Cricket's most over rated players

[Xuhaib]

I highly doubt casual watchers under 15 or teenage girls smitten by his looks chose the World ODI XI for the super series.

TBF he was in awsome form at that time and his bowling in ODI's is mostly pretty good.

 

[Perm]

Hardly the one's whose oponions matter.

No, of course not. I'd value your opinion and also that of other Pakistani members of this forum far more than I would worry about millions of people worshipping a slogger.

 

[TT Boy]

No, of course not. I'd value your opinion and also that of other Pakistani members of this forum far more than I would worry about millions of people worshipping a slogger.

Who has also taken over 200 ODI wickets at less than five runs an over. Afridi maybe overrated in regard to his batting but his all-round cricketing abilities are woefully underrated, Pakistan’s best all-rounder by miles.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Who has also taken over 200 ODI wickets at less than five runs an over. Afridi maybe overrated in regard to his batting but his all-round cricketing abilities are woefully underrated, Pakistan’s best all-rounder by miles.

 

[Prince EWS]

Watson is more underachieving than over-rated, one feels. No-one really rates him that highly, other than his devoted fans who insist he'll do better with an extended run in the test side (he's played what, 2 matches?) and a more appropriate role in the ODI side. No-one seriously expects Watson to dominate with the ball or be the ideal #7 in ODIs - so I don't really see how he's over-rated.

He's under-rated in the fact that people pick him as someone who is probably the worst genuine batsman in the ODI side and the worst frontline bowler in it as use it to make him out as the weakness he really isn't. He is the great hope in people's eyes that Australia might just have a weak link - or the man that gives agenda-driven journos in Australia someone to demand be dropped. But his first class record with the bat is enough alone to get him into the test team and his bowling has been more than useful at that level as well. As an one day cricketer, he's rapidly improving from someone who was a genuine passenger picked on potential to someone who genuinely commands his place in the team with the bat - I'm sure he'd make any other country's ODI team on batting alone - who can operate as a fourth quick bowler and bowl in the powerplay overs and at the death.

The only thing that really is over-rated about him is exactly how much the general public rates him, IMO - he's slagged off at every opportunity as the man to attack to make you think you know something about cricket.

 

[Fiery]

Watson is more underachieving than over-rated, one feels. No-one really rates him that highly, other than his devoted fans who insist he'll do better with an extended run in the test side (he's played what, 2 matches?) and a more appropriate role in the ODI side. No-one seriously expects Watson to dominate with the ball or be the ideal #7 in ODIs - so I don't really see how he's over-rated.

He's under-rated in the fact that people pick him as someone who is probably the worst genuine batsman in the ODI side and the worst frontline bowler in it as use it to make him out as the weakness he really isn't. He is the great hope in people's eyes that Australia might just have a weak link - or the man that gives agenda-driven journos in Australia someone to demand be dropped. But his first class record with the bat is enough alone to get him into the test team and his bowling has been more than useful at that level as well. As an one day cricketer, he's rapidly improving from someone who was a genuine passenger picked on potential to someone who genuinely commands his place in the team with the bat - I'm sure he'd make any other country's ODI team on batting alone - who can operate as a fourth quick bowler and bowl in the powerplay overs and at the death.

The only thing that really is over-rated about him is exactly how much the general public rates him, IMO - he's slagged off at every opportunity as the man to attack to make you think you know something about cricket.

haha, who mentioned Shane Watson?

 

[howardj]

I'm so over the term 'over-rated'.

 

[pasag]

Watson is more underachieving than over-rated, one feels. No-one really rates him that highly, other than his devoted fans who insist he'll do better with an extended run in the test side (he's played what, 2 matches?) and a more appropriate role in the ODI side. No-one seriously expects Watson to dominate with the ball or be the ideal #7 in ODIs - so I don't really see how he's over-rated.

