Bits n Pieces Cricketers

[Paddles]

This started in another thread, but I thought it deserved its own thread for us all to contribute additional items to my initial list. Add your own and have some fun.

The debate started around apparent confusion as to what is meant by a bits n pieces cricketer, and how one can be defined and identified. The best way of definition is often by way of example, so here are a few common examples of bits n pieces cricketer.

If your bowling average is higher than your batting average, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If bookies do not approach you to fix matches, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have not taken a 5/for nor batted a century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have not taken a 4/for nor batted a century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have only 1 fluky 5/for or century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If the coach has ever defended your selection to the press with the words "what those batting and bowling stats don't show you is his all-round contribution to the team" then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're picked as the 5th bowling option in an odi and the coach picks a 6th bowling option just in case you don't complete your spell you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're the 6th bowling option and you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're the 5th bowling option and you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you added a second string to your bow in order to get selected for national honours, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're batting #6 for Australia, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If the home media on tour have ever asked your coach after looking at your stats have asked "is he an amazing runout fielder or something" cos they don't get your role, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a quota selection for South Africa and you don't open the batting or bowling, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a white ball cricket specialist, who doesn't wicket keep or bat in the top middle order, and not always called onto bowl, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a t20 specialist who did not ever get selected play the longer versions of the game, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a batsman and picked by Australia for possibly being the next SK Warne, you're prolly going to be used by the captain as a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're playing as a wicket keeper in the Ashes this summer, and the first two letters of your christian name are not "Jo" then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If your name is Ian Botham and it is 1987 or later and you're playing test cricket, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If your name is Steve Waugh and its before 1989, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you bat in the Zimbabwe top and middle order, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If Striped Lungi picked you in an Ihag just to be funny, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you open the bowling or bowl first change for Zimbabwe, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're Zimbabwean by birth and you play for Eng or NZ, then you may be picked to play as a bits n pieces cricketer.*

*I'm actually a CDG fan and thought Hick was a good odi bat with bonus spin versatility but not all fans share my view on these 2.

[bolero]

Some names from past Indian teams come to mind:-

1. Hrishikesh Kanitkar.
2. Ajay Sharma
3. Nikhil Chopra
4. Vijay Bharadwaj

All of these obscure guys, not played much international cricket. Chopra was named in a match fixing case.

All, pls feel free to add.

[raja]

Ajay Sharma's career coincided almost entirely with my blackout period (1988-1999) but I remember him being quite highly regarded as a batsman, if not as a bowler. He was finally caught up in the whole match-fixing saga and his career ended with that.

For me, whenever someone mentions b-n-p cricketers, the first name that comes to mind is Mark Ealham.
Son of Alan Ealham, one of Kent's stalwarts for many years and known for his fielding, Mark was one of those guys who England carried in the side, expecting him to come good with either bat or ball on the given day.

Often, he came good with neither, but as was often the case with the England side of his time, he was carried on "potential".

[bolero]

Yup, Raja. I remember Mark Earlham.

What about Jimmy Adams?

[bolero]

Ajay Sharma always looked like a thug to me. He resembled that corrupt police inspector played by Deep Dhillon who was in league with goons in the movie Ghayal.

[raja]

Jimmy Adams was a proper batsman. He could win a place in the side for his batting alone, even if he'd never bowled a ball in his life.
The likes of Mark Ealham, on the other hand...

Stuart Binny is another guy who could qualify as a bnp cricketer.
Surely you wouldn't pick him purely on his batting or bowling skills?

[raja]

This started in another thread, but I thought it deserved its own thread for us all to contribute additional items to my initial list. Add your own and have some fun.

The debate started around apparent confusion as to what is meant by a bits n pieces cricketer, and how one can be defined and identified. The best way of definition is often by way of example, so here are a few common examples of bits n pieces cricketer.

If your bowling average is higher than your batting average, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If bookies do not approach you to fix matches, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have not taken a 5/for nor batted a century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have not taken a 4/for nor batted a century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you have only 1 fluky 5/for or century in the format, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If the coach has ever defended your selection to the press with the words "what those batting and bowling stats don't show you is his all-round contribution to the team" then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're picked as the 5th bowling option in an odi and the coach picks a 6th bowling option just in case you don't complete your spell you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're the 6th bowling option and you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're the 5th bowling option and you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you added a second string to your bow in order to get selected for national honours, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you play for NZ or Eng then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're batting #6 for Australia, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If the home media on tour have ever asked your coach after looking at your stats have asked "is he an amazing runout fielder or something" cos they don't get your role, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a quota selection for South Africa and you don't open the batting or bowling, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a white ball cricket specialist, who doesn't wicket keep or bat in the top middle order, and not always called onto bowl, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a t20 specialist who did not ever get selected play the longer versions of the game, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're a batsman and picked by Australia for possibly being the next SK Warne, you're prolly going to be used by the captain as a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're playing as a wicket keeper in the Ashes this summer, and the first two letters of your christian name are not "Jo" then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If your name is Ian Botham and it is 1987 or later and you're playing test cricket, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If your name is Steve Waugh and its before 1989, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you bat in the Zimbabwe top and middle order, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If Striped Lungi picked you in an Ihag just to be funny, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you open the bowling or bowl first change for Zimbabwe, then you may be a bits n pieces cricketer.

If you're Zimbabwean by birth and you play for Eng or NZ, then you may be picked to play as a bits n pieces cricketer.*

*I'm actually a CDG fan and thought Hick was a good odi bat with bonus spin versatility but not all fans share my view on these 2.

[raja]

I guess Moises Henriques also qualifies.

