On Mathew Sinclair

[Craig]

Scoring runs for fun in New Zealand Domestic cricket (averaging over 118 ATM ) but when he is in the Test team he either can't buy a run or is shifted around the order or he makes one low score and is out of the team.

I've always held hopes for him to do well as a Test player, but I'm not sure if it is mental or his technique or both.

 

[JimmyGS]

Mentally ****ed.

 

[Craig]

Maybe it is me, but IIRC Sinclair has serious problems moving his feet and is rather cemented at the crease. I've noticed it with Jesse Ryder and Peter Fulton.

 

[99*]

I used him as my first Voodoo target tbh, now working on Ponting and Dravid.

 

[Precambrian]

Very much like Atapattu. When he gets going he ensures a big one. Sadly he rarely gets going in tests.

 

[Somerset]

Mentally ****ed.

Haha, thats one way of putting it. I think its a combination of his own mentality and instability within the side, along with a technique that I guess isn't so suited to international cricket against the very best. I don't think averaging 100+ in domestic cricket will get him back in the side though, nor does it indicate hes necessarily changed his game since his most recent stint in the side last summer (where he looked woeful against Bangladesh and then England). Remember Michael Papps averaging 90 a few years ago, getting selected and suddenly getting found out against high quality fast bowling - I'd say Sinclair wouldn't fare much better if he was to be selected again, which as I say, I doubt will happen anyway.

 

[Craig]

I used him as my first Voodoo target tbh, now working on Ponting and Dravid.

Well it has worked so far

 

[Somerset]

Very much like Atapattu. When he gets going he ensures a big one. Sadly he rarely gets going in tests.

I guess similar to Atapattu in terms of distribution of scores (i.e. when it rains it pours, otherwise it can often end up like the desert), but at least Atapattu was proven, and could be depended upon, to guts out an innings and stick around at the other end while the Sri Lankan stroke makers could play their natural game at the other and keep the scoreboard moving, rather than give his wicket away and highlight technical flaws.

 

[Precambrian]

Atapattu's career average is 32.8 excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Sinclair's around 30 excl Zim and Ban

 

[Polo23]

Absolutely nothing to do with Sinclair's technique. His mental game is shot to bits when it comes to international cricket. If he had it in the top 2 inches, he could have been prolific.

 

[Prince EWS]

Mentally ****ed.

Basically, indeed. And that's coming from his biggest fan on CricketWeb.

I'd argue that his "****edness" was due mostly in part to the strange way he was treated by the selectors for the majority of his career though. He was dropped seven times throughout his Test career (IIRC) and it was only really justified twice - the first time and the last time. He was often dropped in that middle period due to ridiculous scheduling more than anything else - he'd get picked in the Test team, do enough to hold his place without being brilliant and then go into a one day series, play poorly (and he's always, always been a poor one day player; he doesn't even have a good domestic record in this format).and get dropped from both forms due to the huge gaps between Tests New Zealand actually played. He was also dropped once for merely saying he'd prefer not to open - not that he wouldn't open or resented the selectors for having to open, but that it simply wasn't his preferred position.

He's always been a bit temperamentally funny but he's scored a lot of pressure runs on difficult pitches in domestic cricket - what he needed was to be assured in that he'd be given an extended run and it become obvious fairly early that this was never going happen. He was a complete shadow of himself in his last series against England - he just really didn't know what he was doing. He isn't the most mentally strong character of all time but I don't think he was, at least in the beginning, as mentally weak and nervous as is generally accepted. At the end he certainly was but there are reasons for this as I explained.

Now, he did have a technical issue as well - his off-stump judgment in defense. However he's certainly not the only batsman to have this issue and I personally don't think his technique actually prevented him from being successful in Tests, particularly if you balance it out with his awesome powers of concentration and, when actually assured of himself, excellent shot selection.

He was always going to be an inconsistent kind of player but he's the classic example of selectorial mismanagement for mine.

 

[Richard]

Atapattu's career average is 32.8 excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Never quite realised that, though it must be remembered that he only once faced a Zimbabwe that didn't deserve Test status (ie, 2003/04).

That said, Atapattu is one of those for whom an average is least useful. Regardless of opposition, you always knew the likelihood was always the same: he'd quite possibly get out very cheaply very quickly and if he didn't there was a much-higher-than-normal chance he'd score something very, very big. By nature, the way the cookie crumbled was always going to mean he'd do these things with different regularity against certain opposition.

However, that Atapattu bashed Bangladesh so well surprises me actually, as most of the times I saw him get out cheaply had absolutely nothing to do with the calibre of the bowling and almost everything to do with the fact he simply seemed shot. It was as if once he made one massive score in a series, everything just went wrong somewhere. I couldn't fathom it, he'd get caught mid-on, he'd be lbw leaving straight balls when there'd been no swing or seam of any note for ages, he'd drag-on the widest deliveries, etc. Atapattu was a strange, strange player.

But when he did play, there were few I'd rather have watched, FTR. An Atapattu stroke, of virtually any description, was a thing of beauty.

 

[Flem274*]

Sinclair was ruined selectorially and mentally. He is Mark Ramprakash II. He's even said on radio he isn't looking for a recall and might not accept one if it was offered, he just wants to focus on CD.

Sinclair always had the ability, that was shown in his first ten or so tests.

Peter Fulton looks to be going down the same kind of path as Sinclair as well. The current Fulton is not the one we saw in 2007.

 

[Bahnz]

He was also dropped once for merely saying he'd prefer not to open - not that he wouldn't open or resented the selectors for having to open, but that it simply wasn't his preferred position.

Thought that was Vincent.

Anyway, I'd imagine that he must be looking for an ICL contract about now, given how little time left he probably has in domestic cricket (he's 33).

 

[Nutter]

Yup, another one who was shafted from being shifted all over the batting order, like Fulton, Vincent, etc.

 

[slugger]

i would believe if he played for canterbury things could have been truely different... also when martin crowe use to consantly run him down.. everyone else listened.. but there is one thing that slipped crowe memory he never scored two double centurys in the space sinclair did..

 

[Athlai]

Too old to start jedi training.

 

[Perm]

Too old to start jedi training.

Nah, start Jedi training whenever you want IMO. Is awesome.

 

[Days of Grace]

Thought that was Vincent.

Anyway, I'd imagine that he must be looking for an ICL contract about now, given how little time left he probably has in domestic cricket (he's 33).

No reason one can't play until late 30s in NZ domestic cricket. It would be great to have a few old hands out there.

 

[Days of Grace]

So Ross Taylor may be out of the second test with a chipped bone in his finger.

What chance, dare I ask, of a recall for Sinclair? Wouldn't that be a turn-up.

He's certainly the form middle order player in NZ at the moment and the West Indies bowling lineup holds no real fears, and also at his home ground in McLean Park.

hmmmmmmmm...