Top Five Most Underrated Cricketers Ever.

[fredfertang]

Terrific shout. Miller is not just underrated in the cricketing world, but by society generally. There are people - actual living, breathing people - who don't consider him to be the greatest hero in the history of human life on this planet. It's beyond ridiculous.

Shagging a member of the Royal Family is a most admirable achievement, but I think you overstate your case just a tad

 

[Red]

Always George to his mates

You're a Statham fan aren't you Fred?

 

[Red]

"The Australian in excelsis" is one of the greatest calls ever.

 

[the big bambino]

^ This is the post claiming that Pollock had it easy.. Considering people were claiming Gilly was a match-saver, just checked the average figures to show that it was Gilly who was actually helped out by the platform set by his teammates more than Pollock.

No we were saying he was a match winner. Its amazing it even needs to be said.

 

[Red]

Anyways, judging someone based on the output of his teammates is kinda odd.

 

[viriya]

No we were saying he was a match winner. Its amazing it even needs to be said.

match-saver match-winner.. tomayto tomarto. is it that hard to accept that gilly had a better platform on average than pollock? it's doesn't denigrate his achievements - just points out that pollock's average was not to be scoffed at. anyway, the comparison was about pollock not gilly.. it's almost like gilly is above criticism like sachin here.. no more on this subject.

 

[the big bambino]

Tomayto tomato? Dear God. Try chalk and cheese.

And yes you proved Australia had a stronger batting line up than South Africa. Duh. What your meaningless stat fails to explain are the times gilchrist entered after a collapse and won us the game.

 

[cnerd123]

I think what he's saying is that the average score Gilly walked in on shows that there were more times where he came it on a cushy platform and flayed a tired attack than there are times he walked in to a pressure situation, and as such his average benefits from this. Which is a strange way to compare.

If the point you are trying to make is that an average of 32 is made even more valuable because Pollock walked in, on average, under more pressure...you need to justify that he actually averages 32 under such pressure first.

I am also lost on how Gilly enters this conversation if this is your point, given he doesnt bat at 8 and averages much much higher than 32.

Wouldn't a better comparison be to list out all the 'pressure' occasions Pollock and Gilly walked in on, find other their averages in such a situations?

Also, comparing 'average pressure faced per innings' is far less telling than listing down the % of innings they have walked in under pressure. And yea if you are gonna claim Pollock averaged 32 under more pressure than Gilly u are gonna have to prove it properly.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Just conflating two arguments.

 

[JBMAC]

Here is another five:

Conrad Hunte
Seymour Nurse
Peter May
Ian Redpath
Keith Stackpole

 

[JBMAC]

AND some more:

Peter Burge
Ken Mackay
Macgill
Colin Cowdrey
Peter Taylor (aka Peter WHO?)

 

[JBMAC]

AND the latest NOT the last:

Engineer
Contractor
Grout
Maclean
Colin Bland (arguably the best in the field of ALL time)

If you have not heard of these players then look 'em up. They may surprise you

 

[vic_orthdox]

Like May as a call.

Chuck in Ted Dexter. Think a lot of their contemporaries saw both of these guys being the equal of, if not better than, Barrington, which is why over time Barrington's figures stand out and he gets looked at as being "underrated" in these threads.

 

[Flem274*]

Nathan Hauritz never got any credit.

 

[the big bambino]

I think he was tossed aside for the X man. Not so much under rated as insulted.

 

[NZTailender]

Nathan Hauritz never got any credit.

Not from outside of the Hazza Appreciation Society.

 

[viriya]

Tomayto tomato? Dear God. Try chalk and cheese.

And yes you proved Australia had a stronger batting line up than South Africa. Duh. What your meaningless stat fails to explain are the times gilchrist entered after a collapse and won us the game.

ok ok ok stop right there.. I wasn't claiming that gilly had it easy.. just that on average he had it easier than pollock.. and that is not to say by any stretch of the imagination that pollock was somehow better than gilly.. just to make a point about pollock's 32 average not being pointless as some suggested (not compared to gilly i admit - probably a bad call considering the gilly fanboy club I seem to have angered..)

 

[NZTailender]

ok ok ok stop right there.. I wasn't claiming that gilly had it easy.. just that on average he had it easier than pollock.. and that is not to say by any stretch of the imagination that pollock was somehow better than gilly.. just to make a point about pollock's 32 average not being pointless as some suggested (not compared to gilly i admit - probably a bad call considering the gilly fanboy club I seem to have angered..)

 

[OverratedSanity]

ok ok ok stop right there.. I wasn't claiming that gilly had it easy.. just that on average he had it easier than pollock.. and that is not to say by any stretch of the imagination that pollock was somehow better than gilly.. just to make a point about pollock's 32 average not being pointless as some suggested (not compared to gilly i admit - probably a bad call considering the gilly fanboy club I seem to have angered..)

None of your arguments made any sense whatsoever... you deviated so far from the original debate (ie) Pollock not being that good with the bat, compared to all rounders like Botham, Miller, Imran and Dev. And if you aren't a gilly fanboy, well, it's your loss

 

[NZTailender]

I don't think there's a fan club as so much there are People Who Have Watched Test Cricket and Recognise a Great Player and the Value He Had Club. (PWHTCRGPVHHC)