Worst Selectors Of The World

[marc71178]

7. McCullum (there seems to be no-one better)

Such praise (!)

 

[Richard]

Because of course he deserves such effusive praise for his purely magnificent ODI batting-average of 21...

 

[Loony BoB]

Considering he bats at #8, that's not too bad, really. He usually gets out during the final overs, when you're fully entitled to go for a slog. I'm confident that he's really better than his stats suggest. He comes across as a player similar to Boucher, personally. After four years, his record is similar to Boucher's first four years, too. I wish the old player rankings site was still up so we could get the career comparisons going on, I'd find that interesting.

 

[Richard]

McCullum was originally brought in as a top-order batsman.
And a woeful excuse for one he proved to be, too.

 

[Loony BoB]

Name one NZ opening batsman that wasn't a woeful excuse for an opener at that time. Hell, we were putting Richardson in as an ODI opener if I remember correctly.

And I don't care what his original purpose was, who he is now is an efficient end-of-the-innings batsman.

 

[ohtani's jacket]

1.
2. Astle
3. McMillan
4. Fleming
5. Taylor
6. Oram
7. McCullum (there seems to be no-one better)
8. Vettori
9.
10.
11. Bond
Not quite as bad as you suggested - as there are holes in most sides.

McMillan?

Oram isn't much of a one day player -- well, he's a better one day bowler than Test bowler, but his batting average falls from 43.56 to 18.46.

 

[aussie]

watson has definetly been rubbish with the ball, infact id claim that his bowlin is as good as non existent. as far as his batting is concerned, do you think that there arent better pure batsmen in domestic cricket than watson?



and how about trying to find the next mcgrath or the next warne(or someone remotely close) instead of trying to replace them with the likes of watson, symonds and co? if an all rounder is there for australia he will show potential in domestic cricket, theres no point in picking thrash and hoping for it to turn into a pot of gold by bringing it into international cricket.

1. Fair enough his bowling has been poor, but his batting has showed good sign's, the thing with him is that from what i can see he is not your Razzaq, Afridi, Flintoff type all-rounder who can bat at 7 or 8 & can smash it to all parts in the closing overs. He seems more of the Kallis mold where he should be batting in the top 6, after all thats where he bats for Queensland.

His batting record in FC cricket puts him right up their with the best batsmen in domestic cricket, so i'd say his batting is comparable with most.

2. And its not as if Watson hasn't showed potential in Domestic cricket hasn't he? http://content-wi.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/8180.html come on..

 

[aussie]

But what exactly is good about his record so far?

has i said here he hasn't set the world on fire with his performaces, but he has potential just give him time, once he gets to play in his preferred role for Australia has he does for queensland i think we would see more better performances from him. But since for his entire career he has played in unaccustomed roles for Australia we cant expect him to be superb can we.

 

[tooextracool]

If it stays as is, then no, his bowling will not trouble any real batsman. But as Sean said in another thread a week or so ago, it's much easier to teach someone how to swing the ball than it is to teach them how to bowl at a good pace with a good action.

He needs to learn to move the ball, and stay away from injuries. But he's far from a horrible prospect.

and dont you think that the 'learning process' needs to occur in domestic cricket and not at international cricket? hes merely tarnishing his record further and further(much like flintoff did) and one must really wonder whether he will be able to recover from his poor performances in international cricket.

 

[tooextracool]

So who would you select for the NZ teams? Seriously, I'd like to know who these NZ'ers are that would take the positions that all those players, semingly according to you, should not have been given.

From what I can tell, Richard's ideal NZ side is:

1.
2.
3. Fleming (could be wrong about the position, I'm just guessing here)
4.
5. Astle
6.
7.
8. Vettori
9.
10.
11. Bond

12.

is michael papps actually planning on making a comeback at any point? he was quite impressive in both forms of the game,particularly ODIs and his list A record is also quite strong.

 

[tooextracool]

1. Fair enough his bowling has been poor, but his batting has showed good sign's, the thing with him is that from what i can see he is not your Razzaq, Afridi, Flintoff type all-rounder who can bat at 7 or 8 & can smash it to all parts in the closing overs. He seems more of the Kallis mold where he should be batting in the top 6, after all thats where he bats for Queensland.

and theres no way hes going to be batting in the top 6 for australia at the moment, because there are far better players.

