When I Was Wrong!

[archie mac]

Given England's gutter standards that summer I'd not have been surprised if no-one ever tried so much as a single Yorker to him all series.

At the start the press dubbed (one B or two?) them the worst Aust. team to ever tour England, half way through they changed it to the worst ever England team

[Richard]

Welll, it was certainly the latter.

Before the tour, the assumption that they were the worst Australian team ever wouldn't have been completely stupid. But Boon had already turned the corner several years before; Merv Hughes turned the corner at the same time the tour commenced; Stephen Waugh had a false dawn that 3-and-a-half years later became a true dawn; Alderman and Lawson were just back in the team and no-one could've guessed quite how good Alderman was going to (albeit briefly) be; and Taylor had played just 2 (unsuccessful) Tests.

But it turned-out that the summer (or winter) of 1989 was a few months when the side went from being bottom of the pile to 2nd-best in The World, in a flash.

And yes, it's dubbed, not dubed.

[Burgey]

I said McGrath would not play another test when he hurt his ankle in about 2002 or 2003. Oops. There hav ebeen plenty of others but that one sticks out as a doozy on my part.

[Furball]

Fairly certain on a different forum I said that McGrath would get pasted at the 2007 WC.

[Richard]

I said McGrath would not play another test when he hurt his ankle in about 2002 or 2003. Oops.

On that note I'd be surprised if anyone was honestly expecting Simon Jones to play any serious county cricket again in the early part of this year (ie, before the cricket season started). I certainly wasn't, and I know for certain that many others on here weren't.

As I said earlier I try not to write anyone off completely but Jones S is surely one of the most unlikely, and hence unexpected, comebacks of recent times and will surely have surprised plenty of people. If he should play Tests again that'd make things more remarkable still.

McGrath's ankle injury happened right at the very end (talking the last week) of 2002 BTW. And he missed most of 2003 and the first half of 2004 because of it.

[NZTailender]

There are a few things I was wrong about, that I probably haven't posted on this forum.

I thought...

• Mathew Sinclair would be the best NZ batsmen since Crowe, become a regular (never getting dropped) and would score at least 5000 test runs (an outside chance the latter could happen, though )
  
• Martin Love would also be a regular fixture in the Aussie line up and average over 50.
  
• Matthew Horne would play more tests than he did and be our regular opener, averaging over 40.
  
• Adam Hollioake would do much the same as Love except for England.
  
• Justin Kemp would be the long term replacement for Klusener in the RSA ODI side.
  
• That Dean Headley would play more tests.
  
• Matthew Nicholson would also play more tests.
  
• That Matthew Elliott would be the one to replace Taylor in the long term, as opposed to Langer or Hayden.
  
• That Michael Bevan and Chris Harris would make test comebacks and be successful.
  
• That Stuart Clark wouldn't be a successful test bowler.

Was right in thinking that Katich would eventually be recalled and not disappoint.

[Johnners]

Haha, but of course, Richard has never been wrong.

Add me to the Symonds list, never thought he'd make it. Granted he has had some luck, but to his credit he made full use of it.

[NZTailender]

Haha, but of course, Richard has never been wrong.

Add me to the Symonds list, never thought he'd make it. Granted he has had some luck, but to his credit he made full use of it.

I always had a suspicion that Symonds would make in test cricket, I just hoped that he would never get the chance or would get dropped because I don't like the guy.

[JimmyGS]

Justin Kemp would be the long term replacement for Klusener in the RSA ODI side.

Bingo. Wow it's really hard to think of any of these!

[NUFAN]

I thought Sean Ervine would end up having a very good career, and it's just a shame that the situation in ZIm as he's still only 25 years old!

Out of the Australians I never expected Brad Hogg to do anything in the one day format and after watching Greg Blewett's debut I thought he'd end up with a much better record then he did.

Someone like Hashan Tillekaratne was a player who I thought was shocking, like he'd end up like the Ken Rutherford's of this world, he actually ended up having a decent Test Career averaging 42 from 83 matches.

[social]

There are a few things I was wrong about, that I probably haven't posted on this forum.

I thought...
[LIST][*]Mathew Sinclair would be the best NZ batsmen since Crowe, become a regular (never getting dropped) and would score at least 5000 test runs (an outside chance the latter could happen, though )

[*]Matthew Horne would play more tests than he did and be our regular opener, averaging over 40.

Was right in thinking that Katich would eventually be recalled and not disappoint.

Dont be too hard on yourself, I thought Hamish Marshall and Luke Vincent would be very successful test batsmen

As for Katich, if we actually had a replacement opener in the same hemisphere, he'd be gone from the lineup for the next test after that disgraceful shot if I had my way

[NZTailender]

Dont be too hard on yourself, I thought Hamish Marshall and Luke Vincent would be very successful test batsmen

As for Katich, if we actually had a replacement opener in the same hemisphere, he'd be gone from the lineup for the next test after that disgraceful shot if I had my way

Replaced for one bad shot after outperforming 9 other players in the side, run wise? Ridiculous.

[_Ed_]

Papps and Foster aren't finished yet.

True, but I find it hard to see Papps ever reaching the heights I'd expected of him. Same with Foster really, even if he does make it back to the England side it'd only be until Davies is ready.

[aussie]

Good thread, some that come to mind from over the years are:


- really thought Gilchrist wouldn't have been a hit & miss test batsman. (But then i reckon many thought so).

- Gavin Robertson would have been more involved than in the Australian side than he was

- Reifell wouldn't have been that effective in the 99 WC given how in bowled in the WI a few months before. Wanted Dizzy to have been picked.

- After such a fantastic 2000/01 season & England were so smashed in the 2001 ashes really felt that i wouldn't see England win an Ashes for a veryyyyyyyy long time.

- Dominic Cork would have been much more of an effective bowler after his exploits in 2001

- Really thought England may have won the Ashes in 2001

- Never thought Laxman was test class his technique really was turn off, even his 167 in Sydney 99 i thiught was a fluke (a la Ganga 2 hundreds vs AUS in 03) & that whenever Australia got him again he would be walking wicket.

- Thought Sunil Joshi may have played more test than he did.

- Franklyn Rose & Reon King would have become solid enough replacements for Walsh & Ambrose.

- Thought Pakistan would take the 99 WC in a canter..

- Razzaq & Mahmood would have become really top-class all-rounders

- The 2000s would have been a really good period for Zimbabwe cricket

- Always used to feel that Bevan may have played ODI's until he was 40, really couldn't see him ever being dropped.

[NZTailender]

Papps is 29 now, not entirely out of contention but I'd say he's dropped down the pecking order a fair bit.

Outside the current incumbents he's probably behind Guptill, Watling and possibly Cumming.

However if he has another season like 06/07 he should rocket himself back into contention.