test side made up of players that were harshly left out of the side, or werent picked somehow

what is your test eleven made up of players that were harshly left out/kicked out of the side...., or for some reason werent picked, let me know what u think

1)Wasim Jaffer
2)Ashwell Prince
3)Mohammed Ashraful
4)Stuart law
5)Mohammed Kaif
6)Scott Styris
7)Parthiv patel (WK)
8)Stuart MacGill
9)Danish Kaneria
10)Ajit Agarkar
11)Fridel De Wet

What about Simon Katich? Very harshly dropped by the Australian selectors. Would take out Aswell Prince as he does get a game for them here and now.

may sound strange but Darren Pattinson?

Gets picked and in a game where i seem to remember there wern't really any stand out bowlers, he gets dropped again next test never to be picked again, seems harsh that he didn't get a chance to really show what he could do. Despite the fact most people wouldnt have picked him anyway.

James Foster? Got injured and was never picked again after that

cricketfan90 wrote:what is your test eleven made up of players that were harshly left out/kicked out of the side...., or for some reason werent picked, let me know what u think

1)Wasim Jaffer
2)Ashwell Prince
3)Mohammed Ashraful
4)Stuart law
5)Mohammed Kaif
6)Scott Styris
7)Parthiv patel (WK)
8)Stuart MacGill
9)Danish Kaneria
10)Ajit Agarkar
11)Fridel De Wet

Do you ever use logic in any of your selections?

Jaffer was dropped due to being technically inept and being found out by Australia. He could make the technical changes needed to regain his place.

How can Prince be harshly treated when he's still in the Test side?

Ashraful was dropped for not scoring runs, kind of essential when you are seen as the premier batsman of your nation.

Stuart Law was unlucky that Australia have 15-20 World class batsmen during his peak.

Parthiv Patel was a mediocre keeper and not very good with the bat. He lost out as first Dinesh Karthik and secondly Dhoni are better than him.

Kaif was dropped for having a shocking run of form and then doing nothing in domestic cricket to warrant a recall. Youngsters like Raina, Kohli and Rohit leap frogged him.

Styris wasn't selected due to injury concerns.

MacGill, like Law, was unlucky due to a certain SK Warne being 1st choice.

Kaneria shouldn't have argued with the PCB, he made his bed and now he is lying in it.

Agarkar was passed his best and was over taken by Irfan Pathan, RP Singh, Sreesanth etc.

de Wet suffered a broken back and on recovery signed a Kolpak in England, SA can't select him if he makes himself unavailable.

So 2 out of 11 can consider themselves unlucky.

[quote="LeBron's Homie"]

cricketfan90 wrote:what is your test eleven made up of players that were harshly left out/kicked out of the side...., or for some reason werent picked, let me know what u think

1)Wasim Jaffer
2)Ashwell Prince
3)Mohammed Ashraful
4)Stuart law
5)Mohammed Kaif
6)Scott Styris
7)Parthiv patel (WK)
8)Stuart MacGill
9)Danish Kaneria
10)Ajit Agarkar
11)Fridel De Wet

Do you ever use logic in any of your selections?



r u stupid?
Prince i put him in the side, because, he made runs in the middle got harshly dropped, for duminy, then scored runs, at the top, and got dropped, for a bit, and dont say he didnt, cos he did, then only just made his way back in the side!

Stuart Law, should have played test cricket, ahead of the batsman that were in that side at the time.

Parthiv Patel, could have stayed in the side as a batman, he made his debut tour when he was 16!!!!, ridiclious

[quote="cricketfan90"]

LeBron's Homie wrote:

cricketfan90 wrote:what is your test eleven made up of players that were harshly left out/kicked out of the side...., or for some reason werent picked, let me know what u think

1)Wasim Jaffer
2)Ashwell Prince
3)Mohammed Ashraful
4)Stuart law
5)Mohammed Kaif
6)Scott Styris
7)Parthiv patel (WK)
8)Stuart MacGill
9)Danish Kaneria
10)Ajit Agarkar
11)Fridel De Wet

Do you ever use logic in any of your selections?



r u stupid?
Prince i put him in the side, because, he made runs in the middle got harshly dropped, for duminy, then scored runs, at the top, and got dropped, for a bit, and dont say he didnt, cos he did, then only just made his way back in the side!

Stuart Law, should have played test cricket, ahead of the batsman that were in that side at the time.

Parthiv Patel, could have stayed in the side as a batman, he made his debut tour when he was 16!!!!, ridiclious

Prince was replaced by Duminy as he was injured, Duminy scored plenty of runs to retain his place. Injuries are part and parcel of the game, if someone better comes along, hard luck.

