david warner v matthew hayden

[weldone]

Picked Warner.

Having watched both batsmen smash hapless Indian bowlers around, I feel a lot more hopeless when Warner is batting than I did with Hayden. Atleast with Hayden you knew he'd eventually **** up the sweep shot against the spinners, and his technique wasn't great so he could nick off or be caught LBW against the new ball. Warner is just so solid and correct and hits the ball sweetly and has shots everywhere.

O come on, Hayden is so much better than Warner in playing spin that's not funny.

 

[Gob]

O come on, Hayden is so much better than Warner in playing spin that's not funny.

i'd certainly back warner to do much better than hayden against the spinners right now.

 

[cnerd123]

http://youtu.be/p-B9EU6QusA?t=1m11s

 

[biased indian]

Hayden clearly ahead now ..if warner can carry on in similar form for another 3-5 years a poll warrants

 

[Gnske]

Hayden for now, but I reckon Warner is going to end up with very similar figures to his once he calls time.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

This site has always had the hugest blind spot for Hayden, it's still mind-boggling these nearly ten years later.

Hayden. Warner may get there, maybe. But it's Hayden for another half a decade at least.

 

[weldone]

i'd certainly back warner to do much better than hayden against the spinners right now.

ok was

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Both-are-not-Test-class-batsman.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Point I was trying to make is that the comparison is almost worthless because at this stage of his career, Hayden was still two years away from his tour of India in 2001.

Hayden had just about as good a post-thirty career as possible; whereas Warner will hit 30 with a serious Test record behind him.

 

[dognutz]

Haydos the runs on the board but I'm expecting Warner to surpass him. He's my favourite player to watch atm. He may be an egghead sometimes but I totally forgive him because it's the same stubborn one-mindedness that gets him into trouble that has also enabled him to transform from 20/20 basher to brilliant all round batsmen. I couldn't stop lovin Lillee just cos he kicked Javed up the bum (little bugger needed it)

 

[dognutz]

Both-are-not-Test-class-batsman.

nonsense

 

[BeeGee]

Warner is very unlikely to turn into a born again hypocritical asshole and release a cookbook, so.....

Warner.

 

[Niall]

Warner is very unlikely to turn into a born again hypocritical asshole and release a cookbook, so.....

Warner.

Not as if Warner is the most likeable either though.

Warner is a massive gun, getting him early will be crucial for England regaining The Ashes.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I'd say Warner.

I may be biased because he's a lot easier on the eye but he doesn't seem to have any glaringly obvious weakness and Hayden did have some issues against lateral movement at speed (batsman finds going harder against top class pace with swing non-shocker, I know...). His peak coincided with the decline of the Windies pace barrage and Donald getting over the hill slightly. The only really top class quick he regularly got the better of was Shoaib but, as the STDs and liposuction probably suggest, he had some mental fragilities and could be "got at".

It could've been in his second coming Hayden would've creamed peak Ambrose and Walsh to all parts anyway, but his earlier career will mean the question will always be raised.

 

[GIMH]

This site has always had the hugest blind spot for Hayden, it's still mind-boggling these nearly ten years later.

Hayden. Warner may get there, maybe. But it's Hayden for another half a decade at least.

Not sure if 'this site' is skewed by one particular person? Which brings me onto...

Both-are-not-Test-class-batsman.

This is phenomenal

 

[Spikey]

This site has always had the hugest blind spot for Hayden, it's still mind-boggling these nearly ten years later.

Hayden. Warner may get there, maybe. But it's Hayden for another half a decade at least.

dont think it's possible i made this thread directly because of that

 

[Red]

Both-are-not-Test-class-batsman.

Elaborate?

 

[Red]

I'd say Warner.

I may be biased because he's a lot easier on the eye but he doesn't seem to have any glaringly obvious weakness and Hayden did have some issues against lateral movement at speed (batsman finds going harder against top class pace with swing non-shocker, I know...). His peak coincided with the decline of the Windies pace barrage and Donald getting over the hill slightly. The only really top class quick he regularly got the better of was Shoaib but, as the STDs and liposuction probably suggest, he had some mental fragilities and could be "got at".

It could've been in his second coming Hayden would've creamed peak Ambrose and Walsh to all parts anyway, but his earlier career will mean the question will always be raised.

This. Hayden was a great batsman, but for an opener he was found out a bit too often by quality opposition quicks.

 

[grecian]

Elaborate?

You had to be there, TBH.

 

[BeeGee]

Not as if Warner is the most likeable either though.

They're both assholes, no question, but I prefer Warner's more straight forward, shot tempered, dumbass, in your face brand of assholeness. Hayden's a dodgy bastard. I don't trust that prick.