The worst selections and non-selections in Test history

[steds]

The continued neglection of Dave Mohammed's talents is the most obvious case for the non-selections column.

 

[wpdavid]

Maybe one of the English players with the worst long term FC record seems to fit the bill according to cricinfo.

Id never rated him, and thats why I had a quick look

EDIT- Ned Larkins

He may well fit our bill, and I didn't rate him either, but I think cricinfo's comments are a little loose with the facts. iirc his '13 tests in an 11 year test career' was made up of a test or 2 circa 1980 then nothing until a longish run in the side during 1990 after Broad, Robinson & Athey had got themselves banned for joining Gatt in SA. He obviously wasn't up-to-it, but alternatives were thin on the ground, especially for the WI tour.

 

[wpdavid]

Yes fair point about Blakey, and I remember at the time thinking he was a worthwhile selection. Not sure I agree with you about Hegg though - he was a very well respected keeper.

And Hegg's selection did work. In the one game he played, Stewart was freed of the gloves, able to open and made his only 100 against Aus in a game that we went on to win.

 

[zaremba]

He may well fit our bill, and I didn't rate him either, but I think cricinfo's comments are a little loose with the facts. iirc his '13 tests in an 11 year test career' was made up of a test or 2 circa 1980 then nothing until a longish run in the side during 1990 after Broad, Robinson & Athey had got themselves banned for joining Gatt in SA. He obviously wasn't up-to-it, but alternatives were thin on the ground, especially for the WI tour.

And he "Nedded" the Aussies in an ODI in Sharjah in early 1990 IIRC.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

A mix of Test and ODI selections for West Indies. In recent memory...

1) Daren Ganga - Picked as a teenager for a 5-Test and 7-ODI tour of South Africa. What had he done? He scored one FC ton and apparently impressed someone, so in he went.
2) Xavier Marshall - Picked on the back of youth level runs and a good debut List-A season. But the worst bit was his continued selection despite looking woefully inadequated. I'm amazed he wasn't totally ruined by it.
3) Suruj Ragoonath - The worst specialist batsman to play for West Indies in the last decade. Picked because, IIRC, he scored a half-century against Australia in a warmup match. A classic "He hit big six!" selection.
4) Lincoln Roberts - A young man with a lot of potential, but picked on the basis of very limited domestic production and to play Australia. He registered a duck in his only Test innings. Amazed that he lasted 7 balls.
5) Dave Joseph - West Indies scraped the barrel for this one. Joseph was a mediocre domestic batsman, so he had no place being called up to play Australia. He played all 4 Tests of the 1999 series and was promptly discarded.
6) Dave Bernard Jr. - What did the selectors hope to achieve? He was so far short of Test class with both bat and ball and that much was obvious before he'd even received his cap.
7) Junior Murray - He had an immense season in 2001/02, so he was picked for the series against India, ahead of Ridley Jacobs. He scored 0, 0 and 1, then Jacobs returned. Ironically, Jacobs scored 0 in his first innings on return. He scored a ton an innings later.
8) Darryl Brown - Picked as an allrounder, despite being not just mediocre, but woeful with both bat and ball. An embarrassing selection.
9) Rawl Lewis - After proving to be one of the most substandard Test spinners in history, he was recalled for a tour of New Zealand, and then again for South Africa. Yes, Lewis improved as a bowler since his horrific debut, but there were many other better and younger spinners in WI at the time.
10) Rayad Emrit - Was never likely to be a success in ODI cricket. At best he's a first-class journeyman who can occasional contribute in List-A. Nowhere near international class.
11) Patterson Thompson - I don't need to explain this one. It must have been embarrassing for Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop to have to line up aside him.

Note also Lendl Simmons and Austin Richards.

 

[jeevan]

I thought the idea of picking Dinesh Karthik as a specialist opener was pure lunacy. He did well enough on the England tour that it seemed to be working for a while but it was never going to last.

India has looked high and low for any sort of test opener lately. Karthik may not even make the top 5 of poor selections for opener in the last 10 years (even 2 wicketkeepers ahead of him - Mongia and Deep Dasgupta).

 

[roseboy64]

Agreed about Austin Richards. Were more deserving players at the time IIRC.

 

[Anil]

rajinder goel as a non-selection...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Patrick Browne ahead of Denesh Ramdin was also pretty dire. At least Ramdin can catch the ball. Yes, Ramdin was injured initially, but it was obvious that they were auditioning Browne for the role.

