Golden Matchups

[bagapath]

Athlai said

Hayden scores vs. Hadlee

4
18
6
3
1
28
0
17
2
184* (probably off 200 balls) (EDIT: and hadlee pulls a hamstring)
46
3

[MrIncredible]

would most probably be 5 out of 10. at their respective peaks imran is as likely to knock sachin's out early as tendulkar carting him around the ground. have seen khan make attacking batsmen look like fools and sachin make great fast bowlers cry "mommy".

Are u talking about a single test or an entire series? Because i can hardly recall a time when Sachin made ne great fast bowler "cry mommy" for an entire series.

[Faisal1985]

Lets add one more to this ....Akram vs. Dhoni?

[subshakerz]

Lets add one more to this ....Akram vs. Dhoni?

Akram 7/10. Dhoni would do pretty well to block him or score singles, but if he tries to demolish Akram he ends up in the hands of mid-off or mid-on.

[zaremba]

Devon Malcolm bowling v Devon Malcolm batting

[bagapath]

Are u talking about a single test or an entire series? Because i can hardly recall a time when Sachin made ne great fast bowler "cry mommy" for an entire series.

a ten test series would still be ten individual tests played one after the other. i would back my 50:50 prediction every time these two square up to face each other.

[thierry henry]

paddles was anyway well above pollock's pace. so no stepping out business for mr. hayden. he will have to stay put in crease and he will succumb to his own dodgy back foot play.

Nonsense.

Prime Hadlee simply was not quick.

Like McGrath, Pollock, or Vaas, he belonged in the "fast enough to usually succeed" category.

And btw, many of the mediocre bowlers Hayden "stepped out to" were substantially faster than Pollock/McGrath. As I said, above 140kph was probably the cut-off.

Pollock, as a prime example, was a fine bowler, but exactly the sort of bowler Hayden loved to hammer. McGrath and Hadlee would've been in the same category.

[thierry henry]

Well, maybe

[DingDong]

Right now- Warner vs Patel

from the past- Ranatunga vs Kumble

[bagapath]

Nonsense.

Prime Hadlee simply was not quick.

Like McGrath, Pollock, or Vaas, he belonged in the "fast enough to usually succeed" category.

i completely disagree and i am leaving it at that.

Actually I am not leaving it at that.

I do remember Hadlee being significantly faster than Pollock,/ McGrath/ Vaas types., He was no Lillee/ Marshall/ Holding. But he was in the Akram league in terms of pace for the majority of his career. He might have slowed down a bit after 19856-86 but by then he had crossed 300 wickets already and most of his career was behind him. Also, he didnt become that slow for him to be remembered as a medium pacer. Even cricinfo lists Hadlee as Right-arm fast. So I know I am not imagining all of this.

And btw, many of the mediocre bowlers Hayden "stepped out to" were substantially faster than Pollock/McGrath. As I said, above 140kph was probably the cut-off.

Pollock, as a prime example, was a fine bowler, but exactly the sort of bowler Hayden loved to hammer. McGrath and Hadlee would've been in the same category.

Pollock was "fine" but Hadlee was great. he was as accurate as McGrath but faster. Hadlee was definitely better than Pollock overall. Even for argument's sake if you want to bunch them in the same category in terms of pace (I wouldn't agree but still...) pace alone doesnt determine whether the batter can succeed in stepping out to you. Pollock relied on seam (as did McGrath). Hadlee was a master of swing as well. I dont think a batsman with a faulty backfoot technique could have handled Hadlee very easily. I admit I was trying to be nasty in giving Hayden 0.5 out of 10 in facing Paddles. In all honesty it would be around 0.6. Okay. Okay. Enough mucking around. I would give 3 to Hayden and 7 to Hadlee.

[0RI0N]

SF Barnes vs DG Bradman
on the pitch that was used for the 4th Border Gavaskar Test 2004.

[bagapath]

SF Barnes vs DG Bradman
on the pitch that was used for the 4th Border Gavaskar Test 2004.

DG Bradman b SF Barnes 33

Bradman would score only a third of his usual share of runs per innings. Barnes would concede twice as much for the wicket than his career average; even stevens but moral victory for Barnes.

[0RI0N]

DG Bradman b SF Barnes 33

Bradman would score only a third of his usual share of runs per innings. Barnes would concede twice as much for the wicket than his career average; even stevens but moral victory for Barnes.

I'd go with that Bagapath.
Barnes was a real Dr. Wily plus that Mumbai wicket was a brute but I'm sure the Don would have scored a few.
Great thread btw.

[subshakerz]

DG Bradman b SF Barnes 33

Bradman would score only a third of his usual share of runs per innings. Barnes would concede twice as much for the wicket than his career average; even stevens but moral victory for Barnes.

Interesting, from what I remember Michael Clarke took 6/9 on that wicket. SF Barnes would be close to impossible to play on that. Barnes 8/10 over Bradman in that case.

[subshakerz]

from the past- Ranatunga vs Kumble

Kumble 7/10. He never did that well against India.