Players who 'over-performed' internationally

[stephen]

Nathan Hauritz is a player who comes to mind. He was really not a very good first class bowler but was much better than expected at test level. I even thought he shouldn't have been dropped for Lyon at the time.

 

[Zinzan]

I don't think Jadeja is very good. What do you fellas reckon?

World's best bowler for mine

 

[Kirkut]

Tendulkar.

That was a lofted bullet shot over the bowler's head!

 

[Shady Slim]

i'd like to put smith forward but he earnr his overperformance through heaps of hard work

 

[honestbharani]

In the time I have seen, I will say Alastair Cook and Steve Waugh. Not that they were not good, but they were players whose ceiling just based on batting ability would have been at the very good level but they "overachieved" through being smart and working hard to take themselves to the "great" bracket amongst batsmen.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think defesinve batsmen sometimes get shoehorned into the "not talented but worked hard" thing too often. Waugh maybe didn't show how great he would go on to become early in his career, but Cook was pretty impressive pretty much from the beginning.

Cook's temperament and concentration, you could argue, are raw attributes and part of what you call 'talent'. Talent isn't just the ability to time the ball, it can be many other things.

 

[honestbharani]

Nah, you need shots to score runs and he has a very limited repertoire of shots. When I say batting ability, I mean the ability to score runs off various types of deliveries you might face in international cricket and I dont think many will argue that Cook and even SWaugh had fewer options compared to other players. But they just made better use of the options they did have, than most other batsmen. And IIRC, even in the 2005 series when he made his debut, I mentioned that Cook might be able to play time much better than score runs. And he has definitely shown he can do both. Hence I feel they "overachieved". And I mean that as a compliment.

 

[ImpatientLime]

I think defesinve batsmen sometimes get shoehorned into the "not talented but worked hard" thing too often. Waugh maybe didn't show how great he would go on to become early in his career, but Cook was pretty impressive pretty much from the beginning.

Cook's temperament and concentration, you could argue, are raw attributes and part of what you call 'talent'. Talent isn't just the ability to time the ball, it can be many other things.

oh god this so much.

people prattling on about 'natural talent' and lacking 'intangibles'.

natural talent = shot making only in their minds and mental qualities being something that you should just expect to possess.

 

[Daemon]

over the years the terms have come to mean what they're most commonly used as. just accept it and roll with it imo. no harm.

 

[Howe_zat]

over the years the terms have come to mean what they're most commonly used as. just accept it and roll with it imo. no harm.

Nah it's a problem. It leads to people who have worked their jacksies off to get a textbook technique, but lack a natural eye or powers of concentration, are dismissed as lazy. Because they look good but don't consistently make big scores, you hear about them being spineless/brainless/relying on talent alone.

 

[Daemon]

Nah it's a problem. It leads to people who have worked their jacksies off to get a textbook technique, but lack a natural eye or powers of concentration, are dismissed as lazy. Because they look good but don't consistently make big scores, you hear about them being spineless/brainless/relying on talent alone.

Yeah that's an issue of lazy stereotyping, but I was referring to the common usage of natural talent = eye and temperament/concentration being separate from 'talent' or 'ability'.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Everyone credits Tendulkar for cutting out the cover drive for one innings to make a double century.

But cut out a number of shots for your career to reduce risk, and you're less talented.

 

[AndrewB]

Must be one of the few (only) cases where a player has averaged over 50 while never having scored a half century.

Jomel Warrican is (currently) the only other player with a Test average over 50 without a FC 50. In his case, it's due to 6 not-outs in 7 Test innings.

 

[cnerd123]

Jomel Warrican is (currently) the only other player with a Test average over 50 without a FC 50. In his case, it's due to 6 not-outs in 7 Test innings.

Until this post I wasn't even aware that Jomel Warrican was playing tests.

 

[honestbharani]

Jeezz.. u guys


I also always say Lara is more talented than Tendulkar. Its not just about the ability to think of a shot for any type of delivery though, its also the ability to execute it. Case in point - AB and Lara. To me, that is shotmaking talent - both conception and execution- that a Steve Waugh or a Cook lack. But, they have made themselves equally good as batsmen even though the other two are better at the ability to play shots, which you need to do to score runs. Its really such a simple thing for all of you to jump on. No one is talking about hard work or laziness here. Unless you think AB or Lara were lazy. To me, all 4 were equally talented when it comes to working hard and ensuring they are at the right state to produce their optimum output.

 

[cnerd123]

I used to feel 'talent' is a term that belongs to things like hand/eye co-ordination, reflexes, and general body control, but over the years my experiences from following/training/playing different sports has lead me to use talent to cover things such as temperament, coachability, concentration, work ethic, etc. These are all things that some people are just inherently better at - ie, more 'talented' - than others.

 

[honestbharani]

I agree, *****, but I think all the things u listed there were equal between the examples I used. But its undeniable that a Lara or a AB had more shot options to a delivery than Cook or Waugh did. And yet Cook and Waugh are arguably just as good as batsmen as Lara and AB are. Which was my point in the original post.

 

[cnerd123]

Was just replying to the thread in general WRT the use of the word 'Talent'

 

[stephen]

The problem is that Shaun Marsh appears more talented than Steve Waugh and Warner looks like the greatest ever batsman if you believe that talent is the ability to play beautiful looking technically correct shots.

The problem is that hand-eye coordination, patience and concentration are batting skills which are just as, if not more important than the ability to play a hook shot and a ***y cover drive.

A real test match overachiever is someone like Lyon who really doesn't do well in the shield. Stoinis would be a good example of an ODI overachiever.

 

[ImpatientLime]

and Warner looks like the greatest ever batsman if you believe that talent is the ability to play beautiful looking technically correct shots.

wat