Biggest Under achievers XI (tests)

[Dasa]

Tendulkar.

 

[Robertinho]

in that case, matt elliot, brad hodge and mike hussey deserve a mention

Hodge and Hussey still have careers ahead of them!

But yes, Elliot is long gone, was very good at the domestic level, but how could you choose him over Taylor, Slater, Blewett, Hayden, Langer, etc.?

Bevan should have definitely been a good test cricketer, his performance in the Pura Cup only shows what he is capable of. Too late, unfortunately.

 

[Link]

oh yeah, bevan is another good mention

 

[kwigibo]

Chris Cairns, just look at his stats. Stuart Law, played one test, made a not-out half century, will never have an average unless England picks him when he's 40-something.

 

[kendall]

Tendulkar.

il just asume that was a joke

 

[honestbharani]

I am surprised no one else mentioned Carl Hooper. That guy, when in mood, would bat like a right handed Lara and couple that with his intelligent and often under rated bowling and brilliant catching in the slips, forget Richards, he could have been the next Sobers....

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Simon Jones, Brett Lee and Ian Butler also deserve a mention.

I don't think either Simon Jones or Brett Lee were selected solely on their pace, they both proved themselves in different ways. Lee had a good run in domestic cricket and a fantastic start to his test career, and was eventually pushed out of the side due to injury and poor form, and Jones has had to battle with Anderson for an extended period and has clearly come out on top.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Stuart Clayton Williams
Non-Test FC Cricket
8334 Runs
Average: 45.05
100s: 25
50s: 33
HS: 252*

Test Cricket
1183 Runs
Average: 24.14
100s: 1
50s: 3

 

[neutralguy]

thats a bit stiff. he did average 40, and was more of a guy who didn't get the opportunity. wasn't even "dropped" as such from the team, had to make way for people coming back from injury.

yeah buddy, but his average in 40's is due to 2 not outs one against bangladesh(100 not out ) and another against england (62 not out).Apart from that in other innings he played ( which is around 6), he failed.My point is, if he is good enough he wouldn't have made way for katich or lehmann.Remember people were once saying that he is the next mark waugh, which did not happen.

 

[SJS]

There have been many. But of those I have seen myself .....

Carl Hooper and Salim Durrani absolutely top the list. Great players both of them who will not be remembered as such by history !!

 

[Zinzan]

I am surprised no one else mentioned Carl Hooper. That guy, when in mood, would bat like a right handed Lara and couple that with his intelligent and often under rated bowling and brilliant catching in the slips, forget Richards, he could have been the next Sobers....

You obviously didn't read the first post in this thread. I selected Hooper

 

[Marius]

Neil Mckenzie
Andrew Hudson

 

[SJS]

I have always thought of some great players who achieved a helluva lot but I felt they could have done much more !!

1. Tendulkar
2. Sobers
3. Colin Cowdrey
4. Prasanna
5. Bishen Bedi
6. Ted Dexter
7. Vishwanath
8. Subhash Gupte
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Ian Botham
11. Frank Worrell

Come to think of it, add a wicket keeper and this is a very formidable line up

 

[Prince EWS]

I always thought Kallis could have done more, to tell you the truth.

With bat and ball.

 

[Swervy]

I have always thought of some great players who achieved a helluva lot but I felt they could have done much more !!

1. Tendulkar
2. Sobers
3. Colin Cowdrey
4. Prasanna
5. Bishen Bedi
6. Ted Dexter
7. Vishwanath
8. Subhash Gupte
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Ian Botham
11. Frank Worrell

Come to think of it, add a wicket keeper and this is a very formidable line up

wow you are asking a lot of some of those players:

Tendulkar 71 international centuries, 23635 international runs
Sobers: 8000 test runs,averaging almost 60 with the bat, 230 test wickets
Lillee and Botham both held the wrold record for test wickets etc

tyou are a tough man SJS

 

[Dasa]

I have always thought of some great players who achieved a helluva lot but I felt they could have done much more !!

1. Tendulkar
2. Sobers
3. Colin Cowdrey
4. Prasanna
5. Bishen Bedi
6. Ted Dexter
7. Vishwanath
8. Subhash Gupte
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Ian Botham
11. Frank Worrell

Come to think of it, add a wicket keeper and this is a very formidable line up

Agree completely... that's why I mentioned Tendulkar. Watching him bat, I feel he should be averaging 60+ easily...

 

[SJS]

wow you are asking a lot of some of those players:

Tendulkar 71 international centuries, 23635 international runs
Sobers: 8000 test runs,averaging almost 60 with the bat, 230 test wickets
Lillee and Botham both held the wrold record for test wickets etc

tyou are a tough man SJS

No. I am not looking at Tendulkars 10000 runs and 34 100's to which he will add no doubt.
I think with his gifts and skills, he should have dominated the test cricket longer and with much bigger innings than he has managed. He, with his immaculate game and powerful strokeplay, was the next man after Bradman to pile up really large scores (Bradman had 12 double 100's) and still leave time for matches to be won. I think he got lost with thinking too much about what he wanted to do/

Similarly, Sobers did not do what he was capable of. He was too laidback. If he had Bradman's ambition and value for his wicket...WOW !

The others are more easily explained.

Basically these, were highly gifted players with natural gifts plus their huge skills who fought on relatively equal terms with much less gifted opponents.

 

[vic_orthdox]

yeah buddy, but his average in 40's is due to 2 not outs one against bangladesh(100 not out ) and another against england (62 not out).Apart from that in other innings he played ( which is around 6), he failed.My point is, if he is good enough he wouldn't have made way for katich or lehmann.Remember people were once saying that he is the next mark waugh, which did not happen.

so he did the wrong thing by being not out? he should have thrown his wicket away at the end to make sure that his average was what it really should have been? averaging 46 in 8 innings is hardly underachieving (and if you want to bring mark waugh into it, its a higher average than his) and his first class average of 49.9 is not exactly appalling. he's just been born in the wrong era. the lack of opportunities was hardly a fault of his own. especially when he was competing for a middle order spot behind the waughs for virtually his whole career. and he has only been given an opportunity when players have been injured, and generally we've seen that the australian selectors are happy for injured players to have a mortgage on their spot while they're out of the side.

 

[kendall]

Agree completely... that's why I mentioned Tendulkar. Watching him bat, I feel he should be averaging 60+ easily...

i really dont think you can call scroing 10000 runs and 34 centuries an underachievment surley most players could have done better but that doesnt make the underachivers in the game does it

 

[SJS]

i really dont think you can call scroing 10000 runs and 34 centuries an underachievment surley most players could have done better but that doesnt make the underachivers in the game does it

NO NO. I never ever claimed he is one of the under achievers meant for this thread.
For that I named only two. Hooper and Durrani.

These eleven I mentioned separately if you go back to that post as greats who achieved greatthings. But I wish they had done more since they were so bloody good.