Who is the best finisher in ODI cricket?

CricketingMinds

Tape Ball Star
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Runs
730
Post of the Week
1
2012-03-14_0005.png


In the 4th ODI of the recently concluded CB series, when faced with a task of chasing 13 runs in the last over, MS Dhoni, with his nerveless batting, delivered one of the most sensational victories for India. In doing so, he re-established the fact that cricket might be a team game but the difference between victory and defeat can sometimes be the skill of one man – the finisher.

A team’s opening batsmen might make a big score and the bowlers might squeeze the opposition out of the game but in close games, it’s the performance of a finishing batsman that defines the end result.
In a big game that is heading towards a close finish, one that is too close for comfort for those with a weak heart, the man in the middle must be one with a cool head. Amidst all the pressure, he must be able to assess exactly what approach is required and which bowlers he should attack. If he’s batting with the tail, how much can he trust them? Which bowlers can he expose them to and for how long?

A prime example of a man with a reputation to finish off games for his team was Michael Bevan. He was recognized for this role in the 90s. Alongside him were some other top players, such as Ranatunga, Harris, Thorpe, Azharuddin and Salim Malik. Inspired by this elite group of players, it seems the current crop has taken the standards of finishing games to an even higher level. Some examples include: Dhoni, Raina, Hussey, Klusener, Razzaq, deVilliers, Matthews, Morgan, the list goes on.

Dhoni’s innings in the CB Series re-ignites the argument: who is the best finisher after all? We, at CricketingMinds, researched various finishers, the types of innings they’ve played and put together an analysis on 4 of the best finishers of this era – Bevan, Dhoni, Klusener and Hussey. This time, it’s upto you to decide who the best finisher is, we’re just gonna put up the numbers.

A deep look into the statistics shows that there are varius types of innings, a ‘finisher’ can play. A specific criteria was formed to categorize a particular innings as a “finisher’s innings”.

TYPES:

Below are the different types under which a finisher’s innings can fall under:
• Man of the match: These finishers got the Man of the Match for their performances, suggesting how their batting won their team the game. Example can be Dhoni’s finishing act in the 2011 World Cup final: http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cric...ch/433606.html

• Type 1 – the almost worthy man of the match: These finishers played a Man-of-the-Match worthy performance but did not get it due to some other player’s performance. An example is Michael Bevan’s brave performance while chasing the English total in this match:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65269.html

• Type 2 – quick-fire innings to finish: These finishers came in with a few overs left to bat and with a quick Strike Rate (relative to the team) they played a quick innings and did the job: Example is Dhoni’s quick-fire 28 off 13 balls in this game:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/215286.html

• Type 3 – played second fiddle: played an essential innings by supporting another batsman (who is going strong), or took lead to finish off a small amount of runs required. Michael Hussey’s innings of 25 to chase 42 runs when he came in, is an example of this:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/226381.html

• Type 4 – normal finish: a finisher’s innings which satisfied the criteria but did not come under any of the above categories. Example can be Michael Bevan’s innings of 40 off 70 balls in this match: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66373.html

CRITERIA:

Here are the criteria established for an innings to be called a “finisher’s innings”:
When his team bats first:
• The team wins or the result is a draw
• Stays not out or gets out with 2 overs to go
• Scores at least 25 runs
When his team bats second:
• The team wins or the result is a draw
• Stays not out
• Scores at least 25 runs

NOTE: The criteria might appear harsh on some counts but here is the justification:
- A batsman plays a finisher’s knock when his team loses, does not account for a team win and so losses (and matches with ‘No Result’) are excluded. (Matches which were draws are included)
- There are cases where batsmen got out in the 48th over while batting first and playing good innings – a threshold had to be formed and that is where the line was drawn.
- There are cases where the batsman scored a useful score which is less than 24, but there are too many cases where the value of the performance is arguable, so it’s better to discount those.
- The strike rates were not a consideration since Bevan and Klusener belong to a time where the teams never saw scores 400 whereas in these recent times, to which Dhoni and Hussey belong to, the average strike rate of batsmen matters a lot more, relatively speaking of course.

THE FINISHERS:

Here is a look at the players in contention:
Michael Bevan: The first man to be known as the “Finisher”, Bevan’s speciality was his ability to score quickly and occupying the crease, getting his team out of tense situations. He was a run-machine who was one of the first batsmen to end his ODI career on an average of 50+ , the biggest reason being his 67 not outs in 196 innings. One of the most classic innings he played came in the World Cup 2003, in the match against England when Australia, needing 205 to win, were down at 135/8. He ended up scoring 74 not out, and with the help of Andy Bichel chased the target down with 2 balls to spare.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Bevan's shortlist

M.S.Dhoni: The Indian captain, in the recent series, just highlighted the fact that he truly is one of the best ‘finishers’ of modern times. Ability to score quickly in high pressure situations and maintaining a cool head, a feature which has also sets him apart from other captains is what makes Dhoni special. In 2005, Dhoni launched himself on to the international scene with a scintillating 148 against Pakistan. His first true finisher’s knock came against West Indies where he scored a fantastic 28 off 13 balls from number 7 to get India to a good total and the outcome of the match was that India won by 7 runs. However the best innings came in the World Cup final 2011 when he scored 91 not out to lead India to a World Cup victory in 28 years.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Dhoni's shortlist