 

[a massive zebra]

Although this discussion has centered around recent times, the original poster did specify greatest "ever", so perhaps I will be forgiven for nominating a couple of questionable selectorial decisions from long ago.

Kenny Burn was selected as reserve wicket keeper for the Australians on the 1890 Ashes tour having never kept wicket in his life, and Clarrie Grimmett was dropped from the Australian team after enjoying the second most successful Test series of any bowler in history.

 

[leepayne]

For England, they have now surpassed themselves with the selection of a 30 year old Aussie who's hardly played First Class Cricket.
Worst non-selection for England - John Snow for the 1974/75 Ashes Series.

Why don't people understand Darren Pattinson is English? Born in Grimbsy, England, to English parents. He's about as Australian as Andy Symonds.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Why don't people understand Darren Pattinson is English? Born in Grimbsy, England, to English parents. He's about as Australian as Andy Symonds.

Everyone is perfectly well aware of his heritage and his upbringing thank you very much, mainly because they looked it up on Friday having never heard of him.

 

[jeevan]

rajinder goel as a non-selection...

At that point of time, India had quite a selection of spinners in general,
and of SLA in particular as well. Just in the SLA category behind Bedi -
Padmakar Shivalkar was a contemporary too (no tests either), as was Dilip Doshi
(a few years younger, which helped him have something of a late test career).

 

[Flem274*]

Alot of the players from the 90s were shockers for NZ.

This decade I'd say James Marshall and Tama Canning. Done nothing in domestic cricket and the same goes for international cricket. Elliott for tests was dodgy but he does seem to be a gifted enough ODI player.

If they pick the two teenagers Boult and Anderson after good results at the tournament in Australia their names will appear here rather quickly I suspect.

 

[jeevan]

For India: certainly the Maharaja of Vizianagaram is a candidate for the worst selection based on cricketing merit. (I recall reading that he bankrolled the series that he played in).

 

[_Ed_]

Alot of the players from the 90s were shockers for NZ.

This decade I'd say James Marshall and Tama Canning. Done nothing in domestic cricket and the same goes for international cricket. Elliott for tests was dodgy but he does seem to be a gifted enough ODI player.

If they pick the two teenagers Boult and Anderson after good results at the tournament in Australia their names will appear here rather quickly I suspect.

I can beat those.

Remember when we were struggling to find a back-up spinner for Vettori? Paul Wiseman was doing alright, so we decided to replace him. Had a few decent options (Bruce Martin springs to mind, and Jeetan Patel was around then too), but instead we said "let's go for experience." Experience meaning the oldest spinner in the country, GRANT BRADBURN!

Failed in the early 90s, surely he'll do better a decade later. Umm...yeah.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Elliott for tests was dodgy but he does seem to be a gifted enough ODI player.

Given the way he batted in ODIs, I think New Zealand could do a lot worse than him in Tests.

 

[Flem274*]

Given the way he batted in ODIs, I think New Zealand could do a lot worse than him in Tests.

Well yes, that has probably already been proven unfortunately. Still, he's not good enough to make it in as a specialist bat, not unless he does a Styris anyway, and his bowling isn't effective at all in test matches. In ODIs however, he's been an unlikely hero against England. Hopefully he can keep it up.

 

[Flem274*]

I can beat those.

Remember when we were struggling to find a back-up spinner for Vettori? Paul Wiseman was doing alright, so we decided to replace him. Had a few decent options (Bruce Martin springs to mind, and Jeetan Patel was around then too), but instead we said "let's go for experience." Experience meaning the oldest spinner in the country, GRANT BRADBURN!

Failed in the early 90s, surely he'll do better a decade later. Umm...yeah.

Don't remember that guy at all. I do remember Brooke Walker though, as well as Central Districts finest, Glenn Sulzberger.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Well yes, that has probably already been proven unfortunately. Still, he's not good enough to make it in as a specialist bat, not unless he does a Styris anyway, and his bowling isn't effective at all in test matches. In ODIs however, he's been an unlikely hero against England. Hopefully he can keep it up.

Tbh, I think he's more likely to be successful with the bat in Tests than Flynn. I hope I'm proven wrong though, because Flynn is likely to get many more opportunities than Elliott.