Is Murali the worst Number 11 in History ?

[NZTailender]

Wtf, there's no way Murali's the worst number 11 in history. He averages over 10, which is obviously better than <10 of which there are numerous number 11's.

 

[archie mac]

I still think I'm on a good thing with Reid. If you look at his sustained excellence in both Tests and ODIs. As well as in both forms of international cricket, he also had more List A wickets than runs.

Well Higgs was pretty bad, more first class wickets then runs http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/player/5652.html

 

[archie mac]

I think Jack Iverson had a Test average of less than 1

 

[Perm]

I think Jack Iverson had a Test average of less than 1

Haha, he sure did. Unfortunately he did score 31* in a FC match, so he must know how to hold a bat.

 

[sideshowtim]

McGrath was poor as a batsman, but he did play numerous very important hands in Test matches in his latter years. I don't think he's anywhere near the 'worst'. He performed a different job to Murali. And I'd rather have someone who averaged 7 and stuck around for a while so the bloke at the other end could make runs than someone who'd just swing his bat at everything and score a quick 11 every match.

 

[Matt79]

He's got a test half-century to his name, so that pretty much disqualifies him from being the worst IMO...

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Devon Malcolm.

 

[Neil Pickup]

In addition to the fact that Chris Martin is clearly the answer to the question, the fact that Murali would bat above Harmison, Hoggard and Panesar also suggests the answer is probably no.

 

[gettingbetter]

In addition to the fact that Chris Martin is clearly the answer to the question, the fact that Murali would bat above Harmison, Hoggard and Panesar also suggests the answer is probably no.

You sure? All of them have been nightwatchmen (not too sure about Harmison though).

 

[Josh]

I'm the worst number 11 in history... but am pretty handy when I bat at 6

 

[ozone]

Phil Tufnell. Not just about the stats but also the way he looked like an alcoholic stroke victim on a bouncy catsle when he was batting. It was always funny to watch him hopping around whenever anyone quick came on to bowl, particularly Walsh and Ambrose.

 

[Richard]

Agree Chris Martin is bad...Another one who was really bad was Alan Mullally who used to play for England... But anyone from current Test players...?

Alan Mullally once batted at nine in a Test (was a dark day indeed). Tufnell was even worse, and Edward Giddins I've seen no-one worse, ever, even Martin and Malcolm.

Think Alan Hurst was worse still?

 

[sideshowtim]

Haha, I remember in 98/99 when Mullally was absolutely woeful down here and scored something like 5 ducks in his first 6 innings. The one in which he didn't get a duck out of this run was an edge through slips.

 

[Beleg]

He isn't the worst by any stretch of imagination.

 

[Richard]

Haha, I remember in 98/99 when Mullally was absolutely woeful down here and scored something like 5 ducks in his first 6 innings. The one in which he didn't get a duck out of this run was an edge through slips.

And then slogged 16 in the second-innings at The MCG to play a massive part in the victory.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Agree Chris Martin is bad...Another one who was really bad was Alan Mullally who used to play for England... But anyone from current Test players...?

Mullally wasn't flash, but there were worse batsmen around playing for the same England teams (Malcolm, Tufnell, Such & the worst of the lot, Giddens) as him, never mind ever.

It's very rich that one should criticise Murali for playing over 100 tests and not improving his batting.

Glenn McGrath, anyone?

I reckon Murali has a fair bit more natural ability than McGrath, but you have to credit the latter with at least working hard at his game. He was able to hold an end up if a proper batter was in quite effectively in the latter stages of his career. I remember him & Hussey put on 100+ for the last wicket v SA a couple of years back which totally transformed the game.

Phil Tufnell. Not just about the stats but also the way he looked like an alcoholic stroke victim on a bouncy catsle when he was batting. It was always funny to watch him hopping around whenever anyone quick came on to bowl, particularly Walsh and Ambrose.

Tufnell was about the funniest because he was so utterly gutless when faced with anything over military medium pace. My enduring image is of him backing away to square leg with a guard on each arm vaguely wafting a bat in the direction of the ball.

Apparently tho he opened the batting for his club side (!), so wasn't devoid of ability, it just didn't translate to the highest level.

 

[Richard]

Giddens

Is ins UIMM.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Is ins UIMM.

Yeah, you're right.

 

[The Baconator]

Alan Mullally once batted at nine in a Test (was a dark day indeed). Tufnell was even worse, and Edward Giddins I've seen no-one worse, ever, even Martin and Malcolm.

Think Alan Hurst was worse still?

Irani
Caddick
Mullally
Giddins
Tufnell

Not a nice thought that.

 

[Richard]

Ironically,
Prior
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Anderson
MSP
had the potential to be even worse. Didn't quite happen though. Mind, the possibility (with Harmison perhaps replacing Anderson) remains. Against New Zealand too.

Fortunately you're probably too young to remember in full the horrors of said Oval 1999 Test. I'm not.