• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Andrew Strauss - Not a bad start, chap.

Status
Not open for further replies.

tooextracool

International Coach
social said:
Just who is a proven performer on seaming wickets?
most quality players are, give me the name of any quality test player and i'll give you games where they have scored runs on seamer friendly wickets. hayden hasnt even done it on 1 occasion.

social said:
But I would assume his Test average of mid-50s indicates that he is as good as most.
no it doesnt, which is precisely why he is such an odd case. he hasnt succeeded on seamer friendly wickets, hes been lucky enough that they dont produce seamer friendly wickets in australia often, and that most of the tests hes played elsewhere have also been on flat decks.

social said:
As for weaknesses against in-swing, you have taken a snap-shot of a person's career and blown it out of proportion. Tendulkar, Ponting, Langer, etc., etc., etc, have all, at times, been guilty of the same. The trouble for bowlers is that, for 95% of the time, the same balls which periodically trouble them disappear with monotonous regularity to the boundary.
no they havent, they've all been more than capable of scoring runs on seamer friendly wickets(lets leave tendulkar out of it because it will only turn into a major argument thats already been done before)

social said:
No-one is saying that Hayden is technically perfect but he is as talented as anyone and, by almost unanimous concensus, has been THE dominant batsman in world cricket for more than 3 years until relativel recently.
which is precisely why hes overrated, too many people havent looked at his performances on seamer friendly wickets and just looked at the way hes hammered bowlers on flat decks.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
social said:
You might also like to inform me of when Australia last played on a seaming pitch.

We certainly havent played on any in the period when Hayden's form has been down. In fact, if anything, virtually every pitch, with the exception of Brisbane and Perth (which hardly seam but do bounce) has been slower and lower than pitches we usually play on.

Hayden's problems appear to me to be more mental than anything. Having gone through 3 or 4 years when seemingly every errant (and many not so bad) delivery disappeared to or over the fence, he has now become impatient and is looking to hit every ball too hard.
i believe that the last time australia played on a seamers wicket was against SL in the first test, where you guessed it, he failed. and if you remember the test match in perth, he was undone in the first inning by a full swinging delivery from akhtar. but the times that he has played on seamer friendly wickets have been few and far between such as durban against SA in 02 and the first 4 test of the series in england.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
Out of interest, can you list these players for us?
Players like Love, Lehmann, Hayden, Bevan, Elliot, Hodge, Hussey, Martyn etc who have maintained a good domestic average over many years while being kept out of the Australian test side. Most of them get their shot in the end, some don't. Hard to see how someone like Strauss (without his test performances) would get a go in the Australian side through that sort of competition, unless he was either considered a promising young talent like Clarke, or had waited his obligitory decade.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Mr Casson said:
C'mon guys, can we not destroy Strauss' thread with talk of Matthew Hayden? He's not worth it.
Come on Mr C, you have been here what 4 months? You should know this is how CW works :D :p
 

Craig

World Traveller
tooextracool said:
absoultely 100% correct. IMO its one of those strange situations where someone can perform so brilliantly on flat pitches and fail on seamer friendly ones and as a result end up with a flattering test average.
Hardly his fault when every cricketing board is obessed with producing with flat wickets is it?
 

Mr Casson

Cricketer Of The Year
Craig said:
Hardly his fault when every cricketing board is obessed with producing with flat wickets is it?
I think his point is that on the rare occasion Hayden's been faced with a pitch that is conducive to seam bowling, he's got nothing.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Mr Casson said:
I think his point is that on the rare occasion Hayden's been faced with a pitch that is conducive to seam bowling, he's got nothing.
The Gabba has something of a reputation for being green from time to time in domestic cricket, and he played a fair few of his FC matches there with success.
 

Craig

World Traveller
I do believe he got a 100 their against New Zealand on a wicket which looked like it would assist the seam bowlers, and on the first day of the first Ashes Test in Brisbane, that pitch had assistence for seam bowlers, and had England actually bowled a lot better then what they had and had Michael Vaugh and co had learnt how to field they could have taken a few wickets, and Hayden got a hundred.

I know I watched the majority of the first two days of the Tests, and virtually every single ball of the second day of that Test as well.
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
tooextracool said:
i believe that the last time australia played on a seamers wicket was against SL in the first test, where you guessed it, he failed. and if you remember the test match in perth, he was undone in the first inning by a full swinging delivery from akhtar. but the times that he has played on seamer friendly wickets have been few and far between such as durban against SA in 02 and the first 4 test of the series in england.
You mean the series where he destroyed England.

The series where Australia retained the Ashes in 11 days.

Ah yes! Thank-you for destroying your own argument.
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ok, let's take an unrealistically short-sighted view of the world and concentrate on the last 12 months only.

Hayden would not make a World X1 on this criteria.

Strauss is one of the 2 or 3 best batsmen of all-time but, even so, would not make a World X1 as Langer and Sehwag have scored runs against better opponents.

Vaughan and Tendulkar should be dropped from their respective Test sides.

Murali's records need to be extinguished from the game as he has been scientifically proven to throw one of his major deliveries.

Pollock is a medium pace draft horse.

I hope your finally starting to see how ridiculous your arguments seem.

Finally, your comments on Hayden make me think that you havent seen him bat.

He is 6ft 4in, bats a couple of feet outside the crease, and plays predominantly off the front foot. Therefore, he is ALWAYS going to get the benefit of the doubt more than most when it comes to LBW decisions.

Hayden has been, and remains, one of the 3 or 4 most feared batsmen in the world.

As I said before, a career should be analysed from a standpoint of more than 12 months.

At this stage, Strauss' career, whilst off to a fantastic start, is only in its' infancy.
 
Last edited:

twctopcat

International Regular
social said:
You mean the series where he destroyed England.

The series where Australia retained the Ashes in 11 days.

Ah yes! Thank-you for destroying your own argument.
He's referring to 2001 in England when steve waugh destroyed england, bot hayden. Scoring one fifty is tres-esque.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Anyway getting back to Strauss & Australia, I like to think of that annoying 'OKAY' advert - why bother with light bulbs if candles were 'okay' etc. Healy was probably more than okay, why bother with Gilchrist?
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Scaly piscine said:
Anyway getting back to Strauss & Australia, I like to think of that annoying 'OKAY' advert - why bother with light bulbs if candles were 'okay' etc. Healy was probably more than okay, why bother with Gilchrist?
Only because Healy had lost form and Gilchrist is the greatest keeper-batsman of all time, which is precisely why he continually gets named in greatest teams of all time.

To use your analogy, and back on the subject, Strauss' candle has only just been lit, is burning extremely brightly, but no-one knows if and when it will go out. His first class record would suggest soon.
 

Mr Casson

Cricketer Of The Year
social said:
Only because Healy had lost form and Gilchrist is the greatest keeper-batsman of all time, which is precisely why he continually gets named in greatest teams of all time.

To use your analogy, and back on the subject, Strauss' candle has only just been lit, is burning extremely brightly, but no-one knows if and when it will go out. His first class record would suggest soon.
Gilchrist is considered the greatest keeper-batsmen by many now, but not when he was first selected.

And Strauss' FC record might suggest to you that his candle will go out soon, but his temperament and his technique and approach to the game suggest otherwise to me.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Mr Casson said:
Gilchrist is considered the greatest keeper-batsmen by many now, but not when he was first selected.

And Strauss' FC record might suggest to you that his candle will go out soon, but his temperament and his technique and approach to the game suggest otherwise to me.
Exactly, these are the sort of selections Australia have been coming up with for years and years and England have started to follow suit selecting players like Harmison, Strauss and Anderson rather than just picking people blindly by FC averages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top