Who would you pick as your 2 Test openers from 21st Century?

[stephen]

good post. He also played crap in the '01 Ashes where nearly all his peers filled their boots against a very woeful english side. And this was right after his best ever series when he scored 500+ runs in India


I'm sure Red Hill will mention those SA scores in 01/02 were against a past-it Donald

Ah yeah but this feeds into the "Hayden was crap in swinging conditions" narrative, because it's easy to look at his "in England" record and see that he had a couple of poor tours by his standard.

He got out to:

Giles (1st test)
Caddick (2nd test)
Tudor x2 (3rd test)
Caddick, Mullally (4th test)
Tuffnel (5th test)

So that's Caddick twice, Tudor twice, Mullullay and two crap finger spinners who got him out in that series. I think Hayden's actual weakness that tour was poor quality finger spin. Harbhajan in India was obviously too high quality for him.

 

[Shri]

Hayden/Sehwag

Rip spinners

 

[morgieb]

Thing is that Hayden was good against RSA against whoever they threw at him. It's a shame we didn't see an earlier Hayden vs Donald battle, but we didn't.

96/97?

 

[stephen]

96/97?

You're right. Hayden didn't get out to Donald that series. Pollock twice, Schultz twice and run out once. Probably wasn't in the middle for long enough to face Donald :P.

I actually forgot about this series.

Turns out that Donald did dismiss Hayden in 1994 in his debut test.

 

[Bolo]

Thing is that Hayden was good against RSA against whoever they threw at him. It's a shame we didn't see an earlier Hayden vs Donald battle, but we didn't.

Na. RSA fielded proper quality against Hayden in 4 series. He got murdered in the first two and the last one. He was amazing in 2001. He scored pretty heavily in 2002, but that was maybe the worst attack ever fielded. A medium paced ODI death bowler in tests. Wow.

Then the return in 2006ish was pretty good in one and mediocre in the other. IDK bowling quality. Good contests. He was on top at home and down away same as everywhere else.

 

[vcs]

I agree with stephen on this one. Hayden may have been weaker against pace/swing bowling than his usual beastly self, but calling it a genuine weakness (like Sehwag against outswing) is a bit of a stretch.

 

[Bolo]

I agree with stephen on this one. Hayden may have been weaker against pace/swing bowling than his usual beastly self, but calling it a genuine weakness (like Sehwag against outswing) is a bit of a stretch.

He didn't uhave a big series away against a quality pace attack in his career. There is definitely an issue.

 

[Borges]

From what I've seen, Hayden would have been heartily feasted on by a quality pace attack. If that is the criterion, then it is Smith and Cook.

 

[Bolo]

Bad away, weaker against pace, bully, downhill skiing, tons of soft runs...

Not sure if I'm describing Hayden or Sehwag. Either way it's an ideal parnership for Smith in particular. Loser gets Cook, also a great pairing.

 

[SeamUp]

Thing is that Hayden was good against RSA against whoever they threw at him. It's a shame we didn't see an earlier Hayden vs Donald battle, but we didn't.

There was the 96/97 and 93/94 tour to SA and obviously home tours. So obviously Hayden wasn't peak then but Donald and co were

Not sure when he Hayden was left our again due to performance. Same for Elliott. But I do remember after we beat Australia in 1993/94 at SCG Damien Martyn lost his place

Same Australian batting line up all 3 tests : Taylor, Hayden, Elliott, M.Waugh, S.Waugh, Blewett, Bevan

96/97

Joburg
c Cullinan b Pollock 40 (115)

Donald, Pollock, Klusener, Kallis, Adams Cronje

Port Elizabeth
c Cullian b Pollock 0 (14)
run out (Cronje) 14 (37)

Donald, Pollock, Adams, McMillan, Cronje, Kallis

Centurion
b Schultz 10 (22)
lbw b Schultz 0 (6)

Donald, Schultz, Klusener, Kallis, Symcox, Cronje


Best part of the tour is tour matches : Results | Global | ESPNcricinfo


Also 93/94 tour to SA

Joburg
c Richardson b Donald 15 (36)
b de Villiers 5 (19)

Slater, Hayden, Boon, M.Waugh, Border, S.Waugh
Donald, de Villiers, McMillan, Matthews, Cronje

Cape Town
didn't play
Slater, Taylor, Boon, M.Waugh, Border, S.Waugh

Durban
didn't play
Same line-up as CT

 

[Red]

I'm sure Red Hill will mention those SA scores in 01/02 were against a past-it Donald

This is my whole point about Hayden. When the pace bowlers were elite and in their prime, or hunted in packs, he went missing.

He was very good at standing up and making runs against mediocre attacks, and very good against spin, but in terms of being an opener who could deal with elite pace bowling, I find him far from satisfactory.

I dont think he's terrible, obviously. Just that he's overrated.

 

[Red]

I agree with stephen on this one. Hayden may have been weaker against pace/swing bowling than his usual beastly self, but calling it a genuine weakness (like Sehwag against outswing) is a bit of a stretch.

An opening batsman with a weakness against pace/swing IS A GENUINE WEAKNESS!

From what I've seen, Hayden would have been heartily feasted on by a quality pace attack.

100%

 

[Furball]

Cook and Sehwag, out of sheer bias.

Cannot stand either Smith or Hayden.

 

[Furball]

90's Shield was genuinely great cricket (not far off Test standard, for example)

Nonsense.

 

[stephen]

This is my whole point about Hayden. When the pace bowlers were elite and in their prime, or hunted in packs, he went missing.

He was very good at standing up and making runs against mediocre attacks, and very good against spin, but in terms of being an opener who could deal with elite pace bowling, I find him far from satisfactory.

I dont think he's terrible, obviously. Just that he's overrated.

His first two full series were against Ambrose/Walsh/Bishop and then against a full strength SA outfit away. How many openers would have feasted in such conditions?

Being blooded against the two strongest attacks in the world at the time in an era known for its bowling is no way to judge an entire career.

What I really meant before was that it would have been good to see Hayden continue after the 97 Windies series, adjust to international cricket and then see him against Donald and co in 98. It took time for Hayden to adjust to international level, which was more psychological than anything else. Given a longer run earlier I'm sure he would have been fine against any attack (as he was later in his career).

 

[stephen]

Nonsense.

The batting was and the bowling wasn't.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Nonsense.

Not at all. 90s Shield cricket was probably even stronger at times than Test cricket on average, tbh.

 

[morgieb]

Not at all. 90s Shield cricket was probably even stronger at times than Test cricket on average, tbh.

I wouldn't go that far unless you're talking about early 2000's Bangladesh/Zimbabwe. Though certain full-strength Shield teams would be international class.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I wouldn't go that far unless you're talking about early 2000's Bangladesh/Zimbabwe. Though certain full-strength Shield teams would be international class.

In Aus they were stronger than most sides other than SA for a while there. A bit harsh on the Asian sides touring in unfamiliar conditions though.

 

[jimmy101]

Probably NSW would have been the only team from that era who could been consistently competitive at Test level. All of the other states during that time, whilst in possession of one or two star players, had holes in their lineups that would have been heavily exposed at intl level.