Worst Player To...

[tooextracool]

I could pick an XI of England players who couldn't even rub Strauss's boots during the last couple of years.. But they'd all be Mahmood

sorry i should have said 'batsman'. i think its without doubt that strauss is the worst amongst all the batsmen in both forms of the game.

 

[NUFAN]

Mahanama was pretty crap. Played 52 Tests and averaged only 29.27 however he did score a double century when Sanath smashed 340, so it would be harsh to say he was the worst player ever to play 50 Tests.

 

[tooextracool]

Mahanama was pretty crap. Played 52 Tests and averaged only 29.27 however he did score a double century when Sanath smashed 340, so it would be harsh to say he was the worst player ever to play 50 Tests.

mahanama played almost exclusively in a period when SL were largely a minnow. He can be excluded otherwise we'd have to start bringing up Grant Flower and Alistair Campbell as well.

 

[NUFAN]

mahanama played almost exclusively in a period when SL were largely a minnow. He can be excluded otherwise we'd have to start bringing up Grant Flower and Alistair Campbell as well.

Ok fair enough, I will vote for Ken Rutherford then..

 

[nato]

Hooper is the worst to play 100 tests by a distance IMO. A distinctly average test player who was kept in the team by stubborness, lack of competition and the occasional impressive innings.

The words you used hurt so much . Carl Hooper was a huge dissapointment though wasnt he? He did average 50 when captaining the side IIRC. I loved watching him in full flight. He had as much time as Mark Waugh when playing shots. I guess the pressure of been the heir apparent to Viv Richards must of got to him.

And to add another one to the mix, unless its come in after the post that i quoted. Graeme Hick. I mean for all the talent and potential he had, when it got to test cricket he was a huge flop.

 

[Richard]

mahanama played almost exclusively in a period when SL were largely a minnow. He can be excluded otherwise we'd have to start bringing up Grant Flower and Alistair Campbell as well.

Flower and Campbell played plenty and plenty when Zimbabwe were certainly ODI and Test standard, and really when were SL ever substandard?

 

[tooextracool]

Flower and Campbell played plenty and plenty when Zimbabwe were certainly ODI and Test standard, and really when were SL ever substandard?

anytime before the end of 95 when they beat Pakistan they were clearly substandard IMO, while Zimbabwe have only ever been half decent for the tiny period when they had Goodwin, Streak, Andy Flower, and Johnson all in the same side.

 

[pup11]

Ridley Jacobs and Mohd.Sami,how many test matches did they play??

 

[ramkumar_gr]

a) Play 50 or more Tests

b) Play 100 or more ODIs

I've seen many posts in regrads to players not being of international standards, so I'm wondering, which players have slipped under the selector's radars and didn't get dropped

a) Many English players; Ramprakash and Butcher just to name two, how they played 52 and 71 Tests, I don't know.

b) I can't think of too many at the moment, I'll come back and update this one. Afridi or Azhar Mahmood maybe? SUre they've had their bright spots, but with their experience, you'd hope for better stats, especially from Afridi

Grant Flower, Rameez Raja, Krish Srikanth, Mark Ramprakash, Graeme Hick

 

[ramkumar_gr]

Worst test player ever: Patterson Thomson (WI)

 

[Perm]

Ridley Jacobs and Mohd.Sami,how many test matches did they play??

Ridley Jacobs played 65 Tests and 147 ODIs.
Mohammad Sami played 30 Tests and 81 ODIs.

 

[Dasa]

Ridley Jacobs and Mohd.Sami,how many test matches did they play??

I don't think Ridley Jacobs is close to being among the worst players to play 50 Tests.

 

[tooextracool]

Lol at ridley jacobs being amongst the worst players to play 50 tests.

 

[gettingbetter]

If Kim Hughes played 3 more ODis, he would certainly be up there. Suprisingly, his Test match record isn't all that bad and considering the situation he was facing, its even better than first thought.

 

[Fiery]

Grant Flower, Rameez Raja, Krish Srikanth, Mark Ramprakash, Graeme Hick

Graeme Hick shouldn't be anywhere near this thread. Underachiever? Yes. "Worst player to..." ? No

 

[Perm]

Graeme Hick shouldn't be anywhere near this thread. Underachiever? Yes. "Worst player to..." ? No

Agreed, like I said earlier Mark Ramprakash and Graeme Hick aren't bad players, they were just pretty bad at Test level.

 

[Fiery]

Agreed, like I said earlier Mark Ramprakash and Graeme Hick aren't bad players, they were just pretty bad at Test level.

I wouldn't even say he was "pretty bad". He was shafted by the selectors, used as their scapegoat so many times, always in and out of the team and any batsman who averages over 30 in test cricket has done OK...not great...but shouldn't be considered for the title of this thread anyway.

 

[Perm]

I wouldn't even say he was "pretty bad". He was shafted by the selectors, used as their scapegoat so many times, always in and out of the team and any batsman who averages over 30 in test cricket has done OK...not great...but shouldn't be considered for the title of this thread anyway.

Maybe if he's playing Test cricket for New Zealand, as a general sort of rule I think that anyone averaging under 40 has just been an average performer at Test level, but that is a very general sort of rule. There was a reason he was used as the scapegoat so many times, beacuse he was a poor performer at Test level. No real excuse for it IMO, he had all the potential to be one of England's greatest Test batsman but failed at the highest level.

 

[Fiery]

Maybe if he's playing Test cricket for New Zealand, as a general sort of rule I think that anyone averaging under 40 has just been an average performer at Test level, but that is a very general sort of rule. There was a reason he was used as the scapegoat so many times, beacuse he was a poor performer at Test level. No real excuse for it IMO, he had all the potential to be one of England's greatest Test batsman but failed at the highest level.

You are right about him having great talent and potential but there were times when he was unfairly dropped which would have affected his confidence at test level

 

[PY]

Yeah I think Hick's failing was his mental condition and that can't have been helped by the way he was treated by selectors. If he'd been in the side now, you could bet he'd have been given 30-40 Tests consecutively because of the loyalty shown to players nowadays.