Richard Hadlee as a batsman - how good was he? Overrated, underrated?

[mr_mister]

So among the big four 80s all rounders, Hadlee is always seen as definitely the weakest bat. Some think it's a stretch to truly call him an all-rounder since he averaged 27 in tests.

He did get a test 150 and FC 200, but I almost never see his batting used as an argument to big him up when comparing him to other players like Imran and Kapil

He's often lauded as one of the best pace bowlers ever, top 5 for many. I'd say CW slightly ranks him above Imran with ball, but acknowledge it's not unanimous

However just as an all rounder he's never talked in the same breath as Sobers, Kallis, Miller and Imran

His batting seems kinda equivalent to Kallis bowling, but just for the fact he is an 80s peer of Imran who has such clear cut better AR stats, well I think that really works against Hadlee's AR reputation

But my question was how good was he? Does his average flatter him or undersell him

 

[Fuller Pilch]

 

[Fuller Pilch]

 

[Athlai]

It's always difficult to talk about the value of a #7 (or #8) batsman in a Test team. Outside of Gilchrist, none have ever really reached the lofty career peaks of a truly great middle order Test batsman. But he was every bit the batsman that Kapil was (can't wait for the Kapil diehards to talk about how many centuries he had ignoring entirely how many were made on dead pitches in meaningless draws).

Outside of Chris Cairns and Daniel Vettori, I don't think there was anyone better a batsman as he was in that position (if we exclude keepers) and those two are vastly inferior bowlers. Pollock/Kapil/Holder/(and Imran when he was actually a good bowler) were approximately at the same level.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

This has coverage of the great Clive Rice batting as well (Notts):

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Hadlee actually averaged more with the bat than Kapil in the 1980s (30.90 to 30.76), so that makes him a 45/46 averaging bat and his bowling is the equivalent of a 60 average with the bat so that comes to 105 (#betterthanBradman).

 

[subshakerz]

First half of his career he was a no.8, second half a no.7.

I think Hadlee would be around Pollock level with the bat. Fairly useful, but I don't think he could make top 6 overall.

 

[subshakerz]

It's always difficult to talk about the value of a #7 (or #8) batsman in a Test team. Outside of Gilchrist, none have ever really reached the lofty career peaks of a truly great middle order Test batsman. But he was every bit the batsman that Kapil was (can't wait for the Kapil diehards to talk about how many centuries he had ignoring entirely how many were made on dead pitches in meaningless draws).

Outside of Chris Cairns and Daniel Vettori, I don't think there was anyone better a batsman as he was in that position (if we exclude keepers) and those two are vastly inferior bowlers. Pollock/Kapil/Holder/(and Imran when he was actually a good bowler) were approximately at the same level.

Imran clearly was a level above as a bat to all the other, especially during his peak bowling years.

 

[Athlai]

Imran clearly was a level above as a bat to all the other, especially during his peak bowling years.

Imran didn't average 30 in Tests till his 50th Test match.

 

[Athlai]

Imran (First 50 Tests)

2008 @ 31.87
232 @ 22.91 (4.64 wickets per match)

Imran (Tests 51-88)
1799 @ 47.34
130 @ 22.63 (3.4 wickets per match)

Haven't chosen the 50 Test mark for any other reason besides thats when he started averaging 30 with the bat, but you can see what I mean about his batting really coming on when his bowling workload was reduced (albeit still gun)

 

[Bolo.]

I don't think you can particularly overrate or underrate him. A 27 average doesn't leave that much room for interpretation, whichever way you swing.

Discussion on Hadlee's batting is always about how valuable having a bowler of his batting level is as opposed to a regular tail ender.

 

[h_hurricane]

It's always difficult to talk about the value of a #7 (or #8) batsman in a Test team. Outside of Gilchrist, none have ever really reached the lofty career peaks of a truly great middle order Test batsman. But he was every bit the batsman that Kapil was (can't wait for the Kapil diehards to talk about how many centuries he had ignoring entirely how many were made on dead pitches in meaningless draws).

Outside of Chris Cairns and Daniel Vettori, I don't think there was anyone better a batsman as he was in that position (if we exclude keepers) and those two are vastly inferior bowlers. Pollock/Kapil/Holder/(and Imran when he was actually a good bowler) were approximately at the same level.

The irony is that Hadlee has scored only 2 hundreds and both came in meaningless draws.

Also don't want to divert the topic to another Kapil discussion, but at least you acknowledge that Kapil bowled on dead pitches.

 

[Athlai]

The irony is that Hadlee has scored only 2 hundreds and both came in meaningless draws.

Also don't want to divert the topic to another Kapil discussion, but at least you acknowledge that Kapil bowled on dead pitches.

Yeah, a hard task though could always just let the spinners bowl if the ball wasn't doing anything.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

The irony is that Hadlee has scored only 2 hundreds and both came in meaningless draws.

Also scored perhaps the greatest 99 of all time which was key in an innings' victory (also took 8 wickets in the match).

Also the 100 vs the WI was hardly meaningless. This was the last series the best team in the world lost for 15 years!

 

[h_hurricane]

On the topic, Hadlee was Ashwin level with the bat and a moderate upgrade on Akram as a batsman. There can be enough arguments made that Ashwin isn't an allrounder, same goes for Hadlee.

Hadlee made the best use of his limited batting abilities and I rate him.

 

[Line and Length]

Neither overrated nor underrated. Just a very useful bat and an outstanding bowler.

 

[subshakerz]

Imran (First 50 Tests)

2008 @ 31.87
232 @ 22.91 (4.64 wickets per match)

Imran (Tests 51-88)
1799 @ 47.34
130 @ 22.63 (3.4 wickets per match)

Haven't chosen the 50 Test mark for any other reason besides thats when he started averaging 30 with the bat, but you can see what I mean about his batting really coming on when his bowling workload was reduced (albeit still gun)

Picking his 50th test is pretty arbitrary actually. His career was a constant improvement and he moved up the order. He started as a tailender in the early 70s, then a no.8 in the last 70s, then a no.7 in the early 80s, and a no.6 in the late 80s and early 90s was good enough to promote himself up the order if the team needed it.

Your post specifically said when he was good as a bowler, and his bowling peak started from 1980 onwards, and he easily averaged over 40 since that time.

Compared to Hadlee, who only moved from a no.8 to no.7 as his career progressed.

 

[Athlai]

Picking his 50th test is pretty arbitrary actually. His career was a constant improvement and he moved up the order. He started as a tailender in the early 70s, then a no.8 in the last 70s, then a no.7 in the early 80s, and a no.6 in the late 80s and early 90s was good enough to promote himself up the order if the team needed it.

Your post specifically said when he was good as a bowler, and his bowling peak started from 1980 onwards, and he easily averaged over 40 since that time.

Compared to Hadlee, who moved from a no.8 to no.7 as his career progressed.

Imran wasn't a level above the others for his whole career though. Only in the latter third

 

[cnerd123]

But he was every bit the batsman that Kapil was (can't wait for the Kapil diehards to talk about how many centuries he had ignoring entirely how many were made on dead pitches in meaningless draws).

by this dumb logic all of Kapil's wickets are worth more than any of Hadlee's given he had to bowl on those same dead pitches in meaningless draws

 

[subshakerz]

Imran wasn't a level above the others for his whole career though. Only in the latter third

And Hadlee for the first half or 40 tests of his batting career was averaging around 20 and the second half 33.

Basically 1980s onwards, for like 63 out of 88 tests of Imran's career, he was clearly a level ahead of Hadlee as a bat.