Who is more mediocre than Atherton and Hussain?

[marc71178]

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.

The PwC ones you mean?

They don't give a full score until a player's played plenty of games, but how does explain Atherton being in the top 10 after only 4 games?

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.

Yes, because wicket-keeping cannot be compared from scores.

And as it stand, Patel is ranked 66 for batting (above Yuvraj incidentally)

 

[Scaly piscine]

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.

I say top 25 players because there'll be times that there'll be far more world class batsmen around than there are world class bowlers (and vice versa), like you could argue was the case now and I don't see the need to quota that 25 into so many all-rounders, wicket-keepers, wrist spinners and so on. My 25 is just a rough figure of course, I was only saying what I thought 'world class' meant, I was really after what SJS's definition of it was as it is a vague term.

 

[Scaly piscine]

The PwC ones you mean?

They don't give a full score until a player's played plenty of games, but how does explain Atherton being in the top 10 after only 4 games?

From the PwC site it said he was 44th after 4 games, breaks into the top 10 on 08/04/1990 (dd/mm/yy) after 33 games - perhaps the ratings you looked at were from the old formula or something?

 

[tooextracool]

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.

err yes we all know that lara is a far better player than hussain and atherton were. what next? compare them to bradman and call them mediocre?
and in case you dont remember atherton pretty much saved that game against SA on his own when he score 185 odd, and do i even need to remind you off some of the innings off brilliance that hussain has played not too long ago?

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?

atherton i am almost certain would oust trescothick, who is about as limited as limited can be.
im surprised that butcher who averages lower than both atherton and hussain is being given so much more respect for no reason whatsoever.
interestingly enough, where was the vaughans and the trescos in that series against the WI? if i remember correctly it was hussain, butcher and thorpe who held the batting together.

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?

that would depend on who this other batsman is, atherton as i have said time and time again averaged over 40 for most of his career.

 

[tooextracool]

I say top 25 players because there'll be times that there'll be far more world class batsmen around than there are world class bowlers (and vice versa), like you could argue was the case now and I don't see the need to quota that 25 into so many all-rounders, wicket-keepers, wrist spinners and so on. My 25 is just a rough figure of course, I was only saying what I thought 'world class' meant, I was really after what SJS's definition of it was as it is a vague term.

atherton had a better chance of being in the top 25 players of his generation than tresco, strauss(ATM) and butcher have of being in the top 25 now.

 

[Tom Halsey]

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.

You can’t assume things like that – what a load of bull.

 

[Tom Halsey]

I don't believe Atherton was anywhere near that as you might have guessed...

Of course he was! He averaged over 40 for most of his career, and he’s still pathetic? Get real.

 

[tooextracool]

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.

players like greg blewett,brendon julian and matthew elliot you mean?

 

[marc71178]

From the PwC site it said he was 44th after 4 games, breaks into the top 10 on 08/04/1990 (dd/mm/yy) after 33 games - perhaps the ratings you looked at were from the old formula or something?

Not sure what happened there, but he's still in the top 20 for a very long unbroken spell (such as nearly 5 years)

Hardly mediocre.

 

[twctopcat]

And he scored more runs in the 1990's than any other test batsmen in the world, no mean feat for a man of such limited talent.

 

[KennyD]

Atherton, Hussain, were not medicore....ok?

'nuff said

 

[Scaly piscine]

Not sure what happened there, but he's still in the top 20 for a very long unbroken spell (such as nearly 5 years)

Hardly mediocre.

Any reasonable batsman who plays consistently for that 5 years would be in the top 20. There were 9 Test teams then, 1 of which is Zimbabwe. There are gonna be 6 batsmen at most playing for each team, 1-2 per side is only in for a short run (possibly more with England), then you're gonna have some guys who're injured. Basically any games you miss penalises your rating a LOT so as I say, any remotely reasonably performing batsman would be in the top 20 (ie not Ramprakash). Graeme Hick is a good example of someone who was in the top 20 for a fair amount of time when he played consistently, and dropped way down when he was recalled 2 years later and was in and out again.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Atherton, Hussain, were not medicore....ok?

'nuff said

I'm really surprised anyone is debating that Hussain was mediocre, I can see why with Atherton... but Hussain?!? He was all about grit and determination, his defence included a lot of curtain rail stuff, his driving frequently went in the air when he leant back, his ODI record was abysmal because he wasn't good enough to play shots to much effect, so where is the batting skill to elevate him above mediocre?

 

[twctopcat]

His 14 test centuries and top score of 207 is a bit of a giveaway that there was enough talent inside of him to place him above mediocre.

 

[marc71178]

Any reasonable batsman who plays consistently for that 5 years would be in the top 20.

So you're now saying he was a reasonable batsman, thus negating your earlier argument.

And no, just playing does not get you in there

 

[SJS]

Hi Scaly Piscine, (and others)

I think this is not getting anywhere. So why not call it a day ?

I propose a diversion. I made some anagrams for some of us CW members. All in god humour. If you guys can take it with a smile, I can share them here ?

What do you say ?

 

[twctopcat]

I don't object, mainly because i doubt i'm important enough to have an anagram made!!

 

[SJS]

I don't object, mainly because i doubt i'm important enough to have an anagram made!!

With just one vowel in your name, yous is almost as difficult as mine

 

[SJS]

Actualy, I got the idea from two arguments that were generaating a lot of heat. One on Ganguly's captaincy by Warne Is God and this one by Scaly Piscine. Interestingly, the best anagrams came out for these two

 

[twctopcat]

With just one vowel in your name, yous is almost as difficult as mine

One vowel in twctopat? Good god man your better than that.