Under-rated Test players

Cricket is in some ways the ultimate team game played by individuals, and we all have our opinions about who is really good or not. In this context there are a few ways that a quality player can be generally under-rated by the public or media:
1 - He's unlucky enough to be in the same side as someone recognised as an all time great
2 - He's a similar style as a better contemporary
3 - He's from New Zealand or some other less fashionable cricketing outpost.

So a few nominations from me for guys who in different circumstances could have / should have been more highly praised:

Batsmen:
Graeme Smith - always impresses me with his application and grittiness, but stats don't match up to Kallis
Graham Thorpe - Was a shining light in a sometimes very mediocre England side
Justin Langer / Michael Slater / Damien Martyn - All extremely good batsmen, but overshadowed by the exploits of Hayden Punter and Gilchrist

All Rounders
Chris Cairns - statistically at least the equal of Flintoff, but with nothing like the media profile.

Bowlers
Jason Gillespie - I put on a previous thread that if he'd been English he'd have been a superstar, but with McGrath and Warne in the same line-up, he was almost given the role of back-up
Stuart McGill - probably the most unlucky in being an Aussie leg spinner at the time when the Aussies had someone a bit better.
Angus Fraser - May not have looked a great athlete, but have England had a better trier in their bowlers during the last 20 years?

Further suggestions and comments greatfully received.

As ridiculous as this sounds, I feel Rahul Dravid was somewhat under-rated until the last couple of years. The blazing bravado of Sehwag and the majestic run scoring exploits of Tendulkar almost saw 'The Wall' glossed over a little, excuse the pun.

His batting style, whilst a demonstration of sublime poise, balance and technique, was never setting the game alight, and may have led to his outstanding contributions being overlooked slightly.

However, great to see Rahul getting the recognition he deserves as he has quietly crept up to Test crickets second highest run scorer - a truly remarkable player of amazing skill, mentality and longevity.

Fists
I considered putting Dravid in for exactly the reasons you state. Only thing is that the media over here do recognise his quality and value to the Indian side and consequently talk him up in preference to any of tehir other players bar Sachin.

Another you could make a case for from a few years ago would be Ian Healy - was such a good keeper-batsman that he kept Gilchrist out of the Aussie side for quite a few years, but now Gilly is the one more remembered mainly because of his batting exploits (he became a competent keeper, but wasn't nearly as good with the gloves as IH).

Under/over rated is always so hard to define. By whoom? I certainly don't under or overrate anyone, I rate them all just the right amount.

I suppose what one means by underrated is "doesn't get the credit they deserve" which is usually to do with their media image, and hence their perception by the general public at large. Those of us who know a bit about these things aren't taken in by things like media image.

Damien Martyn is a good shout, he had a ridiculously good record. In fact his innings in the 2003 WC final is criminally overlooked by many. People rightly remember Ponting's big hundred, but how many remember that Ponting originally struggled to get going, and took 70 balls to reach 50? Martyn in contrast reached 50 off just 48 balls, and batted at a run a ball or just better throughout. To use a comparison which may please guilford, his innings was to Ponting's what King's was to Richards in the 79 final. By batting fluently from the word go, he allowed Ponting to get himself in, get through his struggles (IIRC he had a bit of problems with I think Dinesh Mongia's part-time SLA in particular) before the final explosion.

Kallis himself was badly overlooked until the last 2 or 3 years, when people at last realised that he was actually one of the all-time great batsmen.

I certainly ranked Thorpe very highly, ditto Chris Cairns (in fact I think Cairns probably got decent media coverage outside England compared to Flintoff).

Anyone who knows anything about anything rates Gillespie very highly indeed (and wouldn't hesitate to put him in a team of the decade). Those who don't probably started watching cricket in 2005.

Guilford will shortly wade in with his favourite West Indian bat, so I shall allow him the pleasure.

I always thought Giles was underrated as a cricketer. As a bowler his stats compare fairly well to Emburey, Edmonds and Tuffnell (the latter two were of course more "talented" whatever that means) but he added invaluable contributions with the bat, was a decent gully field, and got a few run outs thanks to an excellent arm.

I don't always think Atherton gets enough credit. his stats aren't great, but in an era where he had to face Ambrose, Donald and McGrath on tough pitches he played many a vital knock for England.

Ian Bishop at his peak was a tremendous bowler, people often forget that when they talk about great West Indian attacks. Ditto Andy Roberts, who was rated by a few as the best of his era (no mean feat if you see who he played alongside).

Although not on topic, as ODI players I always thought Lehmann, Hogg and Bichel didn't receive enough credit for their role in what was surely (even guilford would agree?) the greatest one-day side of all time.

