Underperforming Australian Test XI Since 1990

[Sunny]

An XI that have UNDERperformed during their careers. It may be a current player as well.

1. Greg Blewett
2. Geoff Marsh (zzzzzz)
3. Matt Elliott (attitude problems lead to downfall of form)
4. Martin Love (A Ton and a duck against Bangers)
5. Michael Bevan (missed his chance as a "bowling" allrounder).
6. Andrew Symonds (not enough chances).
7. Phil Emery
8. Brett Lee
9. Andrew Bichel
10. Simon Cook
11. Stuart MacGill (Robbo and Hauritz qualify as worst!)

12th & 13th men: Michael Kasprowicz / Michael Slater

 

[RWB83]

Could you clarify your definition of underperforming. A lack of opportunities surely doesn't classify someone as having underperformed? Hence for a start I would question your placement of Symonds and Love in your team.
I would also debate whether MacGill has underperformed. Isn't his record comparable to Warne's on a tests played basis??

 

[RWB83]

Phil Emery played one Test and one ODI. Respectively, he scored eight NO and eleven NO, and had six dismissals and three dismissals. Underperforming???
I'd suggest those figures are alright for one match in each form of the game.

 

[manmountain]

Elliot sealed his fate when he was smacking pots in the hotel bar the night before a Test match in the Windies.

He could make 1,500 runs this season and wouldn't even come under consideration.

FWIW, not many of them underperformed really. I would class underperforming as having the ability but not really grabbing their chances. A lot of those in the list tried their guts out but just weren't quite good enough to carve out a substantial Test career.

 

[RWB83]

Martin Love. 5 Tests. Average of 46.6. 7 catches.
For 5 Tests those figures sound alright to me.

 

[mrcracker]

Have a look at the record books for Australian bowlers with the all time best strike rates in test cricket. You will find Brett Lee 13th and MacGill 14th (more then 2000 balls bowled). MacGill is more expensive the Warne with a wicket every 28.81 runs compared to Warne at 25.16 runs, however he takes wickets more often with one every 54.5 balls compared to Warne 57.7 balls. In the year Warne was banned he was the second highest wicket taker in the world, just shaded by Ntini.

Bichel took 58 wickets in 19 tests, from memory he was involved in a series in the West Indies in some very good batting strips which gave him a relatively poor bowling record but a good batting record. Bevan underachieved or else he would have kept his spot.

 

[frankrizzo]

Martin Love. 5 Tests. Average of 46.6. 7 catches.
For 5 Tests those figures sound alright to me.

And he was dropped for Simon “but im an allrounder” katich, who since he got in as an allrounder in Sydney he has taken just 12 wickets (8 of them vs Zimbabwe in that first game back) and averaged 39 with the bat.

His batting average is just about right for an allrounder now if only he bowled more, actually looking at those stats it’s once again ridiculous that he survived but martyn didn’t, considering he took the place of a centurion his return of 39 runs per bat isn’t good enough for a team which is supposed to be ruthless world beaters.

 

[frankrizzo]

Have a look at the record books for Australian bowlers with the all time best strike rates in test cricket. You will find Brett Lee 13th and MacGill 14th (more then 2000 balls bowled). MacGill is more expensive the Warne with a wicket every 28.81 runs compared to Warne at 25.16 runs, however he takes wickets more often with one every 54.5 balls compared to Warne 57.7 balls. In the year Warne was banned he was the second highest wicket taker in the world, just shaded by Ntini.

Bichel took 58 wickets in 19 tests, from memory he was involved in a series in the West Indies in some very good batting strips which gave him a relatively poor bowling record but a good batting record. Bevan underachieved or else he would have kept his spot.

Proof that strike rates aren’t everything, no point striking often if the other team already had the score it needs when you do.

Test cricket is about more than blasting the opposition out in between them blasting 6’s and 4’s, that’s why we have given up some of our biggest scores when macgill and lee have played.

 

[frankrizzo]

Macgill fair enough, he is sometimes expensive but he takes wickets, 28 is fine for a leg spinner like him, lee however his average of 32 negates his strike rate, 32 is far too high for a test match strike bowler.

More to the point since the England 2001 tour following his series of operations lee has 120 wickets@39 that’s woeful for a strike bowler and considering he gets the attention of a superstar cricketer it paints him as somebody who trades more on potential than performance.

His first season he was a legitimate match winner, the last 4 years he’s been a poor cricketer surviving on that promise from 99/2000 which will never be fulfilled.

 

[frankrizzo]

In the year Warne was banned he was the second highest wicket taker in the world, just shaded by Ntini

Which is why i feel macgill must play the windies, Warne missed the 2000 summer vs. the windies, and the 2003 tour, macgill because of his wrong’un and the abundance of windies lefties did better than Warne has against them, although it should be interesting to watch Warne who is on top of his game right now, he was still injured in 99 when he was dropped but last time he played the windies fully fit in 97 he did well.

p.s. we had a pretty soft 2003 until the indian tour, macgill took most of his 60 odd wickets against the bottom 3 teams in test cricket.

 

[eddiesmith]

Elliot sealed his fate when he was smacking pots in the hotel bar the night before a Test match in the Windies.

He could make 1,500 runs this season and wouldn't even come under consideration.

FWIW, not many of them underperformed really. I would class underperforming as having the ability but not really grabbing their chances. A lot of those in the list tried their guts out but just weren't quite good enough to carve out a substantial Test career.

Elliott sealed his fate when he was honest with his wife and she told Steves wife what they got up to in the Windies, thats why Elliott never played another test untill Ponting was captain

He could make 1,500 runs and wouldnt get picked because he is to bloody old

 

[Gez5]

Elliott sealed his fate when he was honest with his wife and she told Steves wife what they got up to in the Windies, thats why Elliott never played another test untill Ponting was captain

He could make 1,500 runs and wouldnt get picked because he is to bloody old

In the same way Bichel could take 60 wickets and not be considered.........

 

[dan warna]

In the same way Bichel could take 60 wickets and not be considered.........

bichel>lee IMO

 

[wang]

2. Geoff Marsh (zzzzzz)
4. Martin Love (A Ton and a duck against Bangers)
6. Andrew Symonds (not enough chances).
7. Phil Emery
9. Andrew Bichel
10. Simon Cook
11. Stuart MacGill (Robbo and Hauritz qualify as worst!)

12th & 13th men: Michael Kasprowicz / Michael Slater

Those players have no place in that side.

 

[Cassius_Clay]

bichel>lee IMO

everyone including youself>>>>>>Lee IYO.

The Obsession continues.

 

[Gez5]

everyone including youself>>>>>>Lee IYO.

The Obsession continues.

Bichel is a far more accomplished batsman, and there isn't much that separates their bowling performances, so I think dan warna could be on to something.

 

[silky-smooth]

Greg Blewett lived up to his name.

Martin Love and Matty Elliott really have been left in the cold.

 

[Johnson#26]

Bichel, Lee, Love and MacGill have never underperformed. Just unlucky (except for Lee) to be born in such a strong Aussie Cricket era.