Players Who You Predicted Would Be Great................

[age_master]

Another addition to the list upon watching my Ashes '97 video is Matthew Elliott. What happened to him. He had it all as an opening batsman; sound defense, cuts, drives, hooks and pulls up there with the best (okay his hook was suspect sometimes but most times he put the ball out of the park).

The only reason as I see it was a defensive weakness outside of off-stump which guys like Pollock and Curtly were able to exploit. Realistically there was little else that was weak in his technique.

What a shame. He was such a gorgeous player to watch.

he never got picked after colliding with ME Waugh from memory

 

[Andre]

Nah, that was only his second or third Test match, well before he hit his straps....He was on 71 at the time of the collision, and that was his hightest score at the time.

 

[Deja moo]

Kambli
Marlon Samuels( retired? )
AA (not that he isnt great enough , hehehe)
Bruce Reid ?
Narendra Hirwani ( took 16 wickets or something in his first test)

 

[_Ed_]

Kenny Rutherford is a guy that comes to mind as never having reached the heights he should have.

He's now a presenter on our horse racing channel!

 

[Eclipse]

Brett Lee..

Ever since he was injured a few years ago he has been crap but before then he looked so good it's not even funny..

I think he changed his action and now delivers from a much lower trajectory than he used to. Unlike somone like Harmison who can afford to be a little ofline and length occasionaly because of his good trajectory and bounce Lee get's taken to peices if he strays off the perfect line and length.. Thats my opinion anyway..

 

[Eclipse]

Hauritz may yet prove me right but when I first saw him he seemed twice the bowler he is now. I thought he could have been a brillient player, maybe he still can.

 

[DocHead]

He's now a presenter on our horse racing channel!

Is he? Any good? He was on TV a lot on Saturday mornings here in SA. He was a riot, the byplay between him, Neil Andrews & Haysman was hillarious.

 

[Prince EWS]

Paul Collingwood
Matthew Sinclair
Vusi Sibanda (yes, Im very ashamed of this)
Martin Suji
Hamilton Masakadza
Owais Shah
Greg Blewett
Rajin Saleh (but theres still hope for him)

 

[Richard]

Neil Fairbrother never got a fair crack with England.

No, 75 ODIs (in which he performed brilliantly time after time for an exceptional average of 39.47) wasn't a fair crack at all!
I don't really think we can criticise the selectors too much for dropping someone with an average of 15.64 from 15 Test innings.

 

[aussie_beater]

Narendra Hirwani ( took 16 wickets or something in his first test)

Hirwani was the stock legbreak bowler, nothing more. He took those 16 wickets against WI in Madras in 1988 in a pitch where the ball was spinning like a top and with awkward bounce and keeping low and doing all sorts of wicked stuff. To top it all the Windies batsman with the exception of Gus Logie and Viv Richards, had no clue where the ball was going or what it was doing and were only attacking. That was a massacre in a very tough pitch. Hirwani didn't do much after that.

Two Indian spinners who I thought never fulfilled their potential....one was Laxman Sivaramakrishnan the leggie who had lot more potential then Hirwani, and the other was Maninder Singh.

 

[Arrow]

I think Graeme Hick turned out one to be one of the biggest disappointments of the modern era.

 

[Swervy]

Two Indian spinners who I thought never fulfilled their potential....one was Laxman Sivaramakrishnan the leggie who had lot more potential then Hirwani, and the other was Maninder Singh.

yes, those two had the potential to be great bowlers...will always remember maninder bowling in England in 86...bowled about 20 odd overs and took a few wickets for single figures...England didnt know what to do...and he was very young...he probably is only still about 24 years old now

 

[Swervy]

I think Graeme Hick turned out one to be one of the biggest disappointments of the modern era.

maybe the biggest infact

 

[Richard]

I think Graeme Hick turned out one to be one of the biggest disappointments of the modern era.

Only to those who didn't take the time to analyse his technique and identify a palpable weakness with heavy-footed dominance and the planting of the back leg.
Those who actually noticed that upon seeing him play realised that it was always going to lead to problems with the short-ball at the Test level. And they weren't too surprised when he failed time and again against the better attacks.
Mark Ramprakash, on the other hand, never had any problems whatsoever with his technique and simply turned-out to have a terrible temperament from his debut in 1991 up to 1996, and managed to average just 16 in his first 6 years. Now that was a huge disappointment.

 

[Swervy]

Only to those who didn't take the time to analyse his technique and identify a palpable weakness with heavy-footed dominance and the planting of the back leg.
Those who actually noticed that upon seeing him play realised that it was always going to lead to problems with the short-ball at the Test level. And they weren't too surprised when he failed time and again against the better attacks.
Mark Ramprakash, on the other hand, never had any problems whatsoever with his technique and simply turned-out to have a terrible temperament from his debut in 1991 up to 1996, and managed to average just 16 in his first 6 years. Now that was a huge disappointment.

were you one of those people then Richard who analysed Hick back in the mid 80's then.

I can tell you there was very little talk of Hick having problems vs fast bowling when he smashed the 88 WI's team for a massive hundred. Back in the mid to late 80's Hick was going to be Englands saviour and I cannot remember one journo/commentator or whoever saying otherwise...of course you will probably get those who use the benefit of hindsight to say that they were right all along.

fact of the matter was back then, Hick was the most dominant batsman to have played at county level for years...and most people would have thought he would improve with age..alas he didnt.

 

[Anil]

laxman sivaramakrishnan, sadanand vishwanath, maninder singh....wonderful talents, all....but sadly faded away without realising much of their immense potential....

 

[aussie_beater]

were you one of those people then Richard who analysed Hick back in the mid 80's then.

I can tell you there was very little talk of Hick having problems vs fast bowling when he smashed the 88 WI's team for a massive hundred. Back in the mid to late 80's Hick was going to be Englands saviour and I cannot remember one journo/commentator or whoever saying otherwise...of course you will probably get those who use the benefit of hindsight to say that they were right all along.

fact of the matter was back then, Hick was the most dominant batsman to have played at county level for years...and most people would have thought he would improve with age..alas he didnt.

Yes, hindsight is always 20/20...couldn't avoid that cliche

But if you were around those times, anyone would have felt like Hick was going to be the next Jack Hobbs for English cricket.

 

[biased indian]

Kambli
Blewett
Basit Ali
Hirwani
Lehman
Samuels

 

[Dar]

Wavell Hinds was certainly one for me, i thought he was going to be great. Owais Shah was another. James Anderson to a certain extent as well, when he started i thought there was no stopping him. I pictured him leading the england attack.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Vusi Sibanda (yes, Im very ashamed of this)

You've got a friend in me, as I thought he would be pretty good. I never thought he'd be great though.

Still, when he played that lovely cover drive to get off the mark with a boundary in Test cricket (his first ball I believe), he looked a class player.