Lance Klusener: The man of the series of World Cup 1999 might have failed in the semi-finals back then, but he by then had established himself as one of the best finishers lower down the order. Batting at the death, with the tail on most occasions, Klusener played some amazing innings at number 8 and 9 to win South Africa crucial matches. One of these special innings came in World Cup 1999, against Sri Lanka (the defending champions back then), when Klusener, coming in at 115/7 at number 9, scored a quick 52 not out on a difficult pitch to set Sri Lanka a competitive target of 200.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Klusener's shortlist

Michael Hussey: When Hussey arrived on the international scene, it seemed as if he was another version of Michael Bevan for Australia. He rarely showed any signs of feeling pressure and managed to squeeze out runs consistently without throwing his wicket away regardless of the situation. Unlike Bevan, Hussy also established himself in Test cricket his mental toughness seemed to have strengthened his ODI abilities as well. Having earned the nickname Mr Cricket, he was a late bloomer for cricketing standards as he started his career quite late. This didn’t stop him from maintaining an average of around 50 and playing some memorable innings making Australia win matches. Unlike Bevan, Hussey has also been able to clear the rope quite consistently – Bevan hit a lone 21 sixes in 196 innings, whereas Hussey has hit 73 sixes in 146 innings. Although Hussey’s best finisher’s knock was undoubtedly in the T20 WC 2010 semi-final, scoring 60 off 24 against Pakistan, he has also played some wonderful ODI innings.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Hussey's shortlist

ANALYSIS:
2012-03-13_2354.png

This table compares how many innings each batsman has played and how many made through the short list. Bevan leads with 38 innings, but given M.S.Dhoni’s spectacular form recently and the amount of matches is likely to play in the future, it wouldn’t be wrong to say that Dhoni will overtake Bevan in the number of innings. An astonishing fact is that the highest ratio lies with Michael Hussey who, as per this, plays a true finisher’s knock every 4.56 innings. Does that tell us the complete story?
To get a more complete picture, let’s look at how many of these ‘finisher’ innings were played while the team was batting first and how many were played while chasing:

2012-03-13_2356.png

Based on the table above, it’s safe to say that Dhoni reserves his best for games in which he can finish off not just the innings, but the match itself and lead his team to victory. The most important performance of his career came in a situation where his team needed to chase a big score and in the grandest stage of all, the world cup final. Dhoni also has the highest average (amongst test playing nations in ODIs with the minimum qualification of 500 runs) when chasing as seen here. On a different note, it seems that left handers were more successful batting first. Hussey is a prime example in this case, and he also has the highest overall average amongst finishers.
There is a variety of innings a finisher can play and some might be more special than others. Let us take a look at the number of performances which won each one of them a Man of the Match award:

2012-03-13_2358.png

Given that different aspects of a good finisher are highlighting the qualities of different batsmen, it’s no surprise that Lance Klusener manages to stand out in this list. Dhoni might have the most Man of the Matches amongst the batsmen; Klusener has the best ratio when he’s on song, a characteristic which earned him 9 Man of the Match awards in 20 innings.
However, some might winning the Man of the Match award is still not be adequate to show the finisher’s contribution to his team’s victory. Someone else might have scored a hundred but the finisher would have hit a six of the last ball to seal the game under pressure.
Let’s look at the number of innings played by each finisher with respect to the types defined earlier:
NOTE: Characterising types does not make one innings more special than the others – a finisher plays according to the situation and in different situations, different innings can win matches.

2012-03-14_0000.png

Type wise innings as percentages of total ‘finisher’ innings:

2012-03-14_0001.png

Dhoni has the highest ratio of playing innings which are almost worthy of being a Man of the Match innings. All players have a decent “Type 1” percentage over 20%. However when there are 5 overs left to bat, Bevan and Hussey would be the most desirable. One reason why Dhoni has just 5% is because a lot of his ‘finisher’ innings ended up turning into “Type 1”. To explain it further, a characteristic of Dhoni is that he sometimes comes up the order to bat in certain situations. Hence he ends up playing a much more important role. If a team needs some calm batting to chase down and someone needs to pace the team’s innings, Hussey or Dhoni would be the best choices to play a “Type 3” innings.
Another noteworthy parameter is the number of innings each batsman played from different batting positions.
NOTE: For a finisher’s role, batting positions 3 to 9 were considered.

2012-03-14_0002.png

There are a few things we can take from this table:
- Bevan’s expertise can be seen at number 6, a position which gave him the recognition of being called “The Finisher”. Bevan, in this interview also stated the level of importance he gave to staying not out and being there till the end as the No. 6 batsman - a reason for which he is successful. - Hussey, who came after Bevan, has however adapted himself to the positions 5 to 7.
- Dhoni’s versatility can be seen by him getting at least 4 innings at every position from 3 to 7 – more centered on position 5 and 6.
- Klusener is the best option to have at number 8 – a lot of his ‘finisher’ knocks coming from down the order.

