Salamuddin's All Time Test Match X1

[Ikki]

5th or 6th at best for me tbh.

Weren't you the fellow who opened that thread trashing Hayden's 181 not out? Yeah...

For interest's sake, could you guys name all the openers you consider better than Hayden?

I think those who have a valid case are Hutton and Sutcliff. A lot of you have put Gavaskar. To be honest, if Hayden plays another year or so he will overtake Sunil and I'm pretty sure he will as he is sitting quite pretty atm. If Hayden can compare to Gavaskar, why not the rest? That is if you agree that Hayden can compare with Sunil...

 

[silentstriker]

Weren't you the fellow who opened that thread trashing Hayden's 181 not out? Yeah...

For interest's sake, could you guys name all the openers you consider better than Hayden?

I think those who have a valid case are Hutton and Sutcliff. A lot of you have put Gavaskar. To be honest, if Hayden plays another year or so he will overtake Sunil and I'm pretty sure he will as he is sitting quite pretty atm. If Hayden can compare to Gavaskar, why not the rest? That is if you agree that Hayden can compare with Sunil...

I personally don't think he can. Gavaskar played against lot better attacks, and did quite well (his WI stats are inflated, but even with a closer look, he averages 40+ against them, which is rare for an opener to do against the WI of that time). Hayden is good, but a bit of a FTB. And like The Sean, I'd probably have him in my 4th XI, and maybe even the 3rd...but thats pushing it. No higher.

I don't see how you can compare him to guys like Hobbs, or Hutton even if for whatever reason you don't like Sunil in the #1 XI, there are a lot of others who deserve it more than Hayden IMO.

Hobbs would obviously be a given, but there are lots of others for the 2nd spot.

 

[Ikki]

I personally don't think he can. Gavaskar played against lot better attacks, and did quite well (his WI stats are inflated, but even with a closer look, he averages 40+ against them, which is rare for an opener to do against the WI of that time). Hayden is good, but a bit of a FTB. And like The Sean, I'd probably have him in my 4th XI, and maybe even the 3rd...but thats pushing it. No higher.

I don't see how you can compare him to guys like Hobbs, or Hutton even if for whatever reason you don't like Sunil in the #1 XI, there are a lot of others who deserve it more than Hayden IMO.

Hobbs would obviously be a given, but there are lots of others for the 2nd spot.

Well name 3 pair of openers you consider better than Hayden.

And. if it's not too much trouble, name me current openers averaging 50+.

EDIT: 3

 

[The Sean]

Well name 4 pair of openers you consider better than Hayden.

And. if it's not too much trouble, name me current openers averaging 50+.

This wasn't addressed to me, but I'd like to add my two cents worth as well.

My top 7 are described in the teams I've picked above - Hobbs, Grace, Gavaskar, Hutton, Trumper, Sutcliffe, B Richards, in that order. Hayden might sneak in next, but then so might Greenidge or Morris. Or MacLaren. Or Boycott. Or one or two others.

But even a position in the 4th, or more likely 5th, XI means I consider Matthew Hayden to be one of the top 8-10 opening batsmen in cricket history - and surely that's quite an accolade given the competition?

 

[silentstriker]

You mean four or six since I would have him in 3rd or 4th?

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Hutton
Richards
Sutcliffe
Ponsford
Greenidge
Morris


I'd put him right around Ponsford/Morris/Greenidge.

EDIT: We think alike The Sean

 

[PhoenixFire]

Well name 3 pair of openers you consider better than Hayden.

And. if it's not too much trouble, name me current openers averaging 50+.

EDIT: 3

Hobbs & Sutcliffe
Hutton & Gavaskar
Boycott & Morris


And plenty, plenty more.

 

[Ikki]

This wasn't addressed to me, but I'd like to add my two cents worth as well.

My top 7 are described in the teams I've picked above - Hobbs, Grace, Gavaskar, Hutton, Trumper, Sutcliffe, B Richards, in that order. Hayden might sneak in next, but then so might Greenidge or Morris. Or MacLaren. Or Boycott. Or one or two others.

But even a position in the 4th, or more likely 5th, XI means I consider Matthew Hayden to be one of the top 8-10 opening batsmen in cricket history - and surely that's quite an accolade given the competition?

Morris and Boycott? Come on. Greenidge? I think Hayden has surpassed him. I see 4, maybe 5, names that compare but would require you to put quite a bit of subjectiveness into it to think they were THAT Much better. Grace? Sorry, I know a lot of people rate him, but he would be laughed at if indeed a first XI and a second XI were to play.

And to be honest it's still pretty close. I don't yet understand the impossibility of Hayden being in that all-time XI. People mention the era Hayden plays in, well I just asked for some openers in his era of playing averaging like he does. They don't, and this should be a positive.

 

[silentstriker]

Morris and Boycott? Come on. Greenidge? I think Hayden has surpassed him. I see 4, maybe 5, names that compare but would require you to put quite a bit of subjectiveness into it to think they were THAT Much better. Grace? Sorry, I know a lot of people rate him, but he would be laughed at if indeed a first XI and a second XI were to play.