Stuart Law wasn't in the league of Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, Ponting, Martyn. In another era he would've played 100 Tests, again hard luck.

Parthiv Patel was an average keeper, so he was unlikely to stay in the side much longer anyway. Only in the last 3-4 years has he taken his batting seriously, by that time Dhoni and Karthik had leapfrogged him.

Ajit Agarkar harshly dropped????? even Ajit will not forgive you! for that insult!. 50 odd wickets in 20 odd tests is hardly world class.
Parthiv Patel couldn't have stayed on as a batsman. His batting was griddy and decent, but not anything more than that. Jaffer wasn't ujp to mark as an international cricketer and was rightly dropped.
Vinod Kambli should make a better case though. a test batting average of 54 at the time of dropping surely deserved another opportunity???

msp83 wrote:
Vinod Kambli should make a better case though. a test batting average of 54 at the time of dropping surely deserved another opportunity???

Certainly Kambli was unlucky.

The guy was better than Sachin - talantwise. But Sachin had more mental strength.

Martin Bicknell. Picked very briefly early in his career and at the very end. But not when he was for year after year the best English bowler on the county circuit. Probably wouldn't have been a world beater, but I think he would have done much better than various others who were given more chances.

Glenn Chapple
Mark Davies
Both should have played for England, (although, to be fair, Davies' injury problems didn't help)

Matthew Hoggard would warrant a pick IMO.

At the time he was dropped it seemed very harsh, one very poor game and he never came back in! Obviously theres a huge queue of fast bowlers waiting to come into our side now but to have dropped Hoggy for the likes of Mahmood/Plunkett back then was about as harsh as it gets.

The likes of Graeme Pollock, Ian Proctor and Barry Richards could also warrant picks as their international careers were decimated by the arpatheid years and politics of the time.

oh yeah would agree with Hoggard

King Carlos
Good point re Hoggard. You could add, for similar reasons all of David Gower (dropped at least 2 years too soon because of a falling out with Gooch), Robin Smith (one bad series against Warne and May did for him, despite his career record and ODI decimation of the Aussies at the start of the summer) and arguably even Graeme Hick.

Hick got selected so many times when in poor form, yet on a couple of occasions was dropped when in decent nick - he was to some extent the architect of his downfall, because he'd been so good in County cricket during his qualification period, but failed to deliver regularly enough at Test level particularly in the first half of his career.

king_carlos wrote:Matthew Hoggard would warrant a pick IMO.

At the time he was dropped it seemed very harsh, one very poor game and he never came back in! Obviously theres a huge queue of fast bowlers waiting to come into our side now but to have dropped Hoggy for the likes of Mahmood/Plunkett back then was about as harsh as it gets.

The Hoggard thing has been proven correct since though. Jimmy Anderson wouldnt be were he is now if he'd been kept out by Hoggard.
Also Hoggy himslef has recently come out and admitted he was suffering form depression on that tour, and wasnt in a psoitive frame of mind. England had had a host of problems with players disrupting the mood of the team and the camp and well as there own peformances dropping because of personal issues. Its hardly unreasoinable thats eeing his attitude and peformance they took a decision to replace him.
It wasnt Mamhood and Plunket he was dropped for, the bowlers who came in were Broad (for Harmisson) and Anderson ( for Hoggard, he took 7 wickets)...remember those guys?

Its ironic that England are so often citisized for being a cosy club where players can never get dropped because of a reuptation built years before, but when they do its always unfair.

The argument would be later when Sidebottom got injured should he have been recalled as a stop gap? Possibly but instead they tried to look to the future.

"Foxy" Fowler : toured India 1985, made a bunch of runs opening , century in second Test and a double-century to set up the series win in the 4th...

Back to England and Gooch returned to the team , Robinson was preferred as his opening partner and Fowler never played another Test...

i think hoggard is a good shout i should have put him in there.

The desion not to give Ramprakash another go due to his age looked stupid when he spent 4 or 5 seasons at or around the top of the county run lists prior to hs eventual retirement. The idea that it was just a one off and that he would be past it was proven wrong. Of course the idea that he might not be able to take that form to test level ( as earlier in his career) was never tested. Instead we got the likes of Bopara....who wasnt able to take his county form to test level ( aside form the three centuries but they dont count because I say so ) and Shah who wasnt able to take his county form to the test arena and suffered serious mental problems.

In hindsight it seems tough that a guy with such an incredible county record was never even seriously consdered for selection again.