Cricket Betting Site Betway

View Poll Results: Who really is the worst player to play Tests for England since 1990?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • Wayne Larkins

    0 0%
  • David Capel

    0 0%
  • Eddie Hemmings

    1 3.70%
  • Neil Williams

    0 0%
  • Derek Pringle

    0 0%
  • Ian Botham

    1 3.70%
  • Dermot Reeve

    0 0%
  • Mike Gatting

    0 0%
  • Paul Jarvis

    0 0%
  • John Emburey

    0 0%
  • Neil Foster

    0 0%
  • Mike Watkinson

    0 0%
  • Ben Hollioake

    1 3.70%
  • Gavin Hamilton

    2 7.41%
  • Chris Schofield

    2 7.41%
  • Usman Afzaal

    1 3.70%
  • James Ormond

    0 0%
  • Richard Dawson

    4 14.81%
  • Anthony McGrath

    1 3.70%
  • Gareth Batty

    1 3.70%
  • Geraint Jones

    0 0%
  • Liam Plunkett

    0 0%
  • Ian Blackwell

    1 3.70%
  • Sajid Mahmood

    9 33.33%
  • Darren Pattinson

    2 7.41%
  • Amjad Khan

    1 3.70%
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 94
Like Tree41Likes

Thread: Who really is the worst player to play for England since 1990?

  1. #16
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend morgieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    63*
    Posts
    21,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    As I've already said, he had far more success at First-Class county level than Plunkett or Mahmood have ever had and probably ever will have. This isn't about who was worst performed at Test level but who was the worst cricketer. None of the above remotely deserved Test selection; Salisbury actually did, even if he was never going to be successful having got there. The same might be said of, for instance, Devon Malcolm or Richard Illingworth.
    And yet....some of the above still had good county careers. And no, not just those who were dire by the time the 1990's come around.
    RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
    RIP Hughesy 1988-2014. 63* for eternity.

  2. #17
    Hall of Fame Member HeathDavisSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum... And I'm all out of bubblegum.
    Posts
    16,219
    Alan Wells is desperately upset to be left out of the poll.

    The worst cricketer... Possibly Dawson. Saj Mahmood would be right up there, but I guess he's being given another opportunity to make it. Dawson will never get another go.

    And having Neil Foster on that list is an abomination. He had some excellent days for England - albeit in the 80s. I'm guessing this is one of those names you've put in there only due to semantics.
    Last edited by HeathDavisSpeed; 19-11-2009 at 07:35 PM.
    >>>>>>WHHOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHHH>>>>>>
    Fascist Dictator of the Heath Davis Appreciation Society
    Supporting Petone's Finest since the very start - Iain O'Brien
    Also Supporting the All Time #1 Batsman of All Time Ever - Jacques Kallis and the much maligned Peter Siddle.


    Vimes tells it how it is:
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel_Vimes View Post
    Heath worryingly quick.
    ~~~~Categorically not Heath Davis~~~~

  3. #18
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Richard, if that is your logic regarding Salisbury then how is Paul Jarvis on the list?

    Makes no sense. Did you ever see him bowl?
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

  4. #19
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    Geraint Jones wasn't even the worst 'keeper to play for England from 1990, let alone the worst player.


  5. #20
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Hamilton had 2 years of being an excellent county cricketer (1998 and 1999) and aside from those two did nothing. Those couple of seasons were not even full programmes of appearances, and he is a classic case of an apparently exciting talent being rushed in before anyone has taken care to see whether there is longevity there, which with Hamilton there simply wasn't. Just a couple of years after he appeared in Tests he'd completely lost the ability to bowl, something that does not happen very often.
    Thats more of a resume than some and losing the ability to bowl years later is not relevant to his selection at the time.

    Sure it is rare but people do lose the ability to bowl. Just look at poor Keith Medlycott

  6. #21
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Richard, if that is your logic regarding Salisbury then how is Paul Jarvis on the list?

    Makes no sense. Did you ever see him bowl?
    Only in 1999, by which time he was long past his best. I have not, yet, fully familiarised myself with his entire story and don't deny that I may be mistaken in having him on the list. All I know is that by 1999 he was truly dreadful, performed awfully in his Tests and was plagued by injury all career.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  7. #22
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed View Post
    Alan Wells is desperately upset to be left out of the poll.
    Even though Wells was 33 by the time he played and there were many better candidates, he actually averaged 48.59 in First-Class county cricket between 1989 and 1995 and had made productive A tours in 1993/94 and 1994/95. If he wasn't going to play earlier he shouldn't have debuted in 1995, but he was a very good batsman for a while and if he'd developed earlier and\or not elected for the Rebel tour he might possibly have had a shot at an OK Test career.
    And having Neil Foster on that list is an abomination. He had some excellent days for England - albeit in the 80s. I'm guessing this is one of those names you've put in there only due to semantics.
    Included on the basis that he was recalled as a 31-year-old whose time was clearly up (he retired a week after his last Test). In 1993, when he played, he was a wreck.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  8. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    130
    Saj Mahmood and Amjad Khan both look pretty pathetic.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  9. #24
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
    Geraint Jones wasn't even the worst 'keeper to play for England from 1990, let alone the worst player.
    He was pretty bad when first picked, though he did indeed get much better. But as a batsman he was actually one of the worst. Picked based on a single good season in 2003, which he was never to repeat until 2009. Had Stewart retired a year later he'd almost certainly have come nowhere near Test cricket and in all honesty it'd have saved plenty of people plenty of angst had that happened.

