Cricket's time/place continuum- The unluckiest players

[Sooda]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/may/30/the-spin-cricket-email Cricket's time/place continuum The history of the game is full of exceptional players who could barely get a Test because of those in their way The longer your eyes look at something, the harder is it to retrain them. After decades of watching England struggle to find three worthy seamers, it's hard to comprehend that they can omit a bowler as good as Steven Finn, not to mention Graham Onions and Chris Tremlett. If we hadn't seen such poverty, we could live with being rich. "In an ideal world," said the bowling coach David Saker, "we would love to get him in." Finn has been pretty cordial about stirring the cordial. And though it might have not been a wise thing to mention as he carried the drinks for his old club Langleybury on Saturday afternoon, he is actually one of the lucky ones. At the age of 23 he already has 13 Test caps and 53 wickets. A combination of squad rotation and burnout mean he will get occasional appearances in the short term; his terrifying talent will ensure he gets plenty in the long term. The history of cricket is full of exceptional players who were in the right place at the wrong time and could barely get a game at Test level because of those in their way. One man's embarrassment of riches is another's professional poverty. The nature of the subject means we look to the greatest sides for examples. England aren't in that class, although the fact they are experiencing the same problems is a reflection of their pre-eminence. If England have Finn, Onions and Tremlett, then the great West Indies side of the late 1970s and 1980s had an entire XI of fast bowlers good enough to be regulars now. Most settled for spreading fear through the Shell Shield and the County Championship instead. Top of the list are Wayne Daniel and the late Sylvester Clarke. Our own Mike Selvey - who formed a title-winning new-ball partnership with Daniel at Middlesex - said "both would walk into any other international team of the past three decades". Daniel, a muscular hustler who bowled a horrible, rib-bothering length, played only 10 Tests, while Clarke played 11. He has a case for being the nastiest high-class fast bowler of all. When Clarke was in the mood, even the atheists started praying. Steve Waugh, who once asked Curtly Ambrose what the eff he was looking at and lived to tell the tale, said Clarke was the most intimidating bowler he ever faced, while Viv Richards reportedly said the one time he felt uncomfortable at the crease was against Clarke. The former West Indies fast bowler Winston Davis described him simply as "a nasty piece of work". Davis, who was left paralysed from the neck down after a fall in 1998, would have played a lot more than 15 Tests in another era. Others who could have done with an alteration to the place/time continuum are Winston Benjamin, Norbert Phillip, Eldine Baptiste, Franklyn Stephenson, Ezra Moseley, Tony Merrick and poor Tony Gray, who is the only man in cricket history to average under 20 with the ball in Tests and ODIs, yet played only five of the former and 25 of the latter. Ordinarily you would think that specialists - wicketkeepers, spinners and openers - are most vulnerable, because there are fewer places available. Yet as with West Indies' crop of fast bowlers, so the modern Australia had a startling array of brilliant middle-order batsmen. The unluckiest of them all was Stuart Law. He made 54 not out on his Test debut against Sri Lanka in 1995-96, when he was covering for the injured Steve Waugh. With Waugh, the No2 batsman in the world at the time, available for the next Test, Law dropped out. He never played Test cricket again. He holds a unique place in history, as the only man to make a Test half-century but not have an average (because he was never dismissed). "I don't have regrets any more about my Test career," he said in 2002. "I was bitter for a long time and wanted answers - but nobody would give me the truth. Now, when I think about it, I look at the players I needed to knock out - David Boon, Allan Border, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh. What are they in Test cricket history? Legends." The depth of Australian batting in the mid-1990s is best exemplified by the preposterous A team they picked to play England in the Benson & Hedges World Series of 1994-95. The top six was Matthew Hayden, Greg Blewett, Damien Martyn, Justin Langer, Michael Bevan and Ricky Ponting. Some couldn't even make the A team: Jamie Siddons, who held the record for most Sheffield Shield runs when he retired in 2000, played just a single ODI for Australia in 1988. It wasn't just the batsmen who suffered. Damien Fleming made only 20 Test appearances, a crazy figure for a masterful swing bowler. And though Stuart MacGill played 44 Tests and took 208 wickets, he might well have trebled those figures but for Shane Warne. There are other examples from teams who were very good rather than great. India's glorious middle order of the last 15 years meant there was no room for a run machine like Sridharan Sharath :hehe:. He was the cab that never got off the rank. The hostile, indefatigable Les Jackson, who took 1,733 first-class wickets at an average of 17.36 for Derbyshire between 1947 and 1963, played only two Tests - and they were 12 years apart. Ted Dexter said Jackson was the greatest bowler he ever faced, while Fred Trueman called him the "best six-days-a-week bowler in county cricket". Jackson wasn't helped by some disgraceful selectorial snobbery. This was an era in which appearance mattered; as a Derbyshire miner, Jackson had little chance. There has been a similar level of snobbery towards Tim Bresnan - but only from some of the public. The England management team know just what a brilliant all-round cricketer he is. It means that Finn will have to wait his turn. But at least his turn will come.