And to be honest it's still pretty close. I don't yet understand the impossibility of Hayden being in that all-time XI. People mention the era Hayden plays in, well I just asked for some openers in his era of playing averaging like he does. They don't, and this should be a positive.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/india/content/player/35263.html
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/47270.html

 

[PhoenixFire]

Morris and Boycott? Come on. Greenidge? I think Hayden has surpassed him. I see 4, maybe 5, names that compare but would require you to put quite a bit of subjectiveness into it to think they were THAT Much better. Grace? Sorry, I know a lot of people rate him, but he would be laughed at if indeed a first XI and a second XI were to play.

And to be honest it's still pretty close. I don't yet understand the impossibility of Hayden being in that all-time XI. People mention the era Hayden plays in, well I just asked for some openers in his era of playing averaging like he does. They don't, and this should be a positive.

I assume by that, that you're one of those people who think that 8000 Test runs are worthless, because they were made 30 years ago.......

 

[Ikki]

Hobbs & Sutcliffe
Hutton & Gavaskar
Boycott & Morris


And plenty, plenty more.

I disagree, with you and The Sean and SS - respectfully. I do not consider Boycott or Morris to compare to Hayden. I think we cricket fans tend to exaggerate a whole lot and romanticize too much. And as I said before, Gavaskar is going to be left behind by Hayden in a year or two. An argument was brought that Hayden didn't face as tougher bowlers as Sunil, but then if that was a definitive statement it would reflect on Hayden's contemporaries. In that they too would average, at least, above 50.

 

[Ikki]

I assume by that, that you're one of those people who think that 8000 Test runs are worthless, because they were made 30 years ago.......

No but because I value someone who has almost equalled the same feat in less matches. About 29 less.

 

[silentstriker]

In that they too would average, at least, above 50.

No, if they averaged above 50, then they would be just as good as Hayden. We are all saying Hayden is the best opener of his generation and put him in the 3rd, 4th or 5th all time XI, which is quite an honor.....

He still isn't Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Hutton, etc.

 

[Ikki]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/india/content/player/35263.html
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/47270.html

Um yes, neither average 50. Hayden is on 53. As there is a different between 57 and 53, there is also one between 49 - or 47 in Smith's case - and 53.

 

[Ikki]

No, if they averaged above 50, then they would be just as good as Hayden. We are all saying Hayden is the best opener of his generation and put him in the 3rd, 4th or 5th all time XI, which is quite an honor.....

He still isn't Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Hutton, etc.

I'm sorry, what IS a Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Hutton? In comparison, Hayden is VERY NEAR those guys if not better in some instances. So what makes it okay for Sunil to get into the first XI over those gentlemen you named above and not Hayden over Sunil?

 

[PhoenixFire]

No but because I value someone who has almost equalled the same feat in less matches. About 29 less.

Yes, because of better bowlers and worse pitches, it doesn't take a genius to work out that Hayden would have been dropped after 10 matches in Boycott's era against Marshall and co, because he can't defend against swinging and seaming balls.

 

[silentstriker]

Um yes, neither average 50. Hayden is on 53.

If there is a difference between 49 and 53, then there is surely a difference between Hayden's 53 and Sutcliffe's 60?

 

[The Sean]

No, if they averaged above 50, then they would be just as good as Hayden. We are all saying Hayden is the best opener of his generation and put him in the 3rd, 4th or 5th all time XI, which is quite an honor.....

He still isn't Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Hutton, etc.

I was about to say much the same thing, but simply quoting this will do nicely.

 

[Ikki]

If there is a difference between 49 and 53, then there is surely a difference between Hayden's 53 and Sutcliffe's 60?

Yes, there IS. Which is why I said I consider Sutcliffe a very worthy candidate. That average is also better than Sunil too.

However, knowing what I've seen from Hayden - and not just #s - I can say Hayden at his best was a phenom that was incomparable to any other opener I can think of. So I don't see how it's silly, or even 'ridiculous' as you suggested.

 

[PhoenixFire]

However, knowing what I've seen from Hayden - and not just #s - I can say Hayden at his best was a phenom that was incomparable to any other opener I can think of. So I don't see how it's silly, or even 'ridiculous' as you suggested.

May I ask how old you are? Not meant to be an insult, just wondering whether you know for a fact by seeing Hayden at his best is better than Gavaskar or Sutcliffe.

 

[Ikki]

May I ask how old you are? Not meant to be an insult, just wondering whether you know for a fact by seeing Hayden at his best is better than Gavaskar or Sutcliffe.

You are what? 14? How do you know that Hayden isn't better?

I'm much older than you my young friend.

Furthermore: I didn't say for certain or in any definitive manner that he is, indeed, better than Sunil or Herbert. HOWEVER, he definitely compares and can be in the top XI and in my opinion is.