MIke
Good point re Bishop - sadly (or not if you were a batsman), his peak was seriously curtailed by injury, but he was probably better than Walsh and equal to Ambrose. I did contemplate going back a bit further and including Joel Garner as well - perhaps the least revered of the Windies 4 quicks at Test level, although a different story in ODIs.

You are right, that I'm really talking about players who didn't/don't get the media recognition their performances should merit. As such, I deliberately omitted Guildford's man-crush and one or two others.

IMO top ten underrated cricketer playing today are:

1.Darren Bravo
2.Ian Bell
3.Daniel Vettori
4.Rahul dravid (always in the shadow of sachin)
5.Mohammed Hafeez
6.Mahmuddlah
7.Prassana Jawyardene
8.Darren Sammy
9.Hashim Amla
10.Shakib Al-Hasan


however top 10 underrated cricketers of all time IMO would be:

1.Stephen Fleming
2.Michael Atherton
3.Shaun Pollock
4.Justin Langer
5.Mohammed Yousuf
6.Shane Bond
7.Ian Bishop
8.Russel Arnold
9.Ridley Jacobs
10.Danish Kaneria

No Knott, no Larwood?

kwinigolfer wrote:No Knott, no Larwood?

Or would they be in the overrated team?

Now don't be mischevious kwini!

Shaun Pollock is an excellent shout CF. For a player with an outstanding record he is often overlooked in lists of "best ever..." probably because he wasn't flashy (with the ball) and rarely ran through sides in a spell but relied on never ending pressure. Incidentaly, I always felt he was a better batsman than his figures showed.

On the other hand, got to disagree with Russel Arnold and Kaneria. Kaneria I always thought was a very average bowler (and a terrible batsman and fielder). Arnold I thought was pants.

Angus Fraser and Robin Smith.

Stephen Fleming and Vettori are two I should have included, but forgot about (especially Fleming), and Shaun Pollock is almost the definition of what I meant by under-rated - extremely fine player but somehow (unfairly) overshadowed by some of his contemporaries.

Don't think any of us have enough first hand knowledge of Larwood (or of his contemporary reputation) to know whether he was under-rated. Knott on the other hand I've often seen mentioned as the best wicketkeeper/batsman (as opposed to batsman/keeper) of the last 40 years, so I hardly think qualifies for under-rated.

na they're taking the p**s out of me about larwood and knott, duminy.

dummy_half wrote:MIke

.... You are right, that I'm really talking about players who didn't/don't get the media recognition their performances should merit. As such, I deliberately omitted Guildford's man-crush and one or two others.

Always better to be vilified than ignored.

I'll give you two names from the 50's (primarily):
Roy Marshall, Hampshire West Indian opening bat. Beautiful stroke player, got a move on when a hundred before lunch was a rare commodity. Would surely have made many more appearances for the 3W's-era Test teams if cricketers playing for English counties were selected.
My early idol!

Les Jackson, Debyshire fast (genuinely fast) bowler. If he'd've played for a more fashionable county, he'd have worn an England cap more than the token twice(?).

Then there were Derek Shackleton (100 wickets for 20 - TWENTY! - consecutive seasons, think he's still the 8th all-time wicket-taker) and Keith Andrew (arguably the best wickie in the country for the Godfrey Evans era).

what do people think about my selection of Justin Langer?

towards the end of his career he was the most improved cricketer for a long while, and to be honest he was hugely underrated, him and hayden had so many fantastic partnerships for australia.

Mike Selig wrote:Under/over rated is always so hard to define. By whoom? I certainly don't under or overrate anyone, I rate them all just the right amount.

I suppose what one means by underrated is "doesn't get the credit they deserve" which is usually to do with their media image, and hence their perception by the general public at large. Those of us who know a bit about these things aren't taken in by things like media image.

Damien Martyn is a good shout, he had a ridiculously good record. In fact his innings in the 2003 WC final is criminally overlooked by many. People rightly remember Ponting's big hundred, but how many remember that Ponting originally struggled to get going, and took 70 balls to reach 50? Martyn in contrast reached 50 off just 48 balls, and batted at a run a ball or just better throughout. To use a comparison which may please guilford, his innings was to Ponting's what King's was to Richards in the 79 final. By batting fluently from the word go, he allowed Ponting to get himself in, get through his struggles (IIRC he had a bit of problems with I think Dinesh Mongia's part-time SLA in particular) before the final explosion.

Kallis himself was badly overlooked until the last 2 or 3 years, when people at last realised that he was actually one of the all-time great batsmen.

