Shri
Mr. Glass
Triggered.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Wastemen etc
- Thread starter slippy888
- Start date
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I agree he's underrated, but others have more cause for complaint - Stan McCabe the most underrated
Bijed
International Regular
I'm not sure I agree that he's underrated. He rightly receives a lot of praise for the quality of his strokeplay and the I would say prevailing opinion of him, which I agree with, seems to be that, in tests, at least, he performed very well, especially given the attacks he faced, but could have achieved more. I personally couldn't comment on whether he's one of the top ten best Aussie batsmen ever, as I just don't have the knowledge, but I imagine such an inclusion could be justified.
adam milne
What has happen to this guy he can bowl 90 mph with such ease and he seemed to have settled for being a one day cricket and 20 20 specialist and has no desire to get into New Zealand test match team, he is a talent for sure but you have to question his motivation.
What has happen to this guy he can bowl 90 mph with such ease and he seemed to have settled for being a one day cricket and 20 20 specialist and has no desire to get into New Zealand test match team, he is a talent for sure but you have to question his motivation.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
If Mark Waugh does not make someone's Australian ODI top 10, yes he is underrated.
For Tests, I just find it almost impossible to rate him inside that very exclusive number, despite him being my favourite cricketer growing up. Waugh is definitely known for making batting look easy and then finding ways to get out so you'd think he made too many 50-70 scores and no big daddy's to be considered truly in that elite class. I wouldn't bat an eye lid if people named him up with others bats in that high 40 average range, but realistically they probably aren't making Australia's top 10 either (apart from maybe Trumper and Harvey).
For Tests, I just find it almost impossible to rate him inside that very exclusive number, despite him being my favourite cricketer growing up. Waugh is definitely known for making batting look easy and then finding ways to get out so you'd think he made too many 50-70 scores and no big daddy's to be considered truly in that elite class. I wouldn't bat an eye lid if people named him up with others bats in that high 40 average range, but realistically they probably aren't making Australia's top 10 either (apart from maybe Trumper and Harvey).
Bijed
International Regular
I think he's been given a chance down the order and still didn't do a lot? I agree though that he should not be a test opener any longer - as you say, his record his shocking. He has 3 Centuries and 16 50s, so it's not even that he's just a poor starter, he doesn't tend to go on to make really big scores if he makes a start. His time may be up (though tbh, many others have been saying that for some while now and he's still there). Which seems weird, as, even with my limited knowledge of NZ cricket (which basically comes from reading people's posts here) there's a few obvious potential replacements around.
Edit: Off Topic somewhat, but just curious. Given the issues that NZ & England are having with their openers, what would be people say would be 'enough' for someone to keep their spot until someone much better comes along? Personally, I could live with someone averaging about 32 as long as they were consistently scoring 25 or so, i.e seeing the shine off the new ball. Of course, I'd probably then get annoyed if they didn't go on, but right now they're not even getting to double figures with much regularity.
Edit: Off Topic somewhat, but just curious. Given the issues that NZ & England are having with their openers, what would be people say would be 'enough' for someone to keep their spot until someone much better comes along? Personally, I could live with someone averaging about 32 as long as they were consistently scoring 25 or so, i.e seeing the shine off the new ball. Of course, I'd probably then get annoyed if they didn't go on, but right now they're not even getting to double figures with much regularity.
Last edited:
indiaholic
International Captain
The bare minimum would be someone like Aakash Chopra. Probably wont score a run but will hold one end up and ensure that the ball stops swinging before the middle order comes in to bat.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's actually a good question. I'd imagine it would be easy to fall into the trap of just rotating through openers far too frequently because none perform when it might be better to stick with the best you've got, even if they're underwhelming. Maybe there just isn't really a genuinely better alternative.
Like Australia with spinners, they picked like a dozen over the course of a few years and dropped them when they didn't take 5/40 after 1 or 2 games.
Shri
Mr. Glass
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Kiwis, ffs, Guptill is your 30th best test opener ever and there are 20 guys worse than him who have opened in the past for you. He is somewhere in the lower end of the scale in the middle. Stop acting like he is your worst test player ever.
Kiwis, ffs, Guptill is your 30th best test opener ever and there are 20 guys worse than him who have opened in the past for you. He is somewhere in the lower end of the scale in the middle. Stop acting like he is your worst test player ever.