Worst Batsmen in Test cricket statistically

[Prince EWS]

As there are so many people who are convinced that this is just another interesting thread, and if you are confronting for the sake of it, i am finishing it here and if only i accept defeat, you can be peaceful then i am also doing that. OK.

Okay then, twenty tests it is.

 

[ramkumar_gr]

Okay then, twenty tests it is.

20 or whatever number you want, till that makes you happy.

 

[chaminda_00]

I think all that Prince pointed out was that your criteria had flaws, which his correct, as your criteria only limits about 10 players to choice from.

 

[Dasa]

I think all that Prince pointed out was that your criteria had flaws, which his correct, as your criteria only limits about 10 players to choice from.

SO what? That was the point of the thread! I don't see the point in going on and on about the criteria provided by the thread-starter merely because one person likes a player and doesn't think he should be on the list.

 

[howardj]

With the Test batting averages these days, I always chop 5 runs off - gives a more accurate reflection.

 

[tooextracool]

what if someone plays 100 tests and averages 25. You still wont call him a horrible player, just because he has played 100 tests????

the only real example of a player playing 50 tests and being completely unfit to play intl cricket was mark ramprakash. the others all deserved places in their side for the large part in their international career.

 

[luckyeddie]

the only real example of a player playing 50 tests and being completely unfit to play intl cricket was mark ramprakash. the others all deserved places in their side for the large part in their international career.

If that doesn't bring Richard out of hiding, nothing will.

 

[Pothas]

the only real example of a player playing 50 tests and being completely unfit to play intl cricket was mark ramprakash. the others all deserved places in their side for the large part in their international career.

I dont think graham Hick should have played 60 odd test matches. Ramprakash was such an exasperating player because as everyone knows he really should have been good enough to play test cricket. the endles droppings ans recalls really didnt help

 

[marc71178]

I dont think graham Hick should have played 60 odd test matches.

He actually had a fairly large period mid career where he averaged 40 didn't?

 

[Zinzan]

The thing is that is not that bad in New Zealand conditions.

No 27 is still a rubbish average for a specialist test batsmen ....NZ conditions or not !!!

In Rutherfords defense....Who could come back after his start of 12 runs in his first 7 innnings against the West Indies

 

[Natman20]

Stats dont really tell how good a batsman may have been. For instance there could have been many awkward situations for batsman (bad teams they played in, always were in the deep end trying to keep innings together). They could have had a bad start to their career. They could have been out to a lot of good players over the years. By the way im thinking of buying Richie Benauds greatest XI dvd any opinions on it?

 

[Robertinho]

Grant Flower is technically miles ahead of Omar.

He isnt technically miles ahead of Javed!\

Where did i say Omar is technically better than Grant Flower.

hahahah wtf? Ramkumar_gr, I think you better take a time out

 

[Jono]

HAHAHAH! Roberthino that's gold.

 

[tooextracool]

I dont think graham Hick should have played 60 odd test matches. Ramprakash was such an exasperating player because as everyone knows he really should have been good enough to play test cricket. the endles droppings ans recalls really didnt help

you think that ramprakash who failed repeatedly at the intl level should have played as many games as Hick while Hick who actually succeeded at the international level for a significant amount of time, not to mention that everytime he got recalled into the international side he played at least 1 promising innings.....