Wickremasinghe had such a beautiful bowling action (unlike Sami)
Printable View
Wickremasinghe had such a beautiful bowling action (unlike Sami)
So, a couple of good points have been raised
Firstly, should the bar be lowered to make it "international" rather than "test"?
My feeling is that if someone played a few ODIs but was never considered good enough to play Tests, then pretty much by definition he's going to be "worse" than people who played a reasonable number of Tests. So while it might be interesting to find out who's the worst of those people, it wasn't quite what I was aiming for.
But if that's the way you prefer to do it, that's fine. Maybe a compromise would be to say a Test is worth twice as much as an ODI, so the qualification is 10 Tests or 20 ODIs, or some calculation that adds up to the same (1 Test plus 18 ODIs, 2 Tests plus 16 ODIs, 3 Tests plus 14 ODIs, etc.)
The other question is whether to wait until the other Battle is finished -- I'm happy to wait if that's what you want. There 's no reason not to have two battles running at the same time, but if you want to wait, just say so.
Bad luck explains the odd poor looking match or series here or there. It doesn't explain a Test bowling average of over 50 after playing a good number of Tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by centurymaker
...or Chris Cowdrey the Great.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurricane
Given that, I hope that y'all don't mind if for my first post I put a couple of names here:
-Mohammad Ashraful (even tho he falls in the category "player in the first years of a minnow")
-Mark Ramprakash
Probably the 2 worst batsmen ever to play 50+ tests.
Anyway, I'm Gurin, pleased to meet you.
Ramprakash, Hick and Crawley.
Hi Gurin, welcome to the forums. Harsh on Ramps though you may be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Гурин
Cheers!Quote:
Originally Posted by Howe_zat
Perhaps, but only 2 centuries and an average of 27 in 52 test matches for a supposed specialist batsman (for England, nonetheless) is quite a feat. Just to say, the 2000s a batting friendly era and all that, but Imran Farhat, who's also been nominated, averages 5 more than that and has more 100s and 50s while playing 14 tests less. Ramps might have been talented, but if we look at how much effective he was he's down there with the worstQuote:
Originally Posted by Howe_zat
Most of Ramprakash's Tests were in the 90s, not the 00s but I agree he was a massive failure at Test level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Гурин
I was referring to the 2000s for Imran Farhat, it was actually a point in Ramps favor, but probably the only one in that comparison; that's just to say how bad it wasQuote:
Originally Posted by GingerFurball
Farhat,Faisal Iqbal, Sami,Salman Butt,Yasir Hameed and last but no least Kamran Akmal
Unfortunatley Pakistan has produced lot of these in the last decade. Salman Butt should win the whole thing not only was he rubbish but he combined it by being corrupt aswell.
Surprised Imrul Kayes hasn't had a mention yet, seems the obvious current one.
Khatmal has to be up there in the wicket keeping stakes for sure