A final one. We've had the great and the good, we've had the bad and the awful. But who are the players who were really quite a bit better than perhaps the stats might suggest? The guys who were screwed over by selectors, injuries or themselves? Here is my XI - I have limited myself to gentlemen who played Test cricket, even though I desperately wanted to include Ali Brown, who was unfairly labelled a one day specialist by selectors who didn't realise that you could score quickly with a pure technique at the time. I have also followed the rule from our other threads of players post-89/90, which ruled out three otherwise perfect contenders in Graeme Stevenson, Jon Agnew and Wayne Larkins:
Martyn Moxon Had England not had Graeme Gooch, they would surely have made more of one of the most elegant players in the County game. Or at least not dropped him immediately after he was robbed of back to back hundreds in New Zealand. Oddly, also bowled a very Goochesque brand of military medium pace...
Mike Atherton Bear with me here - I know there will be some wondering how a guy who player a hundred tests can be selected ahead of, say, Michael Carberry who got six. But history tends to be unkind to a guy who carried England's batting on his faulty back through the 90s against some of the most fearsome bowling ever seen. Not bad for a Lancastrian.
Scott Borthwick Stephen Smith played two tests as a leggie who could hold a bat. Scott Borthwick got one. Borthwick's first class record since those games is every bit as good as Smith's (and his technique every bit as pig ugly) and his leg spin has held up the better of the two. Okay, I'm not saying with any confidence that he could have done as well at the top level - I am though saying that its a hell of a question to have left unanswered.
Matt Maynard The collossus of Glamorgan's title winning side, it is incredible that English cricket was so messed up that he only got five games, never more than two in a row, to show his class.
John Morris Why did he get in that Tiger Moth? Morris was a quality player, solid on the front foot and brilliant against the quick stuff. He was more than good enough to make it at the top level.
Craig White Only burnt brightly as an all rounder for two seasons, but noticeable that they were the two seasons when England went from also rans to contenders. Quick enough that he takes the new cherry in this side.
Rikki Clarke He wasn't a child of the 80s, when talent counted for little against a flawed establishment. Clarke made his debut in '06, under Fletcher, so it is staggering that nothing was made of his talent. At his peak, he was a genuine number six, a change seamer capable of bowling dry or sharp as the situation required, and worth ten wickets a season for his bucket hands at slip.
James Foster Deemed worthy as a callow youth, but not once he had matured into the finest keeper of the last fifty years.
Adil Rashid Yes, he can be a tad expensive. But he takes wickets, even on good pitches, and Yorkshire have demonstrated that he performs exponentially better once he feels wanted.
Chris Silverwood At his best, seriously rapid with a hint of an outswinger, England saw something in Silverwood that they thought made him ideally suited to carrying drinks - possibly because the feeling was that he needed the new ball, as did both Gough and Caddick.
Jon Lewis England have tried a fair few honest triers over the 00's - Martin Saggers, Ed Giddins, Richard Johnson - but few seemed to have the skill set that Lewis had, even if it did arrive somewhere below express pace. When he finally reached the Test side, he was already on the wane and it was unfortunate that we never got to see whether he could have done a job at the top level in teh same way bowlers like Philander and Kumar have managed to.
Author
Topic: England's Most UNDERRATED XI (Read 5824 times)