Still doesn't explain how he was 66%-100% better than the very best of his contemporaries... No-one, not even Hobbs, has been that superior to their contemporaries. Maybe Grace for a few years in county cricket but it was a very small club back then.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Players who 'over-performed' internationally
- Thread starter Bijed
- Start date
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I've already provided multiple explanations.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Exhausted bowlers to face, every other player drunk and/or hungover, unprofessional standard of cricket . . . what more do you need
If Bradman was really a great player he would have averaged 200
If Bradman was really a great player he would have averaged 200
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
Each as valid as the next.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I don't know how you can think that the modern schedule with two or more overseas tours a year in multiple time zones isn't more mentally fatiguing than an overseas tour once every two years arrived at on a leisurely cruise instead of a twenty-hour tin-can-in-the-sky trip.
Yes I realise that there were a lot more first class matches back then but format shifting has to be more difficult for players than playing one style of cricket the whole time.
Bradman was a freak. My only point is that players in the modern era have a lot more varied conditions and spend a lot more time jet setting that they used to. If Bradman played today is possible that the physical and mental toll of constant travel and format shifting would have reduced his average.
It's not that he wouldn't be as good, it's that he would have a lot more varied conditions to adjust to and he'd have less time to do it in.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nah
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Little known fact: Bradman averaged 10 in Sri Lanka. Clear proof that he would've been a spud on the subcontinent.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Australia don't play either of those two sides.
cnerd123
likes this
because they're scared tho
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
In a post-Sri Lankan shooting world I think it's prudent to be a little scared of touring a country that has specific threats against your cricket team.
ImpatientLime
International Regular
haha ffs
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
Great thread. I take it to mean how a player was received when he started vs 50-100 tests down the line, how he is received now. This is also a difficult conversation in cricket circles because when a player like that performs, cricket fans compete with each other to say "i always knew he was great" just to stroke their ego.
So I am going to mainly go with players from a Post late 90s era because I remember clearly how players who started around that time were received.
Virender Sehwag - came in 99. There is literally no one who saw him and said this guy is going to open with Sunil Gavaskar in my All Time India XI. No one.
Dave Warner - Again another player no one rated much and when he was picked as Test opener, the murmurs were that this is a sign of the decline of Australian cricket in the 2011 period, coinciding with a home Ashes loss.
Younis Khan - ah this one tastes the sweetest because this guy actually started with a bang - hundred on debut. 100 on his away series against Murali. Yet remained an after thought behind Inzy/Yousuf until Woolmer came along. Even after that, I would say he was considered 'lucky' or 'FTB", just another limited, ugly, graceless player who is lucky to get runs but not the real deal. He kept scoring runs and continued to go unnoticed.
VVS Laxman - I know he made his debut in the mid 90s but I remember his journey. He started as a Test opener and pretty much everyone laid into him. Guy was not scoring runs, and they kept talking about he doesn't belong at this level. Plus the other problem was, back in the 90s, other than Tendulkar, no one really recognized any Indian batsman. Or cricketer.
Hashim Amla - debut series in India. His 'horrible' technique was the talk of the town and how he was not going to make it.
AB De Villiers - Started as a Test opener. Pretty mediocre player. In fact so average that people didn't even notice him..like when you're so average people don't even notice when you don't score. Or score.
Steve Smith - If you're going to say things like "oh but I always knew he was special" when his claim to fame was a leg spinner who could 'potentially' be the next Warne, you're lying and everyone knows it. Stop pretending. All the conversations were about Smith the leg spinner. I still remember that Smith and Hauritz were put forward as the likely spinners Australia would look for and how Smith has to improve his control and stop bowling long hops if he is to become a test spinner.
Azhar Ali - again other player who started FC as a leg spinner. His entry into cricket was overshadowed predictably by the Butt-Amir-Asif mafia. A player so average that you wouldn't even notice his failures. In the last 2 years, he has a higher average than Kohli, Root and Pujara.
R Ashwin - did not make a splash. Had a tough Australia series in 2011 and was not the lead spinner of the team for the next 2 years. The home series loss to England in 2012 was put down to how "Indian spinners now are just ****". From that to be a wicket taking machine where people tip you as the guy to break Murali's record, it's quite incredible.
