Undervalued Cricketers

[The Speaker]

hauritz is a stretch imo. honest battler that managed to scrounge a few games as we desperately searched for a spinner

Nope, his record was on par with Lyon's for early years, under a less supportive captain, and was a better batsman. Deserved better treatment.

 

[sobrave]

i remember him bowling straight darts and claiming wickets by batsmen trying to smash him out of the attack. is my memory playing tricks on me?

 

[Back Six]

Andy Bichel, heart and soul type operator!

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Woody15]

Id say Paul Reiffel was fairly underrated. Playing with McDermott, Warne, McGrath, Merv, Gillespie towards the end - they seemed to steal the spotlight a lot and get most of the praise. Reiffel kept one end very tight and became a very handy lower order batsman towards the end of his career.

 

[Cleavy]

Paul Reiffel

 

[PhatBoy]

Andrew Jones is one from New Zealand that’s often forgotten. In some of those competitive sides led (batting wise) by Martin Crowe, he was a very consistent, solid contributor and one of only a handful of pre-2000 Kiwi batsmen to average over 40 in test cricket

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Andrew Jones is one from New Zealand that’s often forgotten. In some of those competitive sides led (batting wise) by Martin Crowe, he was a very consistent, solid contributor and one of only a handful of pre-2000 Kiwi batsmen to average over 40 in test cricket

Him, Crowe and Rutherford (ken I think) we’re more than handy players for the kiwis back in the day

 

[Plugger35]

Michael Kasprowicz

Was a sub continent specialist and filled in when one of the top line bowlers of Lee, McGrath and Gillespie were injured.

From memory he gloved the catch to give England that series changing win in 2005 when McGrath was injured.

I met him a few years before that when he was playing for Queensland and he was a ripping bloke, he didn't deserve that sort of ignominy.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Great calls on the reiffell suggestions.
Bloody handy player. Good first change quick who regularly troubled lefties.
Very good lower order bat.
Very good fielder. One of the few quicks who could field in the slips/gully

Another one would be kasprowicz. Kept Brett lee out of the side regularly, chipped in with handy wickets too

 

[Woody15]

Him, Crowe and Rutherford (ken I think) we’re more than handy players for the kiwis back in the day

Yeh Ken Rutherford.

I liked NZs teams in the early 90s. Good WC team in 92 and 96.

Chris Harris was a favourite. I reckon he would have gone alright in T20 if it were around when he played. Could hit, clever bowler and a good fielder.

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

I’ll also throw in Damian Martyn. No doubt respected, but very much overshadowed by Ponting, Hayden, langer, the Waugh’s etc.
Was a class batsman

 

[Woody15]

I’ll also throw in Damian Martyn. No doubt respected, but very much overshadowed by Ponting, Hayden, langer, the Waugh’s etc.
Was a class batsman

Probably my favourite batsman of all-time.

 

[The Speaker]

i remember him bowling straight darts and claiming wickets by batsmen trying to smash him out of the attack. is my memory playing tricks on me?

Maybe you're thinking of Xavier Doherty.

 

[The Speaker]

I've just remembered one of the things that annoyed me the most during Hauritz's time in the team: the Australian commentary consistently talked him down and seemed surprised when he took a wicket. Slater was a big offender.

 

[PhatBoy]

I've just remembered one of the things that annoyed me the most during Hauritz's time in the team: the Australian commentary consistently talked him down and seemed surprised when he took a wicket. Slater was a big offender.

To be fair almost half his 60 or so wickets were batsman 8 or lower and only 14 were of batsmen who averaged over 40. I think that’s probably reflective of his level - he was solid without a lot of tricks and played a role

 

[The Speaker]

To be fair almost half his 60 or so wickets were batsman 8 or lower and only 14 were of batsmen who averaged over 40. I think that’s probably reflective of his level - he was solid without a lot of tricks and played a role

He wasn't really trusted to bowl at the top+middle order than often anyway, so that's not really telling a lot. Reminder that he wasn't selected at The Oval on a rank turner, forcing Marcus North to play as the main spinner and costing Australia a real shot at the Ashes.

 

[PhatBoy]

He wasn't really trusted to bowl at the top+middle order than often anyway, so that's not really telling a lot. Reminder that he wasn't selected at The Oval on a rank turner, forcing Marcus North to play as the main spinner and costing Australia a real shot at the Ashes.

Australia getting bowled out for 160 - largely at the hands of Stuart Broad’s 5 (yes, Swann took 4) played a bigger role I’d say

 

[The Speaker]

Australia getting bowled out for 160 - largely at the hands of Stuart Broad’s 5 (yes, Swann took 4) played a bigger role I’d say

Having a totally ineffective attack in England's second innings was pretty important, especially when Stuart Clark took 1/84 across the match.

 

[SterlingArcher]

Hauritz also suffers from his best games record wise (i.e. his only 5 fas) being v Pakistan with a team full of match fixers. Doesn't mean his wickets weren't earned, but perception wise with your casual fan, it definitely hurts his overall reputation.

 

[The Speaker]

Hauritz also suffers from his best games record wise (i.e. his only 5 fas) being v Pakistan with a team full of match fixers. Doesn't mean his wickets weren't earned, but perception wise with your casual fan, it definitely hurts his overall reputation.

allegedly

 

[PhatBoy]

Having a totally ineffective attack in England's second innings was pretty important, especially when Stuart Clark took 1/84 across the match.

He took 3-18 off 10 in the first innings of his previous match that series. Would have been somewhat harsh to leave him out

 

[corbies]

I think Shane Watson is more appreciated now simply because of how awful Mitch Marsh has been, Watson honestly wasn't much better in his last couple of years but he had a couple of really good years early on that were forgotten about because his form dropped off so badly.

I think Shane Watson's biggest problem perception wise was that he and the Australian team believed he had to bat in the top order. If he had batted at 6 in the Test team like he should have as the all rounder for most of his career, I believe he'd have a similar reputation to that of Ben Stokes.

 

[Kyptastic]

I’ll also throw in Damian Martyn. No doubt respected, but very much overshadowed by Ponting, Hayden, langer, the Waugh’s etc.
Was a class batsman

Martyn suffers a bit in perception as his best Test Innings were in Asian conditions where not many people would have watched them - he was a big reason we won those series in Sri Lanka and India in the mid 2000s

 

[big_e]

Scott Muller.

In the two tests he played, he:

- Took the same number of wickets as Glenn McGrath
- Had a better bowling average than McGrath
- Had a better strike rate than McGrath and Warne

Not saying he's one of the greats, or even that he should have played a huge number of tests, but he wasn't as bad as he's made out to be.

 

[The Speaker]

He took 3-18 off 10 in the first innings of his previous match that series. Would have been somewhat harsh to leave him out

Yes, that was their logic, but the pitch was not going to fit four seamers. He was very effective at Headingley, but next to useless at The Oval.