Athlai
Not Terrible
Now my friend here's some food for thought...
Mathew Sinclair domestic
8216 runs 180 innings 18 not outs
50.72
Stephen Fleming domestic
9237 runs 217 22
47.37
Scott Styris domestic
3908 runs 149 14
28.94
Jacob Oram domestic
1972 runs 66 7
33.42
Craig McMillan domestic
4701 runs 135 17
39.83
Lou Vincent domestic
3318 runs 99 9
36.87
Nathan Astle domestic
4619 runs 135 14
38.17
Mark Richardson domestic
7218 runs 199 28
42.21
Mathew Sinclair Test
1534 runs 50 innings 5 not outs
34.08 -16.64
Stephen Fleming Test
6982 runs 185 10
39.89 -7.48
Scott Styris Test
1586 runs 48 4
36.04 +7.1
Jacob Oram Test
1390 runs 45 8
37.56 +4.14
Craig McMillan Test
3116 runs 91 10
38.46 -1.37
Lou Vincent Test
1332 runs 40 1
34.15 -2.72
Nathan Astle Test
4702 runs 137 10
37.02 -1.15
Mark Richardson Test
2776 runs 65 3
44.77 +2.56
ALL of these players have higher Test averages than MS Sinclair, all of them have lower domestic only averages, now what does that tell you? His average plummets a massive 16.64 between the forms, he is constantly dropped because he consistently plays below his potential, to a massive extent, he on the Test stage has been surpassed by all of these players despite all the "ability" he may have. Ability only counts so much when you don't have the tenacity to go out there and play to that ability on a higher stage, or even above it. Calling him the 2nd best batsman in New Zealand is far too complimentary, the most promising? The most disappointing? Sure, he can have that.
I can see Fulton, Taylor, Hay, Elliot and Ryder all doing better in his spot in years to come. Mathew Sinclair New Zealand's Greatest Underachiever.
Mathew Sinclair domestic
8216 runs 180 innings 18 not outs
50.72
Stephen Fleming domestic
9237 runs 217 22
47.37
Scott Styris domestic
3908 runs 149 14
28.94
Jacob Oram domestic
1972 runs 66 7
33.42
Craig McMillan domestic
4701 runs 135 17
39.83
Lou Vincent domestic
3318 runs 99 9
36.87
Nathan Astle domestic
4619 runs 135 14
38.17
Mark Richardson domestic
7218 runs 199 28
42.21
Mathew Sinclair Test
1534 runs 50 innings 5 not outs
34.08 -16.64
Stephen Fleming Test
6982 runs 185 10
39.89 -7.48
Scott Styris Test
1586 runs 48 4
36.04 +7.1
Jacob Oram Test
1390 runs 45 8
37.56 +4.14
Craig McMillan Test
3116 runs 91 10
38.46 -1.37
Lou Vincent Test
1332 runs 40 1
34.15 -2.72
Nathan Astle Test
4702 runs 137 10
37.02 -1.15
Mark Richardson Test
2776 runs 65 3
44.77 +2.56
ALL of these players have higher Test averages than MS Sinclair, all of them have lower domestic only averages, now what does that tell you? His average plummets a massive 16.64 between the forms, he is constantly dropped because he consistently plays below his potential, to a massive extent, he on the Test stage has been surpassed by all of these players despite all the "ability" he may have. Ability only counts so much when you don't have the tenacity to go out there and play to that ability on a higher stage, or even above it. Calling him the 2nd best batsman in New Zealand is far too complimentary, the most promising? The most disappointing? Sure, he can have that.
I can see Fulton, Taylor, Hay, Elliot and Ryder all doing better in his spot in years to come. Mathew Sinclair New Zealand's Greatest Underachiever.