subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Who are the poor players that stayed in teams much longer than could be justified?
when the rest are even worseWell the one that immediately sticks out is Rubel Hossain ..
How do you justify 27 tests with a bowling average of 76 ?
They waited a while to debut Ebadot , he was better, Al Amin was better , ..they could have debuted Saifuddin atleast he can bat etcwhen the rest are even worse
Playing another spinner was also a generally a better option for them, even in unfavourable conditions.They waited a while to debut Ebadot , he was better, Al Amin was better , ..they could have debuted Saifuddin atleast he can bat etc
You know your obsession with all things English really should be a concern for you......get some therapy you bore.Ramprakash, Hick, Crawley
Just being honest mate. tbf, because English play the most, they’re the most likely to have players in this category.You know your obsession with all things English really should be a concern for you......get some therapy you bore.
Being prolific in FC helped his cause. Good medium pace and wrist spin basher. Weaker v high pace.Mike Gatting's last five years were generally execrable and he probably should have been discarded earlier.
A bit tough to call Rahana bad.Just being honest mate. tbf, because English play the most, they’re the most likely to have players in this category.
Rahane is a recent player who comes to mind
In terms of selection and his team’s talent, there is no way Rahane should have played 86 tests. Maybe he’s not “bad” but with the calibre of cricketers India is currently producing he should never have played as much as he did.A bit tough to call Rahana bad.
If you're picking on England players, I'd probably go for some of those "new Bothams" from the 90s.
Yeah, I suspect he was kept on because unlike some of the younger players over recent years he had a reputation at least of making important contributions overseas.In terms of selection and his team’s talent, there is no way Rahane should have played 86 tests. Maybe he’s not “bad” but with the calibre of cricketers India is currently producing he should never have played as much as he did.
I mean, for a good chunk of his career he was productive especially away. But yeah, agree he should had been benched atleast 2 years before he was.In terms of selection and his team’s talent, there is no way Rahane should have played 86 tests. Maybe he’s not “bad” but with the calibre of cricketers India is currently producing he should never have played as much as he did.