Who is more mediocre than Atherton and Hussain?

[KennyD]

yeah and the team that Atherton and Hussain played, were face it, a crap team. THose averages were worth more than what they appear, and had they been in better teams, they would have had support, there wouldn`t havent been the pressure, and I believe they would have been seen as better players statiscally.

 

[Scaly piscine]

yeah and the team that Atherton and Hussain played, were face it, a crap team. THose averages were worth more than what they appear, and had they been in better teams, they would have had support, there wouldn`t havent been the pressure, and I believe they would have been seen as better players statiscally.

Another example... Lara, he's been playing in a crap team most of his career - yet he's still manage to win a fair few games for WI with his batting brilliance and some guys at the other end just hanging in there. If a modern-day Atherton and Hussain were playing in the County circuit now, they'd never get in the England team because they're mediocre and are not good enough to stand out because of this. Tresco, Vaughan, Butcher, Strauss, Thorpe - would anyone seriously suggest a Hussain or Atherton could oust any of those?

Another way of putting it... if you gave a standard guy the body of Hussain, Atherton and any of the other said batsmen, who'd he score the least runs with?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Or, if you gave a standard guy the mind of Hussain, Atherton and any of the other said batsmen, who'd he score the most runs with?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yes but here mediocrity is not about the mind it's about batting/fielding/bowling skill.

 

[SJS]

Another way of putting it... if you gave a standard guy the body of Hussain, Atherton and any of the other said batsmen, who'd he score the least runs with?

Its not the physical (bodily) skills of these two that people are supporting but their mental strengths.

Yes, maybe, Nasser would not find a place in a much stronger English batting line up but that doesnt mean a thing. If Statham, Trueman , Loader, Laker and Lock were availabe (England attack of the late 50's) how many of the current English attack everyone raves about would have been automatically selected ??

They were deserving of their places at the times they played and did a pretty decent job of it and thats all there is to it.

 

[SJS]

Yes but here mediocrity is not about the mind it's about batting/fielding/bowling skill.

Its about both. Thats why two of the three top scoring test batsmen of all time (Border and Steve Waugh) are admired as well as held up by the 'fragile yardstick' of statistics, more for their mental strength than anything else.

It is rare that unmatched bodily skills are wedded to immense mental strength but when that happens a Don Bradman is created. Most others rely on one more than the other, just the degree varies.

In cricket, test cricket particularly, both are needed.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Its not the physical (bodily) skills of these two that people are supporting but their mental strengths.

If that were the case there would be no argument about them being mediocre. Yet another example... a 65mph bowler plods in and gets wickets with balls that go gun-barrel straight and easy-to-play bounce, he averages 30 but gets the wickets with clever field placings and outthinking the batsman. Another bowler bowls 95mph and moves the ball a bit, but he averages 32 because he's nervous/a dimwit/fielding places are wrong. Which one is mediocre?

Note any relationship to real life players is purely coincidental.

 

[SJS]

If that were the case there would be no argument about them being mediocre. Yet another example... a 65mph bowler plods in and gets wickets with balls that go gun-barrel straight and easy-to-play bounce, he averages 30 but gets the wickets with clever field placings and outthinking the batsman. Another bowler bowls 95mph and moves the ball a bit, but he averages 32 because he's nervous/a dimwit/fielding places are wrong. Which one is mediocre?

Note any relationship to real life players is purely coincidental.

I think a batting example would be more appropriate, dont you ?

PS: And mind you I am not a great admirer of Nasser Hussain and can see some people thinking he was not a 'great' (much prostituted word) batsman. But Atherton is a different matter. I am surprised that people think his skils were mediocre.

I suspect at times that after the limited over game has gained in the popularity stakes, many cricket followers decry those whose skils (mental as well as physical) are better suited for the longer version.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Its about both. Thats why two of the three top scoring test batsmen of all time (Border and Steve Waugh) are admired as well as held up by the 'fragile yardstick' of statistics, more for their mental strength than anything else.

It is rare that unmatched bodily skills are wedded to immense mental strength but when that happens a Don Bradman is created. Most others rely on one more than the other, just the degree varies.

In cricket, test cricket particularly, both are needed.

Batting in general of course is partially to do with the mind of the player, but batting skill does not. Mental toughness is not a skill, just as brute strength is not a skill.

 

[SJS]

To be honest, I may have used the term 'mediocre' to describe Nasser Hussains batting when discussing with cricketer friends but then it is a relative term. Invariably one felt the standards of batting, worldwide were pretty high, at the time Nasser was playing and he did not stand out in the top company.

Secondly, I suppose, he did get under one's skin with his rather immodest attitude to go with his relatively modest batting skills.

But to give him his due, we have to rate him against the alternatives available to England in batting at THAT time and also to admire him for coming out on top and fighting to the end inspite of his batting limitations.

Atherton, once again, is one of the finest openers of his time and would have played for most world sides at his peak. Calling his batting mediocre is to totally deny knowledge of what is required to be a world class opening batsman for tests.

 

[Scaly piscine]

How do you define 'world class opening batsman'?

Personally I'd say someone who'd make it into say the best 25 players in the World at that time. I don't believe Atherton was anywhere near that as you might have guessed...

 

[marc71178]

Personally I'd say someone who'd make it into say the best 25 players in the World at that time. I don't believe Atherton was anywhere near that as you might have guessed...

Ignoring of course the spell July 1993 through to January 1998 when he was never out of the top 20 (including a spell of over 2 years when he was always in the top 10)

And from August 2000 he was in the top 15 right up to his penultimate Test.

 

[superkingdave]

Where's the shot down smilie?

 

[Scaly piscine]

I said top 25 players not top 25 batsmen, also there were probably a fair few Aussies at the time who didn't even get in the team who were better players than Atherton - they of course would not be in the ratings you're probably basing your 'top 20' on.

 

[superkingdave]

I said top 25 players not top 25 batsmen, also there were probably a fair few Aussies at the time who didn't even get in the team who were better players than Atherton - they of course would not be in the ratings you're probably basing your 'top 20' on.

ROFL, dig dig dig

 

[Scaly piscine]

Anyone with half a brain (that excludes superkingdave who is obviously a moron) could tell you the ratings are only good for guys who've played regularly for the past year or so and have played 20 or more Tests. They're not much use for giving you a value to a team of a wicket-keeper - they'll tell you how good their batting is but that's it, a certain Indian wicket-keeper would look good on those ratings if he keeps playing. The same applies to all-rounders, although they're OK for comparing all-rounders with other all-rounders.

 

[Sanz]

How do you define 'world class opening batsman'?

Personally I'd say someone who'd make it into say the best 25 players in the World at that time. I don't believe Atherton was anywhere near that as you might have guessed...

Can you please come up with top 25 players of Arthers era ?? I am pretty sure he would have made it to the list 99 out of 100 times. Arthers was one of the best openers of his time, Infact I cant think of anyone opener who played consistently better than him in that era.

 

[viktor]

How do you define 'world class opening batsman'?

Personally I'd say someone who'd make it into say the best 25 players in the World at that time. I don't believe Atherton was anywhere near that as you might have guessed...

Athers might or might not have been in the top 25 players at the time but he was definitely one of the top openers of the 90s, prolly just after Taylor and Slater.
That, IMO qualifies him as a world class opening batsman...definitely not mediocre

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

that excludes superkingdave who is obviously a moron

Insults really not necessary.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I said top 25 players not top 25 batsmen

It makes no sense for a batsman to be compared with bowlers and allrounders when you're trying to determine whether he was a world class opening batsman.