When you pick him, you count on him contributing in at least one of the two departments.
Usually he contributes in neither. :-)

[bolero]

Stuart Binny best example of bits and pieces cricketer - neither here nor there. Only known as Roger Binnys son.

His wife Mayanti Langer is doing better professionally.

Tempted to include Sanjay Bangar but the bloke had such a good work ethic. He stood firm as a batsman in the most hostile conditions in England as an opener and could bowl decent medium pace jagging the ball both ways. Was a hard trier

[Mick180461]

My understanding of what a bits and pieces player is. A player who will average somewhere between 27 & 33 with the bat, consistantly scoring 20s,30,40s but rarely 100s, and average 33-38 at 2 wkts a match with the ball, consistantly chiming in with 2 fors but rarely a 5 for. English Cricket specializes in producing this type of Cricketer.

[Paddles]

English Cricket specializes in producing this type of Cricketer.

Yups, NZ and Eng are the worst offenders. I think its largely due to the pitches offering success to fairly innocuous bowling (and complacent batting to yielding the big big scores, complacency helped form due to the pitches). Plus all the low scoring pitches decreases the curve between the top run scorers and the next bands of run makers. If the top guys are averaging under 40 in FC and qualifying for national honours, makes it easier for a bits n pieces player to look like a viable selection. Jesse Ryder's FC bowling stats achieved in Eng and NZ are just seem too good for the bowler he is, and unlikely to replicate this in Australia or Asia. If you've ever seen him bowl and someone tells you he has 2 10w/match - you'd raise an eyebrow.

Although I was reading a Dion Nash article about how comparatively easy it is to get to the FC ranks and stay there in NZ (as against Australia) as the talent coming through is not squeezing incumbents out and he believes this causes a lot of complacency to not strive more to improve. England makes it easy with 18 FC teams. Since Nash's time, NZ first class standards have risen with the South African immigration here, and English county cricket may be a lot of worse without their South African players as well. But I notice a few quota players slipping into the Safrican team with these credentials of late.

For instance: Ryan Harris used to bowl medium and wanted to be a bat. Competition for spots at FC turned him into a legitimate fast bowler. Our bowlers and English typically get slower. English bowlers blame the county workload. I don't know what NZ bowlers blame it on.

[raja]

Yes, I'd agree with this.
In India, a bits-and-pieces cricketer would be thoroughly exposed.
Especially if he pretends to be a bowler. :-)

You'll get a fair amount of lower-order batsmen getting decent scores in domestic cricket but rarely do you find an irregular bowler picking up more than the odd wicket in an innings (unless it's some cheap lower-order wickets).

[Paddles]

Yes, I'd agree with this.
In India, a bits-and-pieces cricketer would be thoroughly exposed.
Especially if he pretends to be a bowler. :-)

You'll get a fair amount of lower-order batsmen getting decent scores in domestic cricket but rarely do you find an irregular bowler picking up more than the odd wicket in an innings (unless it's some cheap lower-order wickets).

Agree with most of this - until Jadeja and Ashwin tour NZ/Aus/Eng and look very bits n pieces

Khan and Sobers at home - Hollioake bros away

[bolero]

What about Pat Symcox ?

[Paddles]

What about Pat Symcox ?

Safrican spinners are just bad since Faulkner. Now they import them.

Boje was more handy with the bat than Pat , makes him a bits n pieces candidate if batting got him ahead of Adams

Callaghan was medium pace and possibly bits n pieces.

[Boycs]

Tahir isn’t terrible

Edit: scratch that. He averages 40 in tests?!?! I had absolutely no idea. So convinced was I hat it was low thirties that I didn’t even bother to check before I posted. Yet a healthy 23 in OFI cricket.

Quite a disparity

[Paddles]

Tahir isn’t terrible

Pakistani import.

[Paddles]

...

[Paddles]

Tahir isn’t terrible

Edit: scratch that. He averages 40 in tests?!?! I had absolutely no idea. So convinced was I hat it was low thirties that I didn’t even bother to check before I posted. Yet a healthy 23 in OFI cricket.

Quite a disparity

Leg spinner syndrome. See Brad Hogg, Adul Rashid,Ish Sodhi and many more.

The googly makes batsmen scared to charge and their natural innaccuracy provides a good ER variation in whiteball with a defensive field. *

Suceed with white ball - fail in tests.

Slaughtered in tests when their short or wide balls get dispatched into an empty outfield.

* Batsmen premeditate in whiteball FAR FAR FAR more than many let on

[Mick180461]

What about Pat Symcox ?

Safrican spinners are just bad since Faulkner. Now they import them.

Yea Hugh Tayfield wasn't much chop hey
Maharaj is starting to shape up as being pretty good 51wkts in 13 tests @26.33, so their search may just be over.

[Paddles]

Safrican spinners are just bad since Faulkner. Now they import them.

Yea Hugh Tayfield wasn't much chop hey
Maharaj is starting to shape up as being pretty good 51wkts in 13 tests @26.33, so their search may just be over.

Maharaj is showing a lot of promise, at times; but has only significantly troubled NZ and Bangladesh thus far. He averaged over 40 when they won in Straya. Moeen outbowled him in England. Easily.

His wickets vs NZ at Wngtn in the NZ first innings were very very innocuous and embarrassing for NZ. The ball wasn't even or turning or drifting and NZ were playing down the wrong line. It was an inept effort from NZ batting that day. Yet Niccolls, a terrible test bat thus far, mastered him for a ton.

Point taken re Tayfield vs Faulkner. My sentiment still stands tho you shaved some decades off it.