won the 2003 world cup, tom moody won the 1999 world cup, and these kinds of bowlers evolved into nathan bracken who had a very good odi career.

 

[Rajdeep]

Ian Harvey was very useful cricketer. Handy medium pacer with deceptive slower balls and good yorker. Was a decent batsman as well.

After seeing off Mcgrath, Lee and Gilespie's spells, batters looked to target Harvey and gave him lots of wickets in the process.

 

[TheSultan]

Ian Harvey was the definition of mediocre.

I have no idea why the Aussies hyped him so much

 

[mominsaigol]

Ian Harvey was the definition of mediocre.

I have no idea why the Aussies hyped him so much

Theirs a myth about aussies as well.

Its overshadowed by the fact that indians spout rubbish about themsleves 24/7 and Australia has won 6 odi world cups and produced legends in every era

But Australia isnt the perfect cricketing team that people portray them to be.


They have produced and supported many medicore cricketers who got am extended run for no reason.

 

[TheSultan]

Theirs a myth about aussies as well.

Its overshadowed by the fact that indians spout rubbish about themsleves 24/7 and Australia has won 6 odi world cups and produced legends in every era

But Australia isnt the perfect cricketing team that people portray them to be.


They have produced and supported many medicore cricketers who got am extended run for no reason.

Agreed - there was Stuart Law aswell. Not saying he was really bad, but unnecessarily hyped to the moon by both Aussies and England (in his county stint)