'Carl Hooper didn't understand just how good he was - Brian Lara

[vvvslaxman]

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/brian-lara-looks-back-at-west-indies-1991-tour-of-england-1442700

 

Great article

[Serpico]

Looks like Viv was a strict headmaster 

 

"Viv used to make me cry every three weeks, but he would make Carl cry once a week. Viv's tone of voice is intimidating and if you're not strong enough, you can take that personally and be affected by it. Me, I was never really affected by it. In a way I welcomed it, because I was so much under his arm that I knew abuse was coming and I was a strong personality. Carl? I know for a fact that Carl shied away from Viv Richards.

 

I don't think Viv wilfully intimidated you. It was just his make-up. He's not a bully. Viv Richards is not a bully. But Viv has a very strong personality. He's a very aggressive person who dealt with most things that way. If we had a team meeting, he would inspire. He would back his players forever. He would talk in such a way that it left a mark on you. Even now, he's not a soft person. Maybe he has a soft side, but a soft person?

 

Put it this way. Viv was Viv, with everything that went with it, at all times. I was on his tail all the time so I might have received more tongue lashings than most, but it never affected me badly because I knew that what he was talking about was what West Indies cricket needed to hear. If you sift out all the toughness and the so-called arrogance and listen to what he's really saying, he means well for West Indies cricket. Sure we had a couple of run-ins, especially later when I was captain and he was selector, but I think I stood up to him most of the time.

 

A lot of players wouldn't dare admit they didn't like Viv Richards, or that they felt intimidated by him. I would say that I love Viv Richards and he did try to intimidate me but never succeeded. I have seen with my own eyes big men brought to tears, including me, under the wrath of the King.

 

Now listen, it needs to be said that Viv Richards never cried down on a person because he didn't want them to be great like him. His sternness was who he was, but he never wanted you not to do well. It was just how he was. And look, Viv loved Carl. Much more than he loved me, that's for sure. But the way Viv shows love didn't resonate with Carl."

[Lord]

A bit like Rohit. Hugely talented you feel they under achieved despite achieving so much.

[tapandrun]

Hooper was highly rated in WI

[Lord]

 

[rkt.india]

Azhar and Hooper had similar batting style.

[Gollum]

Jimmy Adams too had a sudden, steep fall. At one point looked like a 50+ average player. Not talented like Hooper but gritty as *. 

[Gollum]

Hooper destroyed us in the 5 test series in 2002. That's why can't take that Fab 4 team too seriously. 

[Muloghonto]

4 hours ago, Gollum said:

Jimmy Adams too had a sudden, steep fall. At one point looked like a 50+ average player. Not talented like Hooper but gritty as *. 

 

With Paddams, it was a confidence issue. He took a serious blow to the head vs an England county team playing warmup for the WI in 95/96 i believe and ever since then, he was never quite the same. He was nowhere near as fluent against pace or spin as Hooper though- Padams, even at his best relied mostly kicking away spinning deliveries comming in to him as his main 'shot' vs spinners. 

Hooper on the other hand, looked like he was playing slow-medium bowlers, the guy had so much time to play his strokes. He was also technically flawless, combining the wristy play of Azhar on the legside with Kohli-like cover drives and square cuts. I remember watching a WI-Pakistan match in the early 90s where he casually flicks Waqar from 6th stump line, for a six over square leg. But his problem was mental - he wasnt a choker, he was a dude who simply didnt have strong concentration powers and was the kind of guy who'd clobber McGrath, then get out to Steve Waugh. 

One of the most underachieving players in the history of the game.  The one thing he was truly worldclass at, was fielding, where his slip catching was at alltime great level, with his ground fielding being definitely worldclass. His spin bowling was quite good for a 5th bowler's role, possibly the best 5th bowler of his time along with Jayasurya

[neel roy]

Hooper was the reason we didnt win the away series against west indies under ganguly s captaincy in 2002. He was immense and suddenly rose like a phoenix from ashes. He scored 580 odd runs whereas in the series before he was struggling. There was an odi series after that ( which India won) and Dinesh Mongia played well which actually made him a middle order contender which culminated later in him being picked over VVS in the 2003 world cup 

[vvvslaxman]

Hooper i have seen him live in action. in stadium. ONe of the most talented batsman one can see.

[nevada]

15 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

 

With Paddams, it was a confidence issue. He took a serious blow to the head vs an England county team playing warmup for the WI in 95/96 i believe and ever since then, he was never quite the same. He was nowhere near as fluent against pace or spin as Hooper though- Padams, even at his best relied mostly kicking away spinning deliveries comming in to him as his main 'shot' vs spinners. 

Hooper on the other hand, looked like he was playing slow-medium bowlers, the guy had so much time to play his strokes. He was also technically flawless, combining the wristy play of Azhar on the legside with Kohli-like cover drives and square cuts. I remember watching a WI-Pakistan match in the early 90s where he casually flicks Waqar from 6th stump line, for a six over square leg. But his problem was mental - he wasnt a choker, he was a dude who simply didnt have strong concentration powers and was the kind of guy who'd clobber McGrath, then get out to Steve Waugh. 

