Shocking Declines

[morgieb]

Jason Gillespie. For a long time he was pretty damn good but from 2005 onwards he didn't really do much.

 

[Teja.]

Irfan Pathan went from most promising bowler in the world to cannon-fodder in 3 months.

 

[NZTailender]

Wouldn't Brett Lee be more a shocking rise than a shocking decline? His last 2 years in test cricket were the good ones.

Shocking middle period, really.

 

[NZTailender]

Vinod Kambli probably the best (or worst?) example for this. Hamish Marshall a name to be thrown in too.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Arthur Morris would fall into this category too. He scored 10 centuries in his first 36 Test innings, and just 2 in the 43 that followed. His average in that time fell from the 60-70 zone down to its final point of 46.48.

Yeah, he was a superstar of a batsman when he was playing along side Bradman. Was brought back down to earth once Bradman had retired though.

 

[0RI0N]

MTG Elliott
first 17 innings 850 runs @ 53 with 2 100's
next 19 innings 322 @ 17 1 hundred
-
Lawrence "G" Rowe
first 22 innings 1293 @ 61 incl 6 100's.
next 27 innings 754 @ 29 incl 1 hundred.

 

[Himannv]

Jason Gillespie. For a long time he was pretty damn good but from 2005 onwards he didn't really do much.

Except maybe score a double century

 

[popepouri]

Gibbs.

First 59 matches: ave. 49.4
Last 32 matches: ave. 29

Jimmy Adams

First 24: ave. 66
Last 30: ave. 25

 

[Faisal1985]

I don't know but i thought Ishant Sharma started out brilliantly but i doubt he even lasted 1 or 2 years in prime form.

 

[Richard]

Wouldn't Brett Lee be more a shocking rise than a shocking decline? His last 2 years in test cricket were the good ones.

Lee's Test career saw 1 shockingly good arrival, 1 shocking decline, another gradual rise then decline, then another shocking rise, then another shocking decline.

If there'd been more of them he'd be a remarkable case, but he's pretty remarkable as it is anyway.

 

[Richard]

Lawrence "G" Rowe
first 22 innings 1293 @ 61 incl 6 100's.
next 27 innings 754 @ 29 incl 1 hundred.

For anyone who doesn't know the full story there his case is particularly sad - he suffered from a most unfortunate ailment for a cricketer, an allergy to grass. This caused him problems many times early in his career, even while he was making runs, and he was later found to have Pterygium (which until the below post I'd wrongly thought was called tergynium), an eye condition involving vision-blurring growths. This was operated on, but the operation damaged his eyesight and he was unable to wear contact-lenses as they caused his eyes to water.

Under those circumstances it's not all that surprising that he went from brilliant to pretty poor almost overnight.

 

[BoyBrumby]

MEK Hussey, anyone?

1st 20 tests: 2120 runs @ 84.80. 8 100s, 8 50s.
Next 29 tests: 1703 runs @ 35.47. 3 100s, 11 50s.

 

[Goughy]

For anyone who doesn't know the full story there his case is particularly sad - he suffered from a most unfortunate ailment for a cricketer, an allergy to grass. This caused him problems many times early in his career, even while he was making runs, and he was later found to have tergynium, an eye condition involving vision-blurring growths. This was operated on, but the operation damaged his eyesight and he was unable to wear contact-lenses as they caused his eyes to water.

Under those circumstances it's not all that surprising that he went from brilliant to pretty poor almost overnight.

Im surprised I didnt know that. Interesting stuff. It would certainly help explain why his career tailed off so dramatically. Also interesting that a quick google shows no such thing as tergynium and the only reference to it is in articles on Rowe as a misspelling of Pterygium that about 4-5 writers didnt actually check and just directly lifted from other articles. Interesting how in this electronic age a mistake quickly multiplies.

 

[Richard]

Oooo, thanks, I'll be the clever one who gets it right thanks to you now.

 

[Goughy]

Oooo, thanks, I'll be the clever one who gets it right thanks to you now.

Yeah, nothing wrong with you getting it wrong. Most of the online things about Rowe get it wrong and frankly Id never heard of it. It just shows how 1 person writes something and then it is blindly copied by others in articles (Im not talking about a forum posts as there isnt the same level of accuracy supposedly required)

 

[Shri]

Ajantha Mendis

 

[stumpski]

Matt Sinclair: averaged 51.21 from his first 13 Tests, 20.73 from most recent 19.


Btw Jimmy Adams' average of 61 was somewhat inflated by batting in the lower-middle order early in his career, and collecting a few red asterisks. Was certainly useful though.

 

[zaremba]

Matt Sinclair: averaged 51.21 from his first 13 Tests, 20.73 from most recent 19.


Btw Jimmy Adams' average of 61 was somewhat inflated by batting in the lower-middle order early in his career, and collecting a few red asterisks. Was certainly useful though.

Not-outs don't inflate your batting average.

 

[Pothas]

Not-outs don't inflate your batting average.

here we go.

 

[stumpski]

Not-outs don't inflate your batting average.

How so - does Ian Bell score 350 runs every time he goes out to bat against Bangladesh?