Unlike some of our previous articles, we don’t have a solid conclusion as to who the best finisher truly is. There are no set criteria for what defines a finisher, but here at Cricketing Minds, we’ve done our best to quantify this trait. Each player in this list has his own strengths and in one way or another can claim to be the best in the world at what he does.

CricketingMinds
Follow us on Twitter: @CricketingMinds
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kohli is rapidly making a mark on this list. Watch out for this kid - seems to posess nerves of steel :)
 
Should also have listed Abdul Razzaq's stats

I went through the statistics of Abdur Razzaq - trust me, they were not as influential as compared to the others. Maybe Lance Klusener is up there due to his reputation but he too was a successful finisher.
 
Yuvraj
dhoni
kohli
raina
pick any one

Except when you look at the avgs of the batsmen mentioned in the article - their avgs are around the 50 mark. Out of the list you mentioned, only Dhoni stands tall - the reason being his ability to finish games more successfully than others.
 
Bevan all the way. I'll back him against any bowling line-up anywhere in the world on any pitch.



On a given day, based on pure ability -
Bevan > Klusner > Hussey > Dhoni


For consistency, dependability-
Dhoni > Bevan > Hussey > Klusner
 
Last edited:
Of all time? Michael bevan, he wasn't just a finisher. Even if Australia were 80 for 6 (not too often) you could count on him to get us to a defendable position, and chasing 250 if the scoreboard was 90 for 5 he is against your man. Not to forget, he did it against some of the best bowlers to have played odi's. Currently, Dhoni, Hussey.
 
Bevan all the way. I'll back him against any bowling line-up anywhere in the world on any pitch.



On a given day, based on pure ability -
Bevan > Klusner > Hussey > Dhoni


For consistency, dependability-
Dhoni > Bevan > Hussey > Klusner

Bevan wasnt that good in power hitting,so in a steep chase he'd fail.
 
michael bevan was the best , i would also mention inzimam ul haq , he was superb , one of the best of all time.
 
Of all time? Michael bevan, he wasn't just a finisher. Even if Australia were 80 for 6 (not too often) you could count on him to get us to a defendable position, and chasing 250 if the scoreboard was 90 for 5 he is against your man. Not to forget, he did it against some of the best bowlers to have played odi's. Currently, Dhoni, Hussey.

Agreed. Bevan definitely set the standards and Dhoni/Hussey have taken over nowadays.

One issue I had while writing this article was deciding upon the parameters which will give us a much more concrete answer. I was amazed at how different parameters worked for different players - made me want to reconsider the criterion I had set.

The question i would like to throw out to the people here: How would you define a criterion to identify a finisher's innings?
 
Bevan wasnt that good in power hitting,so in a steep chase he'd fail.

Yes but you do realise that Bevan and Dhoni are from different eras of cricket. Bevan never saw scores over 400 while Dhoni did. That is one reason why I did not include Strike Rates in the calculation.
 
Bevan played mostly in the 90's where as Dhoni and Hussey played in 00's.
The pitches and rules in ODI cricket has changed dramatically, even then he has a better avergae than both of them.
So I will say: Bevan>Hussey>Dhoni
 
Yes but you do realise that Bevan and Dhoni are from different eras of cricket. Bevan never saw scores over 400 while Dhoni did. That is one reason why I did not include Strike Rates in the calculation.

It's still relevant IMO. Klusener had a SR of 90 in the 90s, and Viv Richards had a similar strike rate in the 80s. It demonstrates the ability to take the pitch out of the equation when finishing off an innings. Great analysis otherwise :)
 
Bevan all the way. I'll back him against any bowling line-up anywhere in the world on any pitch.



On a given day, based on pure ability -
Bevan > Klusner > Hussey > Dhoni


For consistency, dependability-
Dhoni > Bevan > Hussey > Klusner


How do you differentiate "Pure ability" with "Consistency/dependability"?

In my mind ability is a subset of consistency and dependability
i.e. A batsman's ABILITY to be CONSISTENT or his ABILITY to be DEPENDABLE
 
Bevan wasnt that good in power hitting,so in a steep chase he'd fail.

like what? During his time scores of 300 plus were rare. He won us games in South Africa who had the best odi bowling attack chasing over 270
 
Yes but you do realise that Bevan and Dhoni are from different eras of cricket. Bevan never saw scores over 400 while Dhoni did. That is one reason why I did not include Strike Rates in the calculation.

what about Klusener then?same era,much better SR.u agree or not,SR are as important in ODIs.

I cant confirm but I recently saw a stat that while chasing wen MSD has remained unbeaten India has lost only ONCE.while the same number is 17 for Bevan
 
what about Klusener then?same era,much better SR.u agree or not,SR are as important in ODIs.

I cant confirm but I recently saw a stat that while chasing wen MSD has remained unbeaten India has lost only ONCE.while the same number is 17 for Bevan

Why don't you look at all the other factors? Quality of Odi batsmen around bevan compared to the ones around Dhoni. Quality of bowling. Quality of pitches. Can you show me where Bevan has remained not out 17 times when chasing and lost match? Here it shows only 5 times

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...efault;result=2;template=results;type=batting
 
Last edited:
what about Klusener then?same era,much better SR.u agree or not,SR are as important in ODIs.

