13 overrated players of the last 20 odd years

[Top_Cat]

Well, maybe they had reasons for retaining Hayden. But why was Hayden given 15 tests to redeem himself and Martyn given only 3? That is my point. The selectors seem to think that Hayden is worth more than Martyn and I disagree with that big time.

Couldn't agree more. The answer to your question, I don't have in both senses; why they retained Haydos but dropped Marto.

 

[howardj]

Most Overated in my opinion and reasons why i think so:
Dennis Lillee
-Some consider him to be GODs gift to fast bowling, despite his stats being comparable to a whole host of other bowlers. He was a great bowler, others say he was the most complete bowler and this is where I draw the line.

Matthew Hayden
-No comment necessary but the fact that his rise in fame coincided with the departure of some of his former tormentors (Donald, Ambrose etc) is no mere coincidence. He is the quintesential FTB evidence of this can clearly be scene from his underperformance in the recent ashes when confronted by a fairly decent pace attack.

.

Yeah, regarding Lillee, there's much sentiment and legend surrounding him - it's certainly superseded his actual performances. It frustrates me that people rate him above McGrath. As for Hayden, well you only have to look at how guys like Ambrose, Walsh, Akhtar (last summer), McGrath (Australia v Australia A) and the English pace quartet have found him out in the past. Hayden, a fine player, has never looked comfortable against the top echelon of fast bowlers.

 

[Top_Cat]

-No comment necessary but the fact that his rise in fame coincided with the departure of some of his former tormentors (Donald, Ambrose etc) is no mere coincidence.

Ambrose, absolutely, but Donald? He only dismissed Hayden once in his Test career in his first Test where he broke his thumb. Other than that, it has been Kallis who has caused him the most problems. Hayden also smacked the daylights out of South Africa in 2001-02 with four tons in 6 Tests.

 

[Jono]

Slifer, how is Dravid underrated? Who doesn't rate him highly?

 

[Dasa]

Slifer, how is Dravid underrated? Who doesn't rate him highly?

You'd still find plenty of people who don't think he is in the top class of batsmen of our era...he is very underrated in ODIs as well.

 

[marc71178]

As for his captaincy....he is highly regarded as an excellent captain mainly because a few slightly unorthodox fielding positions have come off.....hardly makes a great captain in my opinion. Overrated?

Tell me of any better one in current world cricket?

 

[sqwerty]

He is not Harmison. I don't think it makes too much difference to him whether he is at home or away as it seems to do to Harmison.

No but it is much easier to play a long series on your home turf. For the Aussies they're in and out of hotels, training, playing and living in unfamiliar environments and always on the move.

It's not just me who thinks an away series is much more hard work than a home series.....and that's whether your homesick like Harmison or not.

 

[Slats4ever]

Shane Warne is definitely overrated, but that is not so say he isn't any good. No one could deny that he is one of the best bowlers of his time, and certainly the best legspinner, but when people go on about him being the best bowler ever or better than Murali and McGrath, nearly always without any supporting evidence, things do get irritating.

umm he's taken the most test wickets. is that enough supporting evidence?

 

[thierry henry]

Over-Rated
- Darren Lehmann
- Damien Martyn
- Sean Pollock
- Sachin Tendulkar
- Chaminda Vaas
- Inzimam Ul-Haq

Underrated
- Adam Gilchrist
- Michael Bevan
- Shoaib Akhtar (there's always been a big question mark over him being a world top 5 bowler when in my opinion he is)
- VVS Laxman
- Chanderpaul
- Vettori

lol

If you completely switched the lists I would almost agree

 

[C_C]

umm he's taken the most test wickets. is that enough supporting evidence?

Kapil and Walsh held the record too. So they are the best pacers too ?
Warney is a great bowler but he is overrated IMO. Without McGrath, he is marginally better than Kumble - the only thing that seperates him and Kumble is a superior away performance and a marginally better statistic overall without McGrath.

 

[thierry henry]

Interestingly, Daniel Vettori can lay claim to being massively overrated as a Test bowler but massively underrated as a Test batsman, IMO. Just look at his record over the last few years excluding matches against Zimbabwe or Bangla.