His batting record in FC cricket puts him right up their with the best batsmen in domestic cricket, so i'd say his batting is comparable with most..

really FC average off 44 is one of the best in Australia? his last full season average was 41. those are decent averages but ive always thought that there were plenty of players averaging in the 50s in domestic cricket in Australia.

2. And its not as if Watson hasn't showed potential in Domestic cricket hasn't he? http://content-wi.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/8180.html come on..

because he has such an outstanding record?

 

[aussie]

and theres no way hes going to be batting in the top 6 for australia at the moment, because there are far better players.



really FC average off 44 is one of the best in Australia? his last full season average was 41. those are decent averages but ive always thought that there were plenty of players averaging in the 50s in domestic cricket in Australia.



because he has such an outstanding record?

1. Exactly so he wont get much oppurtunity to prove himself in the position he normally plays in.

2. For a player who plays as an all-rounder i'd say averaging 41 is a good effort

3. You said that if their was any all-rounder was their for Australia he would show potential, their Watson has a decent FC record averaging 44 with the bat & 30 with the ball, so obviously their is potential their.

 

[sirjeremy11]

1.
2. Astle
3. McMillan
4. Fleming
5. Taylor
6. Oram
7. McCullum (there seems to be no-one better)
8. Vettori
9.
10.
11. Bond
Not quite as bad as you suggested - as there are holes in most sides.

You have to be kidding. Do you know how long it has taken to get McMillan out of the side? And I would absolutely have Styris in my NZ ODI side (I am guessing that is what the side is).

 

[jadeey]

1.
2. Astle
3. McMillan
4. Fleming
5. Taylor
6. Oram
7. McCullum (there seems to be no-one better)
8. Vettori
9.
10.
11. Bond
Not quite as bad as you suggested - as there are holes in most sides.

I prefer Fleming at 3. McMillan anywhere in the side is a horrible thought, definitely not at 3.

I didn't used to like McCullum but he's grown on me and I think he deserves his place in the side.

 

[tooextracool]

1. Exactly so he wont get much oppurtunity to prove himself in the position he normally plays in..

in which case why bother picking him in the ODI side and batting him out of position?

2. For a player who plays as an all-rounder i'd say averaging 41 is a good effort

how many times do we have to establish this? watson is NOT an all rounder. the aussie selectors may pick him as an all rounder but anybody's whos watched him bowl at the international level will tell you that his bowling is not good enough to be classified as such.

3. You said that if their was any all-rounder was their for Australia he would show potential, their Watson has a decent FC record averaging 44 with the bat & 30 with the ball, so obviously their is potential their.

how is that potential? in his last few seasons in england and australia hes been averaging in the 40s with the ball, which is representative of his bowling at the moment. when considering watson one must consider him as purely a batsman and his batting while being decent is not as good as the top 6 or some of the other players in australia.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

and dont you think that the 'learning process' needs to occur in domestic cricket and not at international cricket? hes merely tarnishing his record further and further(much like flintoff did) and one must really wonder whether he will be able to recover from his poor performances in international cricket.

You're talking about it as if he's doing a Mick Lewis every game. Watson hasn't had a particularly good ODI career, but it's not as though he's getting smashed and making low scores every game. His batting average is in the 30s, and his bowling has been poor but not completely woeful. I don't think he'll be suffering any psychological damage from the experience or anything, especially not when he's putting in the odd good performance to go with the crap, as he has been.

 

[marc71178]

His batting average may be in the 30s but half his innings are not outs!

 

[tooextracool]

You're talking about it as if he's doing a Mick Lewis every game. Watson hasn't had a particularly good ODI career, but it's not as though he's getting smashed and making low scores every game. His batting average is in the 30s, and his bowling has been poor but not completely woeful. I don't think he'll be suffering any psychological damage from the experience or anything, especially not when he's putting in the odd good performance to go with the crap, as he has been.

removing his performance against zimbabwe and kenya its actually 25.75. hes scored 2 50s in his international career- one against kenya, the other against the icc world XI neither of which deserve special mention IMO. the question here is what is the purpose of playing him in the side? would australia not be better off by picking a player who is more suited in that position, rather than picking someone whos clearly batting out of position and clearly out of depth in the bowling department?

 

[Smudge]

That post of Richard's is borderline trolling.

 

[sirjeremy11]

Worst selectors = Whoever picked Bracewell to be the coach