He's under-rated in the fact that people pick him as someone who is probably the worst genuine batsman in the ODI side and the worst frontline bowler in it as use it to make him out as the weakness he really isn't. He is the great hope in people's eyes that Australia might just have a weak link - or the man that gives agenda-driven journos in Australia someone to demand be dropped. But his first class record with the bat is enough alone to get him into the test team and his bowling has been more than useful at that level as well. As an one day cricketer, he's rapidly improving from someone who was a genuine passenger picked on potential to someone who genuinely commands his place in the team with the bat - I'm sure he'd make any other country's ODI team on batting alone - who can operate as a fourth quick bowler and bowl in the powerplay overs and at the death.

The only thing that really is over-rated about him is exactly how much the general public rates him, IMO - he's slagged off at every opportunity as the man to attack to make you think you know something about cricket.

Afridi, imo.

 

[Prince EWS]

haha, who mentioned Shane Watson?

I know that was slightly tongue-in-cheek, but...

Shane Watson

The MOST Overated player in international Cricket in ALL forms of the game is...........(drum roll)........Shane (bloody) Watson!

My old Gran used to say "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones". Mr. Watson should take heed.

Going through it country by country, I'd say
Australia: Watson
England: Harmison
Sri Lanka: Tharanga
Pakistan: Afridi
New Zealand: Vettori
India - Pathan
West Indies: Gayle
South Africa - Smith

Yeah but Watson's still overated....so's Brad Hogg ffs

You (a few times), Bahnz and JBMAC.

 

[Fiery]

I know that was slightly tongue-in-cheek, but...









You (a few times), Bahnz and JBMAC.

Thanks Prince...I thought I was a lone voice

 

[The Sean]

Afridi, imo.

Nah, a completely over-rated post.

 

[Prince EWS]

Nah, a completely over-rated post.

Now now, you have no right to say that, as a few select people may believe that you made an even more over-rated post in the past.

 

[Raghav]

Going through it country by country, I'd say
Australia: Watson
England: Harmison
Sri Lanka: Tharanga
Pakistan: Afridi
New Zealand: Vettori
India - Pathan
West Indies: Gayle
South Africa - Smith

Oh no! He has proved time and again how valuable he is to the newzealand side. He not only bowls but he bats lower the order. He is a valuable asset to the team.

Never agree on this.. He has been performing...WC 2007 is such an example. He might not be a great attacking bowler but he is a bowler who knows his limitations very well. His variation of pace is awesome sight! Love him watching bowling than any other spinner IMO...for me

 

[Fiery]

Oh no! He has proved time and again how valuable he is to the newzealand side. He not only bowls but he bats lower the order. He is a valuable asset to the team.

Never agree on this.. He has been performing...WC 2007 is such an example. He might not be a great attacking bowler but he is a bowler who knows his limitations very well. His variation of pace is awesome sight! Love him watching bowling than any other spinner IMO...for me

Tremendous post that. Love hearing Aussies rate him

 

[Flem274*]

Ratings have got to have a set bar so i spose the question is, where is the bar set? If it was at say, an average of 35 in ODIs and someone said Scott Styris was a world class batsman then by looking at the set bar then they are over rating him.

Yes this post was written by a rambling insomniac.

 

[Fiery]

Ratings have got to have a set bar so i spose the question is, where is the bar set? If it was at say, an average of 35 in ODIs and someone said Scott Styris was a world class batsman then by looking at the set bar then they are over rating him.

Yes this post was written by a rambling insomniac.

And yes it sounding rambling

 

[Prince EWS]

Oh no! He has proved time and again how valuable he is to the newzealand side. He not only bowls but he bats lower the order. He is a valuable asset to the team.

Never agree on this.. He has been performing...WC 2007 is such an example. He might not be a great attacking bowler but he is a bowler who knows his limitations very well. His variation of pace is awesome sight! Love him watching bowling than any other spinner IMO...for me

I guess though, that when you say someone is over-rated, you're going to get a whole host of people disagreeing with you - it somewhat proves your theory. If everyone agrees with your assessment, then in fact everyone is wrong, and only the perception of a player's rating is over-rated, not the actual rating of the player.

 

[steds]

Anyone said Shane Watson yet?

 

[Prince EWS]

Anyone said Shane Watson yet?

Speaking of over-rated players, your avatar just won an award over here in Australia.

 

[steds]

Speaking of over-rated players, your avatar just won an award over here in Australia.

So I'd heard. Popular guy, it seems.