Possibly impacting - though certainly far from the only factor - is that these players have obviously had a chance to play far more domestic FC cricket without Test careers stopping them.I find it a bit odd that all 3 of them forged fairly good FC careers as well. It seems to be a pattern with most 'ODI specialists' too. Look at Michael Bevan or Chris Harris. Im not exactly sure if it is just coincidence, but it seems strange that most ODI specialists that were so obviously found out at the test match level were such good FC players as well even though the 2 forms are so completely different.
My thoughts on Bevan have been well publicised in another thread and my thoughts on Hick are similar to my thoughts on Sinclair. However, I don't think it would have mattered how secure his spot was, Knight was never going to be Test standard.Possibly impacting - though certainly far from the only factor - is that these players have obviously had a chance to play far more domestic FC cricket without Test careers stopping them.
Obviously, playing more games won't increase your skill level, but it will allow you to get over bad troughs at domestic level more than someone who maybe started the season with 3, 21, 15, 4 then scored 88 to get back into nick before joining the Test team for the rest of the season would.
No, indeed. I've always compared Hick and Bevan myself. Less sure about Sinclair, but perhaps that's just because he was the opposite of ODI specialist.My thoughts on Bevan have been well publicised in another thread and my thoughts on Hick are similar to my thoughts on Sinclair. However, I don't think it would have mattered how secure his spot was, Knight was never going to be Test standard.