I cant confirm but I recently saw a stat that while chasing wen MSD has remained unbeaten India has lost only ONCE.while the same number is 17 for Bevan

Klusener was more of a basher than a person who rotated strike (like Bevan and Dhoni). He was the most successful bashers and its due to his reputation and the number of Man of the Matches he won, he was included in the final 4.

But technique wise, he's a completely different batsmen than Bevan, Hussey or Dhoni.
 
Some of you really need to know MichaeL Bevan more. :facepalm:
 
Why don't you look at all the other factors? Quality of Odi batsmen around bevan compared to the ones around Dhoni. Quality of bowling. Quality of pitches. Can you show me where Bevan has remained not out 17 times when chasing and lost match? Here it shows only 5 times

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...efault;result=2;template=results;type=batting

ya I was also checking that. i guess i was wrong.sorry about that.

quality of batsmen around Bevan was great as well.pitches n bowling hv deteriorated for sure.but then Dhoni has pressure of captaincy.what u call defendable scores is only bcoz of the gr8 bowling Aus had,take that into account as well.I dont remember Bevan tearing apart bowling.
 
ya I was also checking that. i guess i was wrong.sorry about that.

quality of batsmen around Bevan was great as well.pitches n bowling hv deteriorated for sure.but then Dhoni has pressure of captaincy.what u call defendable scores is only bcoz of the gr8 bowling Aus had,take that into account as well.I dont remember Bevan tearing apart bowling.

Times have changed and matches are more now in favour of batsmen.

One thing which was quite noticeable while I was researching Bevan was his ability to rotate strike - he might score a quick 50-60 but that will only include a few boundaries. It was something which I did not notice in any of the other 3.

Dhoni's batted on some very easy batting pitches - agreed the pressure of captaincy exists but with the game now favouring batsmen more - Dhoni might have had it easier. Same goes for Hussey - he might be ignored as the two top contendors appear to be Dhoni and Bevan but Hussey's rate of playing 'finisher's innings' has been emphatic.
 
Last edited:
Australia losing for sure. Top order best of the best batsmen could not do it. And then bevan changes things around. Time and again.

The chases he made were cylnical. He was the best Finisher when it mattered the most. He rose to the occation as the stage got bigger.
 
Times have changed and matches are more now in favour of batsmen.

One thing which was quite noticeable while I was researching Bevan was his ability to rotate strikes - he might score a quick 50-60 but that will only include a few boundaries. It was something which I did not notice in any of the other 3.

Dhoni's batted on some very easy batting pitches - agreed the pressure of captaincy exists but with the game now favouring batsmen more - Dhoni might have had it easier. Same goes for Hussey - he might be ignored as the two top contendors appear to be Dhoni and Bevan but Hussey's rate of playing 'finisher's innings' has been emphatic.

we r talking about ODIs.pitches were never that threatening in 90s.its not like Bevan was technically far superior,otherwise he'd succeeded in tests.

I dont know about things being easy for Dhoni.with Aussies bowling they were always chasing low scores,so pressure of run rate was hardly there.while its always the case with our bowling.

Dhoni has played standout innings like 183* n 91*.dont remember anything like that fr Bevan
 
Australia losing for sure. Top order best of the best batsmen could not do it. And then bevan changes things around. Time and again.

The chases he made were cylnical. He was the best Finisher when it mattered the most. He rose to the occation as the stage got bigger.

nothing bigger than WC final,no?
 
we r talking about ODIs.pitches were never that threatening in 90s.its not like Bevan was technically far superior,otherwise he'd succeeded in tests.

I dont know about things being easy for Dhoni.with Aussies bowling they were always chasing low scores,so pressure of run rate was hardly there.while its always the case with our bowling.

Dhoni has played standout innings like 183* n 91*.dont remember anything like that fr Bevan

Well, Dhoni made a 91 notout in the final of WC which is one of the best innings ever. Bevan's innings are listed in the article - and you can check out 2 innings which were one of the best, a 74* vs England in WC 2003 and a 101* vs Newzealand.

When I say batting is easier right now, what I mean is that ODI rules have been formulated in a way which helped the batsmen more. With the introduction of powerplays and 2 new balls etc, the laws have been changed to make batting easier.

Not to forget Dhoni's played most of these innings on flat tracks in the subcontinent, whereas Bevan played a lot of his innings outside subcontinent.
 
Last edited:
If I am to trust this stats then if you look at the 2nd table, it shows MSD has 22 innings compare to his other competitors, it's really high.

and true value and test of finisher are measured when they bat 2nd and take their team home to victory.

Personally, I will say 10 more innings like this from MSD and it's fair to say, he should be called best finisher, if not yet.
 
Well, Dhoni made a 91 notout in the final of WC which is one of the best innings ever. Bevan's innings are listed in the article - and you can check out 2 innings which were one of the best, a 74* vs England in WC 2003 and a 101* vs Newzealand.

