People on this board reckon Hayden is a flat track bully and overrated......but Gilchrist is never lumped into that category, which is strange because Gilchrist has largely profited on the same substandard attacks that Hayden did and did far worse in last year's Ashes.
Gilchrist also does not have as good a record on the subcontinent as Hayden.
A lot of people think Gilchrist was simply out of form, in last year's Ashes ---- I don't think so --- he just came up against a very good attack and the deficiencies in his game were exposed.....if you deny him the cut and pull shot, you render him quite helpless as these are his bread and butter shots.
The problem is few pace attacks this decade have been able to exploit that weakness of his.
I reckon if Glichrist had played in the nineties he wouldn't have averaged more than 40.
What do you guys reckon ?