I love these narratives because ultimately what they demonstrate is how difficult and easy this sport is at the same time. It's so ****ing difficult to fight and overcome all the initial perceptions and first impressions people have of you, which you have no control over, and then start your career at the highest level against guys who are so much better than you and there are so many great players already, you wonder how you'll ever get noticed. Yet with hard work, obsession, commitment, these guys prove everyone wrong and make 'experts' look like fools, and the best thing must be when the same people who don't notice you at first then try to use you to gain credibility - "I always knew this guy was great"
And it's not something that happens rarely. The history of this game is rife with such examples.
So I am going to mainly go with players from a Post late 90s era because I remember clearly how players who started around that time were received.
Virender Sehwag - came in 99. There is literally no one who saw him and said this guy is going to open with Sunil Gavaskar in my All Time India XI. No one.
Dave Warner - Again another player no one rated much and when he was picked as Test opener, the murmurs were that this is a sign of the decline of Australian cricket in the 2011 period, coinciding with a home Ashes loss.
Younis Khan - ah this one tastes the sweetest because this guy actually started with a bang - hundred on debut. 100 on his away series against Murali. Yet remained an after thought behind Inzy/Yousuf until Woolmer came along. Even after that, I would say he was considered 'lucky' or 'FTB", just another limited, ugly, graceless player who is lucky to get runs but not the real deal. He kept scoring runs and continued to go unnoticed.
VVS Laxman - I know he made his debut in the mid 90s but I remember his journey. He started as a Test opener and pretty much everyone laid into him. Guy was not scoring runs, and they kept talking about he doesn't belong at this level. Plus the other problem was, back in the 90s, other than Tendulkar, no one really recognized any Indian batsman. Or cricketer.
Hashim Amla - debut series in India. His 'horrible' technique was the talk of the town and how he was not going to make it.
AB De Villiers - Started as a Test opener. Pretty mediocre player. In fact so average that people didn't even notice him..like when you're so average people don't even notice when you don't score. Or score.
Steve Smith - If you're going to say things like "oh but I always knew he was special" when his claim to fame was a leg spinner who could 'potentially' be the next Warne, you're lying and everyone knows it. Stop pretending. All the conversations were about Smith the leg spinner. I still remember that Smith and Hauritz were put forward as the likely spinners Australia would look for and how Smith has to improve his control and stop bowling long hops if he is to become a test spinner.
Azhar Ali - again other player who started FC as a leg spinner. His entry into cricket was overshadowed predictably by the Butt-Amir-Asif mafia. A player so average that you wouldn't even notice his failures. In the last 2 years, he has a higher average than Kohli, Root and Pujara.
R Ashwin - did not make a splash. Had a tough Australia series in 2011 and was not the lead spinner of the team for the next 2 years. The home series loss to England in 2012 was put down to how "Indian spinners now are just ****". From that to be a wicket taking machine where people tip you as the guy to break Murali's record, it's quite incredible.
I love these narratives because ultimately what they demonstrate is how difficult and easy this sport is at the same time. It's so ****ing difficult to fight and overcome all the initial perceptions and first impressions people have of you, which you have no control over, and then start your career at the highest level against guys who are so much better than you and there are so many great players already, you wonder how you'll ever get noticed. Yet with hard work, obsession, commitment, these guys prove everyone wrong and make 'experts' look like fools, and the best thing must be when the same people who don't notice you at first then try to use you to gain credibility - "I always knew this guy was great"
And it's not something that happens rarely. The history of this game is rife with such examples.
Last edited:
Julian87
State Captain
Both limited overs related
Clint McKay - Was a typical Australian ODI fast bowling selection. Picked with test cricket in mind. Never looked like holding down a test spot so turned himself into a ODI specialist and had a very good, albeit rather brief, 50 over career.
Brad Hogg - In ODIs. Was always a good state player but was a genuinely world class spinner for Australia in 50 over cricket. The transition from Warne to Hogg was seamless though it does have to be said he transitioned into one of the strongest 50 over teams cricket has ever seen.
Clint McKay - Was a typical Australian ODI fast bowling selection. Picked with test cricket in mind. Never looked like holding down a test spot so turned himself into a ODI specialist and had a very good, albeit rather brief, 50 over career.
Brad Hogg - In ODIs. Was always a good state player but was a genuinely world class spinner for Australia in 50 over cricket. The transition from Warne to Hogg was seamless though it does have to be said he transitioned into one of the strongest 50 over teams cricket has ever seen.