The opposite is true of Kallis.

If I remember rightly, Vettori, since 2000, has averaged 50 with the ball in tests excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. I also think that in recent years he has averaged somewhere near 40 with the bat.

I also checked Kallis' recent record the other day, I think he was averaging 80+ with the bat (over quite a substantial period and excluding minnows) and over 60 with the ball.

As far as I'm concerned, when not playing Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, or Australia, Vettori is almost embarrassingly ineffective as a test bowler. I don't hate the guy and I sincerely hopes he proves me wrong with some consistent test performances against proper opposition.

 

[nookie_lk]

S Jones
S Harmison
KP
Ntini
Kirsten
Pathan
Laxman
Gilchrist
Fleming
Vettori
Hayden
M sami

 

[Deja moo]

lol

If you completely switched the lists I would almost agree

lol, yeah. some people have a wierd view of things.

 

[a massive zebra]

umm he's taken the most test wickets. is that enough supporting evidence?

Quite simply, he has taken more wickets than anyone else because he has bowled more deliveries than anyone else. Given enough matches even you or I could brake that record, but yes we may need about 100,000 deliveries to do so!!! In terms of average/strike rate/economy rate/wickets per match/matches per 5 wicket haul etc etc he is inferior to scores of bowlers, including at least half a dozen from his own era.

 

[a massive zebra]

well i have never heard anyone say he is better than McGrath plus it would a bit foolish to campare a great leg-spinner to a great fast bowler,

Take a look at this then. The blond bombshell is certainly more celebrated than McGrath and the general consensus amongst the uninitiated is that Warne is a superior bowler.

McGrath gets most of the big wickets for Australia, a high proportion of Warne's victims are tailenders (the highest proportion among all bowlers with over 300 wickets). McGrath has caused the very best like Lara and Tendulkar difficulties - Warne just gets hammered against them. Unlike Warne, McGrath hardly ever has a bad series and has a better record against 5 of the 8 teams both bowlers have played against. McGrath's highest average against any opponent is 25 (the same as Warne's career average) and Warne averages over 30 against two teams including 47 against India.

IMO those people that prefer Warne are simply following the typical ill educated media bandwagon.

 

[shaka]

imo they work best when bowling in tandem

 

[a massive zebra]

Yes definitely, they complement eachother perfectly, McGrath can get the top order out cheaply on a regular basis and Warne is a master of running through the tail. Without McGrath, Warne averages 27 and without Warne, McGrath averages almost 23.

 

[aussie]

Take a look at this then. The blond bombshell is certainly more celebrated than McGrath and the general consensus amongst the uninitiated is that Warne is a superior bowler.

McGrath gets most of the big wickets for Australia, a high proportion of Warne's victims are tailenders (the highest proportion among all bowlers with over 300 wickets). McGrath has caused the very best like Lara and Tendulkar difficulties - Warne just gets hammered against them. Unlike Warne, McGrath hardly ever has a bad series and has a better record against 5 of the 8 teams both bowlers have played against. McGrath's highest average against any opponent is 25 (the same as Warne's career average) and Warne averages over 30 against two teams including 47 against India.

IMO those people that prefer Warne are simply following the typical ill educated media bandwagon.

has i said before its a bit foolish to compare them because they work well as a combination for Australia, unlike Murali who is SRI only strike bowler & he is forced to take most of the major wickets.

 

[C_C]

has i said before its a bit foolish to compare them because they work well as a combination for Australia, unlike Murali who is SRI only strike bowler & he is forced to take most of the major wickets.

The fact that Murali has the capability to operate as a sole strike bowler with significantly higher efficiency ( averages 22+change) vs Warney who is massively dependent on McGrath ( he averages 26-27 when McGrath isnt present and doesnt bag nearly 6 wickets/match either) underlines why murali is vastly superior to Warney.

In fast bowling terms, its a bit like comparing McGrath and Walsh.

 

[andyc]

Steve Harmison, very disappointing in the Ashes I thought