[Sooda]

The Aussies could field an entire unlucky XI of the late 90's and early noughties... Cox, Maher, Law, Hodge, Simmonds, Love, Ryan Campbell, Fleming, Macgill... As for Sharath... its a good point...not sure if he was very good...TN had a strong batting side in those days..Ramesh, Sriram, Badani... There are also guys who could not play for SA when they were banned for Aparthgied in the 80's- Vince van der Bijl is and of course Procter, Richards etc...

[Crookbond]

Van Der Bijl, Procter, Richards, Graeme Pollock would be some of the most unlucky sportsmen not just cricketers. They were supremely talented and possessed immense skill.

[f.b.m]

The fact that someone like Finn doesnt get a game while greats like Suranga Lakmal and Unlucky Sharma get more games is bad not just for the players who miss out but for the viewers who are deprived of a higher quality of cricket. This is what happens when you pit one nation against another but good luck if you want to see an actual change in the way the game is run/played.

[vvvslaxman]

The Aussies could field an entire unlucky XI of the late 90's and early noughties... Cox, Maher, Law, Hodge, Simmonds, Love, Ryan Campbell, Fleming, Macgill... As for Sharath... its a good point...not sure if he was very good...TN had a strong batting side in those days..Ramesh, Sriram, Badani... There are also guys who could not play for SA when they were banned for Aparthgied in the 80's- Vince van der Bijl is and of course Procter, Richards etc...

Sharath would have been a good choice for ODIs. He was like Karsan Ghavri. He could bowl both spin and pace. He was also a good batsman for them especially under pressure.

[Ultimate_Game]

In India's case Rajinder Goel stands out. He was the highest wkt taker in Ranji but never got into the national team as we already had the 4 spinners and there was no longer rom for any more. Similarly in 2000s most of the middle order bats never got a chance as we had likes of SRT, Dravid, Laxman, Ganuly & Sehwag at the time. No matter what sort of nos. you put up you simply couldn't get into the team.

[vvvslaxman]

In India's case Rajinder Goel stands out. He was the highest wkt taker in Ranji but never got into the national team as we already had the 4 spinners and there was no longer rom for any more. Similarly in 2000s most of the middle order bats never got a chance as we had likes of SRT' date=' Dravid, Laxman, Ganuly & Sehwag at the time. No matter what sort of nos. you put up you simply couldn't get into the team.[/quote'] Shivalkar too.

[Cricket Tragic]

In India's case Rajinder Goel stands out. He was the highest wkt taker in Ranji but never got into the national team as we already had the 4 spinners and there was no longer rom for any more. Similarly in 2000s most of the middle order bats never got a chance as we had likes of SRT' date=' Dravid, Laxman, Ganuly & Sehwag at the time. No matter what sort of nos. you put up you simply couldn't get into the team.[/quote'] Shivalkar as well. VV Kumar was an outstanding bowler as well. Tbh, there are plenty of names that you can think of.

[Ultimate_Game]

Shivalkar too.

Shivalkar as well. VV Kumar was an outstanding bowler as well. Tbh, there are plenty of names that you can think of.

I am sure there are. Every team will have these sort of unlucky souls from time to time, especially when the national team is doing well. WI faced the problem in 80s, Aus in 90s and early part of 2000s and India in 2000s. Basically whenever you have a strong team these issues will crop up but this is one issue you want to be faced with than see the likes of Koomars bowling in tandem in a Test

[bangladeshifan]

jammie siddons

[Cricket Tragic]

jammie siddons

Because he had to coach a **** team like Bangladesh?

[Tiger-Don]

not exactly that but he was treated unfairly i think