    I'm presuming you mean Prior as the even-worse wicketkeeper, because Russell, Stewart, Blakey, Rhodes, Hegg, Read, Foster and Ambrose were\are certainly all better than he initially was.

    BTW I'd certainly not pick Geraint as the worst player in the last two decades but I do think he fits into the "players who never had a hope of being successful in Tests and should never have been picked" category.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  10. #25
    Hall of Fame Member HeathDavisSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum... And I'm all out of bubblegum.
    Posts
    16,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Included on the basis that he was recalled as a 31-year-old whose time was clearly up (he retired a week after his last Test). In 1993, when he played, he was a wreck.
    Well, clearly Foster wasn't the worst player to turn out for England in the 90s, if you are wanting to consider their overall ability. Even in the 90s with all of his injury problems, I recall him having some very good games for Essex (though I may be confusing the late 80s with the 90s)

    And I agree with you on Wells, I was being somewhat tongue in cheek that a batsman who averaged 0 for England wasn't on the list.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Thats more of a resume than some and losing the ability to bowl years later is not relevant to his selection at the time.

    Sure it is rare but people do lose the ability to bowl. Just look at poor Keith Medlycott
    I agree it isn't relevant to his selection at the time but it does emphasise just how hasty his selection was. Hamilton looked like he might be a special talent in 1998 and 1999, but he was rushed in before anyone really knew whether he was or was just a flash-in-the-pan. He turned-out to be the latter.

    Aside from 1998 and 1999, which were both merely part-seasons, not full campaigns, Hamilton did pretty much nothing at all at county level. I wish he had, because he really excited me in 1999, and maybe with different alignment of stars he might have (I don't know, I've not read any autobios or heard anyone really suggest just what went wrong). He had more to recommend him than Ben Hollioake, but he was a terribly hasty selection.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  12. #27
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed View Post
    Well, clearly Foster wasn't the worst player to turn out for England in the 90s, if you are wanting to consider their overall ability. Even in the 90s with all of his injury problems, I recall him having some very good games for Essex (though I may be confusing the late 80s with the 90s)
    As I say, I'm not saying he was, I think Saj and Dawson were both much worse. But you'd struggle to justify replacing Phillip DeFreitas with him in 1993 regardless of how far you looked - because he was crocked, and had no hope of being around much longer. He wasn't much of a bowler by 1993 and was an awful selection.

    I'm not saying "who was the worst cricketer, considering entire careers, of those who appeared in the 1990s and 2000s"; rather, "considering only cricket from 1990 onwards, who was the worst?" For the former, Foster would indeed not be remotely worthy of consideration; for the latter, he certainly is.
    And I agree with you on Wells, I was being somewhat tongue in cheek that a batsman who averaged 0 for England wasn't on the list.
    He averaged 3, after spending 39 balls making 3* in the second-innings as a dreadfully dreary game was drifting to an inevitable draw.
    Last edited by Richard; 19-11-2009 at 07:57 PM.
    Fred Tetanus likes this.

  13. #28
    Hall of Fame Member HeathDavisSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum... And I'm all out of bubblegum.
    Posts
    16,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    He averaged 3, after spending 39 balls making 3* in the second-innings as a dreadfully dreary game was drifting to an inevitable draw.
    Memory playing tricks with me I must confess. Not in the best of ways today; though I can never resist a discussion about mediocre English test cricketers. I find it very cathartic.

  14. #29
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    56,554
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Because they were both absolutely awful by the time they received their totally erroneous recalls in 1991 and 1992/93 respectively. And Gatting even got picked again in 1994/95. Make no mistake, Botham had once been a brilliant player and Gatting a very fine one, but the fact that either played in the 1990s served to do nothing but taint their legacies. Botham should have played last in 1987 and Gatting should never have returned after electing for that Rebel tour in 1989.
    This kind of contradicts the point you keep making about it being the worst cricketers in general and not the worst performed cricketers in Tests though, doesn't? They may have been poor when they played in the 90s but they were good players all the same.
    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
    'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'


    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
    Someone asked me the other day if I believe in conspiracies. Well, sure. Here's one. It is called the political system. It is nothing if not a giant conspiracy to rob, trick and subjugate the population.
    Before replying to TJB, always remember:
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJediBrah View Post
    Next week I'll probably be arguing the opposite

  15. #30
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    66,642
    Dawson was horrendous, Jarvis laughable.

    But who the **** is Neil Williams?
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    - JK Galbraith
    Quote Originally Posted by TNT View Post
    You need to clap a cows c**** over your head and get a woolly bull to f**** some sense into you.

    "Do you know why I have credibility? Because I don't exude morality." - Bob Hawke

    #408. Sixty three not out forever.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Battrick
    By James in forum Battrick
    Replies: 2535
    Last Post: 31-10-2015, 04:47 PM
  2. Mystery Draft V.2 (1989-2009)
    By Mupariwa_Magic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 492
    Last Post: 21-11-2009, 01:00 PM
  3. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-05-2009, 01:47 PM
  4. Archived [18/10/06] : Battrick
    By DJellett in forum Battrick
    Replies: 10623
    Last Post: 17-10-2006, 12:20 PM
  5. Player Strength and weakness
    By Craig in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 04-08-2006, 01:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •