Cricket's most over rated players

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Entertainment wasn't a specialty of his, that's pretty irrelevant to the overrated point that HDS was trying to make though.

Exactly. My reasoning is purely the hype that commentators had at the time. "Here comes Athers to save the day" etc. etc. when he was had quite a few bowlers who were readily able to exploit the holes in his technique I previously mentioned. McGrath was one, but I think Ambrose (or was it Walsh?) was equally adept and a couple of notable exceptions apart, Donald was able to dismiss him fairly often. Finally, his overall record does not stack up against the reputation he has.

I think Fiery's avatar is of Merv Wallace... Though I have to admit he's before even my time!!

EDIT: I believe a later New Zealand cricketer once called Wallace the "most underrated New Zealand batsman of all time", so he doesn't warrant a mention in this thread

 

[Fiery]

Fiery, who's that in your avatar.

That's Merv Wallace mate

 

[Pup Clarke]

Never heard of him. His cricinfo profile suggests that he should have had a longer and more productive test career.

 

[Fiery]

EDIT: I believe a later New Zealand cricketer once called Wallace the "most underrated New Zealand batsman of all time", so he doesn't warrant a mention in this thread

Yep, it was John R. Reid who said that about Wallace actually

 

[andmark]

Off the top of my head, if we're comparing reputation to performance ...

Brett Lee
Danish Kaneria
Alastair Cook
Graeme Smith
Hershelle Gibbs
Ramnaresh Sarwan
Chris Gayle

A year ago, I'd have included guys like Harmison & Laxman, but I don't think anyone over-rates them nowadays.

Harsh one feels.

Yeah I agree, Xuhaib.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Oh no! He has proved time and again how valuable he is to the newzealand side. He not only bowls but he bats lower the order. He is a valuable asset to the team.

Never agree on this.. He has been performing...WC 2007 is such an example. He might not be a great attacking bowler but he is a bowler who knows his limitations very well. His variation of pace is awesome sight! Love him watching bowling than any other spinner IMO...for me

I agree with you...Vettori is under-rated in my opinion.

 

[The Sean]

Shane Watson
Cameron White
Allan Border
Shayne O'Connor
Mike Atherton
Dave Richardson
Shane Watson
Richie Richardson
(not Mark Richardson as well, surely?)
Ashwell Prince EWS
Kyle Mills
Anyone with the surname 'Marshall' other than Malcolm
Mark Nicholas
David 'Syd' Lawrence
Shane Watson
Jeff Crowe
Ian Bishop

A few there I'd disagree with, but I'd be especially interested as to why you think AB was over rated.

 

[Son Of Coco]

What happened to Shayne O'Connor? He was impressive for about 5 minutes...injury?

 

[Bahnz]

Yep, stress fracture I think.

 

[Perm]

I agree with you...Vettori is under-rated in my opinion.

Take out all the cheap wickets against minnow sides from his stats and then see how he fares, especially in Test cricket.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Take out all the cheap wickets against minnow sides from his stats and then see how he fares, especially in Test cricket.

I've watched him play against Australia a number of times and he has rarely looked bad. He's one of the few players I'd consider a threat, especially in Australia. It's not all about his stats.

The minnows argument is over-rated in my opinion...everyone plays them, sometimes they get a bagful, sometimes they don't. If you're a decent player, you should have a number of wickets against them...having played a significant number of games.

 

[DJellett]

Take out all the cheap wickets against minnow sides from his stats and then see how he fares, especially in Test cricket.

Same can almos be said for Murali though, his record is far less impressive without said wickets...though he is still one of the greats.

 

[Perm]

I've watched him play against Australia a number of times and he has rarely looked bad. He's one of the few players I'd consider a threat, especially in Australia. It's not all about his stats.

The minnows argument is over-rated in my opinion...everyone plays them, sometimes they get a bagful, sometimes they don't. If you're a decent player, you should have a number of wickets against them...having played a significant number of games.

They cheapen his stats, there is no two ways about it. He averages over 35 in Test cricket if you exclude Bangladesh from his career average I think.

I've seen him play on countless occasions, and there is no doubt that he is a threat and is also a very smart bowler. He's still overrated though, and regularly talked about in the New Zealand media as a strike bowler, which he clearly isn't.

 

[Perm]

Same can almos be said for Murali though, his record is far less impressive without said wickets...though he is still one of the greats.

He performs very well against other nations as well, even with his super cheap wickets against Bangladesh his career average is still excellent.

 

[chaminda_00]

With Vettori he plays well against three sides from what i've noticed Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Australia. Then he struggles a bit against other sides. But most players around his level, good Test bowlers but not great do that. Cus he preforms well against the best and worst he will always be either over rated in some people's views and under rated in others. It just depends on which performs you have seen more of, or rate greater.

 

[Richard]

Absolute rubbish. Atherton's career can nicely be split in two - pre-injury and post-injury. His career pre-injury you'd be (arguably) correct, but after he was injured (I think it was a back injury) he was MASSIVELY over rated. You obviously didn't watch any of the test matches where the commentators would peddle the line "Ah, Atherton's the man that the opposition want to get out" only to be squared up on the crease and edge to slip 2nd or 3rd ball. Also, he had this miraculous ability to edge balls down the leg side to the keeper. He hung on for far too long and despite his technical failings he was still lauded as a great player. He was NOT. What was his average? 37?

As for better openers, Gooch would be the obvious; especially in the period 1988-1993.

That's nonsense. Atherton's career splits into quite a few parts, and his back problem (wasn't an injury, was a hereditary condition) first affected him in 1990, a few months after he started doing well.

Gooch's good period, meanwhile, was 1990-1994. And yes, overall he was indeed probably better, but it's not outright obvious.

 

[Richard]

The minnows argument is over-rated in my opinion...everyone plays them, sometimes they get a bagful, sometimes they don't. If you're a decent player, you should have a number of wickets against them...having played a significant number of games.

But not everyone plays the same amount, nor does it make-up equal percentages of everyone's career. How many times?

 

[Raghav]

Take out all the cheap wickets against minnow sides from his stats and then see how he fares, especially in Test cricket.

If you keep taking cheap wickets and cheap runs..and for that matter cheaper occasions , Tendulkar might be also a queestion mark for overrated batsman......

I think many of them would argue this...but we cant take a performance out considering it came of lesser oppennets or on lesser occasions

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

That's nonsense. Atherton's career splits into quite a few parts, and his back problem (wasn't an injury, was a hereditary condition) first affected him in 1990, a few months after he started doing well.

Gooch's good period, meanwhile, was 1990-1994. And yes, overall he was indeed probably better, but it's not outright obvious.

Your opinions and mine differ then. Atherton was talked up constantly and constantly failed to perform. His end career record fairly reflects the failure to live up to the hype and so called 'flawless technique' that he was supposed to have. To be fair to the English media, they didn't really have anyone else to write up that wasn't old (Gooch, Gatting, Gower), foreign (Lamb, Smith, Hick) or just plain crap (Lathwell, Morris, Morris, James etc. etc.)

He was overrated because he was constantly talked up but more often than not failed to perform.

As for the other guys on my list, I think Allan Border is overrated mainly because Tubbs was underrated in comparison. Taylor was an excellent player for Australia and is often unfairly put down in comparison to Border whose main achievement was instilling belief in the Australian team rather than any highly memorable individual performances.

 

[Perm]

If you keep taking cheap wickets and cheap runs..and for that matter cheaper occasions , Tendulkar might be also a queestion mark for overrated batsman......

I think many of them would argue this...but we cant take a performance out considering it came of lesser oppennets or on lesser occasions

Yes we can take a performance out, Tendulkar has played plenty of other great knocks so his performances against Bangladesh become less relevant.