Mark Richardson to retire?

[Richard]

Ok Richard out of interest, who would you pick as an opener that realistically going to get picked (ie Matt Horne is not).

Presuming Papps is fit he's an automatic for me - can't argue with 86 in his most recent Test (even if it was lucky).
I've never rated Sinclair at all, you know that, and especially not as an opener.
And I don't really know much about Jamie How, Peter Fulton and all the others mentioned as possibilities.
If they've all got good long-term First-Class averages and (vitally) have started the season well they should be considered IMO.

 

[Richard]

Seriously though great player, i liked watching him bat, was a refreshing change.

I really would dispute that - a good player, yes, but faced challenging seaming conditions too rarely to be called a great. The average flatters him a little IMO.
I never really enjoyed watching him bat either. Had a reasonable cover-drive, but that's about it.

 

[Craig]

If Horne plays Test-cricket again I'll be amazed (I wouldn't say I'd eat my computer, though - too much experience of New Zealand selectors).
If Bell plays again I'll sit with my head in hands for at least 5 minutes. How on Earth such a terrible player got to Test-level, let alone scored a century and 2 half-centuries is totally beyond me, and if they give him yet another chance they've lost their minds.

To be honest after that very good series he had against Pakistan in 2001, I geniunelly felt we had found our ideal opening combination in Bell and Richardson.

How (excuse the pun) it taught me not to look at one good (or very) series.

 

[Craig]

I hope they bring out a dvd of his sprinting feats, will inspire generations to come.
Seriously though great player, i liked watching him bat, was a refreshing change.
Struck me as a surprise though, taking after nass i suppose!

Before he went and got himself banned, the best summary of Mark Richardson was by Ged as the one player who could score so slowly and yet still able to like him, when that may not be the case for ther players.

 

[Richard]

By the sounds of things it's almost impossible to not like Richardson.
From everything I've heard he's one of the most likeable guys you could meet.

 

[Pratters]

By the sounds of things it's almost impossible to not like Richardson.
From everything I've heard he's one of the most likeable guys you could meet.

What have you heard? He may be completely the opposite of what he appears.

 

[Richard]

Well, of course he might be, but lots of people have described him as a likeable, easy-going, clever fellow.
I've not heard anyone say a bad word about him.

 

[Pratters]

Well, of course he might be, but lots of people have described him as a likeable, easy-going, clever fellow.
I've not heard anyone say a bad word about him.

A lot of people like who?

 

[Craig]

Voltman for one?

 

[Pratters]

Voltman for one?

We can always comment on his cricket but as we dont know him personally I dont think we can say he would be a lovely bloke or a not so lovely bloke. Some one can be lovely to one person and totally rubbish in the opinion of another.

And I didnt know Voltman has been associated with him in any way which he may have considering he played cricket so great. I do like to meet cricketers but it can never be conjured if they are lovely blokes or not.. if they are nice to me it doesnt mean any thing. Its just a moment and an assessment cant be made on that..

 

[twctopcat]

I really would dispute that - a good player, yes, but faced challenging seaming conditions too rarely to be called a great. The average flatters him a little IMO.
I never really enjoyed watching him bat either. Had a reasonable cover-drive, but that's about it.

Fair enough on the seaming point just thought he had a good eye for when to leave the ball on off stump etc.

 

[Richard]

Voltman for one?

Voltman, Scyld Berry, Kent (whoever he is), several New Zealanders in the com-box (Martin Crowe, Jerry Coney), the list goes on... many of whom either do know him personally or are speaking from the knowledge of people who do.

 

[Richard]

Fair enough on the seaming point just thought he had a good eye for when to leave the ball on off stump etc.

Oh, he did - which made him a very, very competant player indeed when the ball wasn't moving around.
When it was, though - especially when it was moving back into him - he often got into trouble.

 

[Mingster]

Fleming and Papps/How as the opening partnership for SL...

 

[Kent]

Voltman, Scyld Berry, Kent (whoever he is)

What does that mean?

I've not heard anyone say a bad word about him.

Well unless the NZC knew he was on a series-by-series basis, I don't particularly like the way Richardson's let one bad tour of AUS get to him, effectively bailing on an employer at short notice.

That's about it though. If anything I've been a bit harsh because it hurts to see him go, and one of NZ cricket's great stories has come to an end.

If you were writing Richardson's book it would've never ended as tamely as this. As someone who turned himself from a #11 into an opener just to keep his dream alive, he deserved to go out with his passion for the game as strong as ever. But I guess someone like Alan Donald can relate to how reality puts a knife through the heart of sentiment sometimes.

 

[anzac]

the curse of recent NZL series both Home & Away - 2 Tests, 1 warm up & a handful of ODIs................

with Rigor being a 'defensive' player he didn't get a lot of cricket outside of the Tests (as we discussed earlier re picking him for 'A' series etc)..............just too hard a game style to be able to keep turning up & turning it on everytime................

 

[anzac]

so far as a replacement goes.......................

no to - Bell, Horne, Cumming...............

prefer not to see Sinclair sacrificed as an opener as I see no long term good for either the team nor the player - another Vincent scenario..........

same goes for Marshall IMO - doesn't appear to have the forcing strokes - just the nudges...............

Papps in the box seat so far as only missing out on recent tour due to injury.........

but How level pegging re start to the domestic comp.............

Fulton no - not an opener but another potential very good #3 or #4 (along with Fleming & Sinclair)...............

I'd still consider Fleming to open for the good of the team for the remainder of this season only, & to be able to look at having getting the other end settled & confident (I still think Papps is trying to find his way - only 4 matches thus far).........

and I still say it's an opportunity for Macca to ressurect his career - he has the talent & the shots - give him his head and say "swing the bat Macca - see if you can be another Sehwag"....................

 

[Richard]

Fulton no - not an opener but another potential very good #3 or #4 (along with Fleming & Sinclair)...............

Didn't know that...
All this time I've been thinking he was an opener!

 

[Richard]

What does that mean?

It means I don't know your first name.

 

[marc71178]

But don't you think that would be only a short term option though, or on the surface a lot like Lou Vincent ended up?

If it works, I see no reason why it cannot be a long term answer - it would certainly give him the chance in the team I feel he deserves, and as they're really looking for 2 openers - why not try it?