When I say batting is easier right now, what I mean is that ODI rules have been formulated in a way which helped the batsmen more. With the introduction of powerplays and 2 new balls etc, the laws have been changed to make batting easier.

Not to forget Dhoni's played most of these innings on flat tracks in the subcontinent, whereas Bevan played a lot of his innings outside subcontinent.

Bevan was unparelleled in batting with the tail.no denying that,but that is also of position of nothing to lose n the pressure is lesser.the two innings you mentioned were awersome,but cant be compared with WC final innings.they werent even in knockouts.Australia had already qualified in 2003 WC IIRC.

as for Dhoni playing most innings on flat decks,hes done well in Aus,Eng too.players generally r expected do well at home,even though it isnt the subcontinent.so Bevasn doing well in Aus is equal to Dhoni in India imo.
 
Any high scoring game > 250 runs are flat track in my opinion, no matter what the country is. but no-one notices as people just label with country. e.g. India vs England ODIs bilateral series in India, not a single pitch was flat track.
 
Semi-final and QF between India and Aus., Pak weren't exactly flat tracks. Ball was gripping with the pitch and was hard to score runs there. And final Mumbai pitch was bit seamer friendly compare to what we had against SA.
 
Last edited:
Bevan was unparelleled in batting with the tail.no denying that,but that is also of position of nothing to lose n the pressure is lesser.the two innings you mentioned were awersome,but cant be compared with WC final innings.they werent even in knockouts.Australia had already qualified in 2003 WC IIRC.

as for Dhoni playing most innings on flat decks,hes done well in Aus,Eng too.players generally r expected do well at home,even though it isnt the subcontinent.so Bevasn doing well in Aus is equal to Dhoni in India imo.

Professionally I am in no position to decide which innings was better. Personally I feel Bevan's innings was slightly better - when Dhoni came out to bat, India were 3 down in the final. Agreed that innings was one of the best innings ever, but Bevan was there when the team was 8 down. And it was a different context - a match against England (which is equivalent to an India-Pakistan match) which might not be as big as a WC Final but the context is quite huge enough.

This does not mean that Bevan was better than Dhoni etc. The stats show that Dhoni's the best player to have in your team while you're chasing.

So I'd let the audience decide :).
 
we r talking about ODIs.pitches were never that threatening in 90s.its not like Bevan was technically far superior,otherwise he'd succeeded in tests.

I dont know about things being easy for Dhoni.with Aussies bowling they were always chasing low scores,so pressure of run rate was hardly there.while its always the case with our bowling.

Dhoni has played standout innings like 183* n 91*.dont remember anything like that fr Bevan

maybe because you haven't watched cricket in the 90's?
 
When we discredit current batsmen saying they are playing in batting friendly pitches, we also need to consider that

They are chasing almost 50 - 70 runs more than batsmen in 90s and trying to score similar number more if batting first. Which is almost 1 run more per over.

This means they have to play more shots with an increase risk of getting out. So scoring 5 RPO for 10 overs may be difficult in 90s , but scoring 9-10 runs per over now would be similarly difficult now( relatively ).

I am not saying who is better here but just trying to remove the argument of pitch. Because when pitch has gone flatter, the need to score faster has gone higher too. So that neutralizes the pitch thing.
 
It has to be Dhoni. He is much bigger hitter of the ball than bevan. That is an advantage.
 
Dhoni cant win a match from 80/6 while chasing a 230+ score , Bevan Could .

Dhoni already took India from 70/5 to 234 but India still lost the match where as beven took Australia from 83/7 to 200 and Australia won the match ,guess the reason ,better bowlers and fielders and Australia have better tailenders who can handle the bat
 
Dhoni already took India from 70/5 to 234 but India still lost the match where as beven took Australia from 83/7 to 200 and Australia won the match ,guess the reason ,better bowlers and fielders and Australia have better tailenders who can handle the bat

better bowlers and fielders shouldnt matter while chasing .

Remember how Bevan helped Australia chase from a hopeless situation against England in the same 03 Wc .

Bevan won matches from situations where his team looked completely out of a chance , Dhoni never performed any such miracle .
 
better bowlers and fielders shouldnt matter while chasing .

Remember how Bevan helped Australia chase from a hopeless situation against England in the same 03 Wc .

Bevan won matches from situations where his team looked completely out of a chance , Dhoni never performed any such miracle .

hopeless situation?70 needed of 12 overs with 2 wickets in hand isnt a hopeless situation.

n u forget Bichel did all the scoring.34 off 36.Bevan took his time n expolited the situation where teams give singles to main batsmen n target the tailender
 
hopeless situation?70 needed of 12 overs with 2 wickets in hand isnt a hopeless situation.

Really? Then what is a hopeless situation? 300 required with 2 wickets in hand which Dhoni has successfully chased "N" numbr of times I suppose ?

How many times have you seen a team scoring 70 runs with 8 wickets down to win the match ?

Anyways another match ,

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65531.html

Australia chasing 173 against an opposition of Walsh/Ambrose gets down to 38-6 only to be taken home by Bevan .