I certainly ranked Thorpe very highly, ditto Chris Cairns (in fact I think Cairns probably got decent media coverage outside England compared to Flintoff).

Anyone who knows anything about anything rates Gillespie very highly indeed (and wouldn't hesitate to put him in a team of the decade). Those who don't probably started watching cricket in 2005.

Guilford will shortly wade in with his favourite West Indian bat, so I shall allow him the pleasure.

I always thought Giles was underrated as a cricketer. As a bowler his stats compare fairly well to Emburey, Edmonds and Tuffnell (the latter two were of course more "talented" whatever that means) but he added invaluable contributions with the bat, was a decent gully field, and got a few run outs thanks to an excellent arm.

I don't always think Atherton gets enough credit. his stats aren't great, but in an era where he had to face Ambrose, Donald and McGrath on tough pitches he played many a vital knock for England.

Ian Bishop at his peak was a tremendous bowler, people often forget that when they talk about great West Indian attacks. Ditto Andy Roberts, who was rated by a few as the best of his era (no mean feat if you see who he played alongside).

Although not on topic, as ODI players I always thought Lehmann, Hogg and Bichel didn't receive enough credit for their role in what was surely (even guilford would agree?) the greatest one-day side of all time.

Mike - good mix of detail and humour.

Bishop and Roberts are both particularly good calls.

Closer to (my) home, Ali Brown never got the national media credit nor international recognition that his ability and effectiveness merited.

As regards the greatest one-day side of all time, I always find it difficult to look beyond the first winners. Now would that be '73 or '75?

Thanks guilford. Bishop is one I feel strongly about. Ali Brown is a good shout, I always thought England were too scared to use him properly.

CF, I've always thought Langer was a very good player and an excellent foil for Hayden. In terms of being "damn fine players somewhat eclipsed by their contempories" he is a very good shout.

CF - agree about Ian Bell. Had a ridiculous number of detractors on the old 606 site. If he got 5 centuries in a series someone would always find a reason why it was not worth much.

Kallis still under rated considering his incredible record.

Agree Thorpe under-rated considering the number of back-to-the-wall innings he ground out for England in difficult circumstances

Bob Willis.
Better test record than Andy Roberts, John Snow or Wes Hall. Comparable with Statham or Bedser. All acheived despite the burden of captaincy later in his career (when his record actually improved) and dodgy knees. Never seems to be mentioned in discussions of best fast bowlers, or even, that often, in discussions of best ENGLISH fast bowlers.
Deserves more credit IMO.

good shout with bob willis, gave his all for the side, bowled all day long, and no over the top celebrations, just a simple handshake and got on with his bowling

VVS Laxman for the same reasons given already for Dravid, always overlooked in favour of Sehwag or SRT.

Mark Waugh is somewhat underrated, as too were Slater and Langer

Kumar Sangakarra

Ian Bell is as good a batsman as anyone else currently playing in world cricket, I am 100% certain of that. You name me one batsman that is technically better.

His early career issues with mentality perhaps, and confidence look now to be over, and if 2011 was anything to go by we may just see Ian show that he truly is one of, if not THE best batsman in the world in 2012.

CF, Sangakkara isn't under-rated by anybody, a truly world class operator that has a few issues with the swinging ball at times, not much more to it than that, everyone knows how valuable he has been to Sri Lanka's batting over the years, the majority of which was done as a keeper.

Gregers, Laxman I have never rated massively, despite him obviously being a fine batsman. He rightly plays second fiddle to SRT and Dravid etc, simply because he isn't as good as them. Very good, but not great.

David Boon.

Opened and batted at three in at first a average Aussie side but still ended with a test average of 43.

Plus, he played the Windies quicks as well as most.

Stella
Perhaps Boon's advantage against the Windies was that he carried a little extra internal padding compared with many of his contemporaries. May have benefitted his bravery when fielding at short leg as well

Not sure he was really under-rated, as most recall him being a good and very gritty batsman who you were always happy to see the back of

dummy_half wrote:Stella
Perhaps Boon's advantage against the Windies was that he carried a little extra internal padding compared with many of his contemporaries. May have benefitted his bravery when fielding at short leg as well

Not sure he was really under-rated, as most recall him being a good and very gritty batsman who you were always happy to see the back of

He..he...yeah.

He never gets mentioned when talking about the best players of his era. That was my thinking.

Surely David Boon gets ample recognition for his world record performance?

53 cans was it?

I believe it was only 52 .

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:I believe it was only 52 .

Pft..........overatted

Praveen
Samaraweera
Rampaul
Kallis
Raina (in ODI's)
Duminy (in ODi's)

GG you have put raina, duminy (odi's)...

its a test match thread....