One of the most underachieving players in the history of the game.  The one thing he was truly worldclass at, was fielding, where his slip catching was at alltime great level, with his ground fielding being definitely worldclass. His spin bowling was quite good for a 5th bowler's role, possibly the best 5th bowler of his time along with Jayasurya

He wasn't on good terms with the WI board. He made his living mostly with county cricket where he played for Kent. Also played FC in Australia IIRC. The board felt that he wasn't as loyal to the WI as he was to his county team. Plus his family had all migrated to NY and he spent his holiday time there instead of Guyana. Whether he hit a century or took a wicket, he didn't seem much excited about it and had a nonchalant air about him. He retired right ahead of the 1999 WC and came out of retirement 2-3 years later only because he was promised captaincy. If his family had migrated to England instead of the US, maybe he would have had a better career as the English board isn't impoverished like the WI board and would have provided him financial security. 

[Nikhil_cric]

7 hours ago, neel roy said:

Hooper was the reason we didnt win the away series against west indies under ganguly s captaincy in 2002. He was immense and suddenly rose like a phoenix from ashes. He scored 580 odd runs whereas in the series before he was struggling. There was an odi series after that ( which India won) and Dinesh Mongia played well which actually made him a middle order contender which culminated later in him being picked over VVS in the 2003 world cup 

Him and Merv Dillion I think.  Dillon got injured after that series and was never the same bowler again .

 

In fact, Windies lost their very next home series to a completely unremarkable NZ side just a couple of months later. 

 

 

[deathmonger]

On 7/16/2024 at 11:38 PM, Gollum said:

Hooper destroyed us in the 5 test series in 2002. That's why can't take that Fab 4 team too seriously. 

thats to do with bad bowling tbh.

 

fab 4 were great batsmen. give them the current ind bowling lineup and you have an aus style legacy.

[gattaca]

30 minutes ago, deathmonger said:

thats to do with bad bowling tbh.

 

fab 4 were great batsmen. give them the current ind bowling lineup and you have an aus style legacy.

Fab 4 collapsed against Shaun udal of all people. Indian batting was much better after sehwag joined the team. He never let any spinner settle in any rhythm. I have seen us loosing wickets to Warne except sehwag who scored 60 odd in that first series aussies won.

[deathmonger]

28 minutes ago, gattaca said:

Fab 4 collapsed against Shaun udal of all people. Indian batting was much better after sehwag joined the team. He never let any spinner settle in any rhythm. I have seen us loosing wickets to Warne except sehwag who scored 60 odd in that first series aussies won.

I meant sehwag with those 4.

 

We collapsed yes but then in those pitches with the current bowling we would have made the opposition collapse.

 

Back in the day India would collapse to a low score but the opposition would make a big one and win. Post 2018 this was not that prevalent. The first SA test this year in 2024 was that in a long time. Before that maybe 2018 lords test and 2021 headingley.

 

I cant remember any other tests in between where we didn't hang in there in the first innings.

[Gambit]

15 hours ago, gattaca said:

Fab 4 collapsed against Shaun udal of all people. Indian batting was much better after sehwag joined the team. He never let any spinner settle in any rhythm. I have seen us loosing wickets to Warne except sehwag who scored 60 odd in that first series aussies won.

 

 

Exceptions don’t prove the rule. Similar lists can be made for the Australian team which probably had the best players of pace bowling but ended up giving 5fers/6fers to Agarkar, Harminson, Lawson, Vasbert Drakes, Tudor etc.

[deathmonger]

On 7/16/2024 at 10:47 PM, Lord said:

A bit like Rohit. Hugely talented you feel they under achieved despite achieving so much.

not too dissatisfied with rohit's white ball career. bonafied atg with 2 t20 wcs and a ct plus highest score, double centuries etc.

 

test cricket he should have been a 30 century 10k batsman. issue is he didn't crack test cricket around the 13-14-15 era when Rahane, Kohli, Pujara did.

 

Only became a good player post 2019. hopefully he has a few good years and ends with 17-18 100s, preferably a few in aus and eng.

 

[MumInd]

On 7/16/2024 at 1:06 PM, Gollum said:

Jimmy Adams too had a sudden, steep fall. At one point looked like a 50+ average player. Not talented like Hooper but gritty as *. 

there is a very good explanation for this....

 

best one you will ever find....

 

very detailed and for those with deep cricket knowledge....

 

go to you tube channel good areas live by jarrod kimber....

 

tune into wagon wheel chat 09-07-24.....

 

go to minute 27:22 in the video....

[gattaca]

1 hour ago, Gambit said:

 

 

Exceptions don’t prove the rule. Similar lists can be made for the Australian team which probably had the best players of pace bowling but ended up giving 5fers/6fers to Agarkar, Harminson, Lawson, Vasbert Drakes, Tudor etc.

•  

Not exceptions they collapsed too often for my liking. They had skill but were not mentally strong. We collapsed and couldn’t 100 odd against west indies and a no name Franklin rose destroyed us. We had too many collapses in foreign tours. We got all out for 50 and 80 odd against South Africa and no bowling could save you when you bat terribly like that.

Edited July 18, 2024 by gattaca