How many times has Dhoni won the match for India in a similar crisis ?
 
Really? Then what is a hopeless situation? 300 required with 2 wickets in hand which Dhoni has successfully chased "N" numbr of times I suppose ?

How many times have you seen a team scoring 70 runs with 8 wickets down to win the match ?

Anyways another match ,

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65531.html

Australia chasing 173 against an opposition of Walsh/Ambrose gets down to 38-6 only to be taken home by Bevan .

How many times has Dhoni won the match for India in a similar crisis ?

again,I already said Bevan was unparelleled in bating with the tail.but thats about it.u realise in those situations,team tend to attack the tailender more. n if there is no pressure of RR it becomes even easier.that is much easier position than having to swing all the time to keep up with asking rate

Dhoni has not done it bcoz he doesnt that kind of tail to work with.Bevan also didnt play brutal innings like so many of Dhoni's.how many knockout games has he won for Aus let alone WC finals?
 
yeah

u know that guy that is a match-winner? that no team can relax against till he is out

that applies to many cricketers/big hotter.fact is his average is very low to be even considered
 
Razzaq was good when he was in his prime but that mantle surely goes to Dhoni.
 
It has to be Dohni, of recent times he never gets under pressure i sometime get the feeling that he performs even better while under pressure and makes sure his team gets to the finishing line.
 
yeah

u know that guy that is a match-winner? that no team can relax against till he is out


A professional team should never 'relax' until and unless all of the opposition batsmen are out ....
Its not over till its over.
 
It has to be Chris Martin. He finishes the game / innings off, the first ball he faces. Ever seen / heard of a greater finisher. :)))

What about great Sunny Gavaskar ... An electrifying 36 of 174 balls in a world cup game, a marathon knock ... what a player. :)))

On a more serious note, its :jm
 
Comparative statistics of MG Bevan, MEK Hussey and MS Dhoni:

Right guys, here are a few stats that I have dug out of MS Dhoni, Michael Hussey and Michael Bevan. The intentions are not to prove one better than the other or anything as they are just random statistics. They don´t necessarily relate to them being finishers but rather just as normal batsmen and contributers to their team. Agreeing or disagreeing is a different thing, but I hope you guys will appreciate and respect the fact that it took me roughly a week to compile them. I tried my level best to remain impartial/unbiased towards all of them, and it is also likely that I might have miscalculated a few things and corrections made are most welcome:).

As of 26th March 2012 for all three players and include only the matches they have played in:

Edit: Statistics have been posted in post #77 and #78 in a much better way and are easier to understand.
 
Last edited:
2012-03-14_0005.png


In the 4th ODI of the recently concluded CB series, when faced with a task of chasing 13 runs in the last over, MS Dhoni, with his nerveless batting, delivered one of the most sensational victories for India. In doing so, he re-established the fact that cricket might be a team game but the difference between victory and defeat can sometimes be the skill of one man – the finisher.

A team’s opening batsmen might make a big score and the bowlers might squeeze the opposition out of the game but in close games, it’s the performance of a finishing batsman that defines the end result.
In a big game that is heading towards a close finish, one that is too close for comfort for those with a weak heart, the man in the middle must be one with a cool head. Amidst all the pressure, he must be able to assess exactly what approach is required and which bowlers he should attack. If he’s batting with the tail, how much can he trust them? Which bowlers can he expose them to and for how long?

A prime example of a man with a reputation to finish off games for his team was Michael Bevan. He was recognized for this role in the 90s. Alongside him were some other top players, such as Ranatunga, Harris, Thorpe, Azharuddin and Salim Malik. Inspired by this elite group of players, it seems the current crop has taken the standards of finishing games to an even higher level. Some examples include: Dhoni, Raina, Hussey, Klusener, Razzaq, deVilliers, Matthews, Morgan, the list goes on.

Dhoni’s innings in the CB Series re-ignites the argument: who is the best finisher after all? We, at CricketingMinds, researched various finishers, the types of innings they’ve played and put together an analysis on 4 of the best finishers of this era – Bevan, Dhoni, Klusener and Hussey. This time, it’s upto you to decide who the best finisher is, we’re just gonna put up the numbers.

A deep look into the statistics shows that there are varius types of innings, a ‘finisher’ can play. A specific criteria was formed to categorize a particular innings as a “finisher’s innings”.

TYPES:

Below are the different types under which a finisher’s innings can fall under:
• Man of the match: These finishers got the Man of the Match for their performances, suggesting how their batting won their team the game. Example can be Dhoni’s finishing act in the 2011 World Cup final: http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc_cric...ch/433606.html

• Type 1 – the almost worthy man of the match: These finishers played a Man-of-the-Match worthy performance but did not get it due to some other player’s performance. An example is Michael Bevan’s brave performance while chasing the English total in this match:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65269.html

• Type 2 – quick-fire innings to finish: These finishers came in with a few overs left to bat and with a quick Strike Rate (relative to the team) they played a quick innings and did the job: Example is Dhoni’s quick-fire 28 off 13 balls in this game:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/215286.html

