When I Was Wrong!

[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...

• 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.

 

[tooextracool]

- Really thought England may have won the Ashes in 2001

It might very well have been a very close series had England actually had the same players that had been the pillar for the success for the previous 4 series before that summer. Thorpe missed the entire series (he was safely our best batsman at the time), Vaughan was injured, Captain Hussain missed a number of tests, White was effectively useless with the ball and Giles missed a chunk of the series. I do think England get a lot of bad rap for this series, and I dont honestly think that Australia were as good a side as the one that toured India in 2004. If England had perhaps played the Ashes the summer before, things might well have been very different IMO.

 

[tooextracool]

I can only think of 2 players for which I have been categorically proven wrong.

I didnt expect Gilchrist to get a single score past 50 in SL in 2003/04, but he did manage the small matter of 144 in one inning despite following the trend that I laid out for him for the rest of the series.
I can easily put my hand up and say that I got Trescothick wrong. I did not expect the kind of performances that he put in during the series in SA in 2004 and to an extent in the Ashes in 2005. There are still some aspects of my argument on Trescothick that I still stand by, but he achieved far more than I was expecting off him at one point of his career.

EDIT: Also always thought Hick would go on to achieve far more than he ended up doing. I genuinely believe and still believe today that had he been treated fairly, he would have gone on to have had a very distinguished test match career.

 

[tooextracool]

Alec Stewart - totally manufactured cricketer who was no more talented than any numbers of young guys around at the time of his early fc career

Went on to have an excellent career, playing over 100 tests and, amongst other things, scored twin centuries against the Ambrose and Walsh in the Windies

Really? Always thought Alec Stewart as being one of the best technical players of his time. He had all the shots in the game, if anything he underachieved IMO.

 

[tooextracool]

Was wrong about Mahmood.

Think one day, everything will click for Mahmood and he will finally realize the value of line and length over variation. When this day happens, he will take a bucketload of wickets, however like most bowlers this will probably happen after hes past 30 and therefore no longer in consideration for a berth in the England XI.

 

[archie mac]

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.

Me and you both, also G. Pollock stated that he would finish with a Test ave over 50 after watching him play a Test in Sth Afr. I still can't understand why he did not make it

 

[Goughy]

Really? Always thought Alec Stewart as being one of the best technical players of his time. He had all the shots in the game, if anything he underachieved IMO.

Yeah, I wouldnt call him the most technical of players but he was certainly not 'manufactured'.

He was a flair player that timed the ball like a dream.

 

[tooextracool]

He had his issues against spin and struggled on slower wickets against all bowlers, but his cover drives were as crisp as they got and I dont think I have seen anything more authoriative than some of his pull shots.

 

[Goughy]

He had his issues against spin and struggled on slower wickets against all bowlers, but his cover drives were as crisp as they got and I dont think I have seen anything more authoriative than some of his pull shots.

His 2 hundreds in the same Test in Barbados (IIRC) was a thing of beauty.

He loved pace on the ball, possibly related to learning his game at the Oval.

 

[social]

Sorry guys, I should've pointed out that Alec and I are of roughly the same vintage ( ) and my assessment of him was made from experiences in the nets and in matches before he was fully established in the Surrey lineup

To give him credit, he had a top shelf career and that was no less than he deserved as he worked as hard at his game as anyone I've met

 

[sanga1337]

I thought that:

Dan Cullen or Cameron White would go on to be decent spinners for Australia.

Hashim Amla would never make it as a test batsman

Tino best would go on to be a good bowler for the WI

just off the top of my head