• Type 3 – played second fiddle: played an essential innings by supporting another batsman (who is going strong), or took lead to finish off a small amount of runs required. Michael Hussey’s innings of 25 to chase 42 runs when he came in, is an example of this:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/226381.html

• Type 4 – normal finish: a finisher’s innings which satisfied the criteria but did not come under any of the above categories. Example can be Michael Bevan’s innings of 40 off 70 balls in this match: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66373.html

CRITERIA:

Here are the criteria established for an innings to be called a “finisher’s innings”:
When his team bats first:
• The team wins or the result is a draw
• Stays not out or gets out with 2 overs to go
• Scores at least 25 runs
When his team bats second:
• The team wins or the result is a draw
• Stays not out
• Scores at least 25 runs

NOTE: The criteria might appear harsh on some counts but here is the justification:
- A batsman plays a finisher’s knock when his team loses, does not account for a team win and so losses (and matches with ‘No Result’) are excluded. (Matches which were draws are included)
- There are cases where batsmen got out in the 48th over while batting first and playing good innings – a threshold had to be formed and that is where the line was drawn.
- There are cases where the batsman scored a useful score which is less than 24, but there are too many cases where the value of the performance is arguable, so it’s better to discount those.
- The strike rates were not a consideration since Bevan and Klusener belong to a time where the teams never saw scores 400 whereas in these recent times, to which Dhoni and Hussey belong to, the average strike rate of batsmen matters a lot more, relatively speaking of course.

THE FINISHERS:

Here is a look at the players in contention:
Michael Bevan: The first man to be known as the “Finisher”, Bevan’s speciality was his ability to score quickly and occupying the crease, getting his team out of tense situations. He was a run-machine who was one of the first batsmen to end his ODI career on an average of 50+ , the biggest reason being his 67 not outs in 196 innings. One of the most classic innings he played came in the World Cup 2003, in the match against England when Australia, needing 205 to win, were down at 135/8. He ended up scoring 74 not out, and with the help of Andy Bichel chased the target down with 2 balls to spare.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Bevan's shortlist

M.S.Dhoni: The Indian captain, in the recent series, just highlighted the fact that he truly is one of the best ‘finishers’ of modern times. Ability to score quickly in high pressure situations and maintaining a cool head, a feature which has also sets him apart from other captains is what makes Dhoni special. In 2005, Dhoni launched himself on to the international scene with a scintillating 148 against Pakistan. His first true finisher’s knock came against West Indies where he scored a fantastic 28 off 13 balls from number 7 to get India to a good total and the outcome of the match was that India won by 7 runs. However the best innings came in the World Cup final 2011 when he scored 91 not out to lead India to a World Cup victory in 28 years.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Dhoni's shortlist

Lance Klusener: The man of the series of World Cup 1999 might have failed in the semi-finals back then, but he by then had established himself as one of the best finishers lower down the order. Batting at the death, with the tail on most occasions, Klusener played some amazing innings at number 8 and 9 to win South Africa crucial matches. One of these special innings came in World Cup 1999, against Sri Lanka (the defending champions back then), when Klusener, coming in at 115/7 at number 9, scored a quick 52 not out on a difficult pitch to set Sri Lanka a competitive target of 200.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Klusener's shortlist

Michael Hussey: When Hussey arrived on the international scene, it seemed as if he was another version of Michael Bevan for Australia. He rarely showed any signs of feeling pressure and managed to squeeze out runs consistently without throwing his wicket away regardless of the situation. Unlike Bevan, Hussy also established himself in Test cricket his mental toughness seemed to have strengthened his ODI abilities as well. Having earned the nickname Mr Cricket, he was a late bloomer for cricketing standards as he started his career quite late. This didn’t stop him from maintaining an average of around 50 and playing some memorable innings making Australia win matches. Unlike Bevan, Hussey has also been able to clear the rope quite consistently – Bevan hit a lone 21 sixes in 196 innings, whereas Hussey has hit 73 sixes in 146 innings. Although Hussey’s best finisher’s knock was undoubtedly in the T20 WC 2010 semi-final, scoring 60 off 24 against Pakistan, he has also played some wonderful ODI innings.
Here is the shortlist of the innings which fulfilled the criteria: Hussey's shortlist

ANALYSIS:
2012-03-13_2354.png

This table compares how many innings each batsman has played and how many made through the short list. Bevan leads with 38 innings, but given M.S.Dhoni’s spectacular form recently and the amount of matches is likely to play in the future, it wouldn’t be wrong to say that Dhoni will overtake Bevan in the number of innings. An astonishing fact is that the highest ratio lies with Michael Hussey who, as per this, plays a true finisher’s knock every 4.56 innings. Does that tell us the complete story?
To get a more complete picture, let’s look at how many of these ‘finisher’ innings were played while the team was batting first and how many were played while chasing:

2012-03-13_2356.png

Based on the table above, it’s safe to say that Dhoni reserves his best for games in which he can finish off not just the innings, but the match itself and lead his team to victory. The most important performance of his career came in a situation where his team needed to chase a big score and in the grandest stage of all, the world cup final. Dhoni also has the highest average (amongst test playing nations in ODIs with the minimum qualification of 500 runs) when chasing as seen here. On a different note, it seems that left handers were more successful batting first. Hussey is a prime example in this case, and he also has the highest overall average amongst finishers.
There is a variety of innings a finisher can play and some might be more special than others. Let us take a look at the number of performances which won each one of them a Man of the Match award:

2012-03-13_2358.png

Given that different aspects of a good finisher are highlighting the qualities of different batsmen, it’s no surprise that Lance Klusener manages to stand out in this list. Dhoni might have the most Man of the Matches amongst the batsmen; Klusener has the best ratio when he’s on song, a characteristic which earned him 9 Man of the Match awards in 20 innings.
However, some might winning the Man of the Match award is still not be adequate to show the finisher’s contribution to his team’s victory. Someone else might have scored a hundred but the finisher would have hit a six of the last ball to seal the game under pressure.
Let’s look at the number of innings played by each finisher with respect to the types defined earlier:
NOTE: Characterising types does not make one innings more special than the others – a finisher plays according to the situation and in different situations, different innings can win matches.

2012-03-14_0000.png

Type wise innings as percentages of total ‘finisher’ innings:

2012-03-14_0001.png

Dhoni has the highest ratio of playing innings which are almost worthy of being a Man of the Match innings. All players have a decent “Type 1” percentage over 20%. However when there are 5 overs left to bat, Bevan and Hussey would be the most desirable. One reason why Dhoni has just 5% is because a lot of his ‘finisher’ innings ended up turning into “Type 1”. To explain it further, a characteristic of Dhoni is that he sometimes comes up the order to bat in certain situations. Hence he ends up playing a much more important role. If a team needs some calm batting to chase down and someone needs to pace the team’s innings, Hussey or Dhoni would be the best choices to play a “Type 3” innings.
Another noteworthy parameter is the number of innings each batsman played from different batting positions.
NOTE: For a finisher’s role, batting positions 3 to 9 were considered.

2012-03-14_0002.png

There are a few things we can take from this table:
- Bevan’s expertise can be seen at number 6, a position which gave him the recognition of being called “The Finisher”. Bevan, in this interview also stated the level of importance he gave to staying not out and being there till the end as the No. 6 batsman - a reason for which he is successful. - Hussey, who came after Bevan, has however adapted himself to the positions 5 to 7.
- Dhoni’s versatility can be seen by him getting at least 4 innings at every position from 3 to 7 – more centered on position 5 and 6.
- Klusener is the best option to have at number 8 – a lot of his ‘finisher’ knocks coming from down the order.

Unlike some of our previous articles, we don’t have a solid conclusion as to who the best finisher truly is. There are no set criteria for what defines a finisher, but here at Cricketing Minds, we’ve done our best to quantify this trait. Each player in this list has his own strengths and in one way or another can claim to be the best in the world at what he does.

CricketingMinds
Follow us on Twitter: @CricketingMinds
I was expecting somebody from pakistan on the pictures but its not there
 
I was expecting somebody from pakistan on the pictures but its not there


Yeah i wish that too. Unfortunately, Pak did not produce a consistent finisher whose record and stats would be comparable to those of Dhoni Bevan or Hussey.

Razzaq has decent numbers for 1st innings only. Not so much while chasing.

If you think about it, Pak has never been good at chasing totals in Tests or ODIs.
The reason for that is the fact that Pak doesn't have a proper "finisher" who can fight till the end and make sure Pak wins the game.

Let's hope Hammad Azam/Umar Akmal become the finishers which Pak need desperately atm.
 
Eoin Morgan is a very good finisher on his day but Hussey is my most favourite.

Pollard's on the way up so he might be one for the future.
 
Only Bevan could play the miraculous innings

anyone remember his last ball 4 against Windies and his century against NZ
 
Comparative statistics of MG Bevan, MEK Hussey and MS Dhoni:

Right guys, here are a few stats that I have dug out of MS Dhoni, Michael Hussey and Michael Bevan. The intentions are not to prove one better than the other or anything as they are just random statistics. They don´t necessarily relate to them being finishers but rather just as normal batsmen and contributers to their team. Agreeing or disagreeing is a different thing, but I hope you guys will appreciate and respect the fact that it took me roughly a week to compile them. I tried my level best to remain impartial/unbiased towards all of them, and it is also likely that I might have miscalculated a few things and corrections made are most welcome:).

As of 26th March 2012 for all three players and include only the matches they have played in:

Above all stands, here are the statistics again:

***Please check the next post too for a further clarification.***
 

Attachments

  • Dhoni Final.JPG
    Dhoni Final.JPG
    230.7 KB · Views: 388
Comparative statistics of MG Bevan, MEK Hussey and MS Dhoni:

Guys, here is a clarification and an overview of things:
 

Attachments

  • Übersicht.JPG
    Übersicht.JPG
    26 KB · Views: 375
Funny.

The two biggest contenders are playing right now.
 
Funny.

The two biggest contenders are playing right now.

Dhoni has declined a lot in the last three years.

Don't think that he is the same "best finisher" anymore, despite of the last knock.

Doubt that there will be much competition.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top