Inzamam vs Hayden; Test Batting

[Burgey]

in reference to weldone's comment, i have always - partly subconsciously perhaps - classified cricketers by their quality into discrete clusters.

for example, in the 70s and 80s, it was richards, gavaskar and chappell in the first tier. followed miandad, border. and then the others like gower, gooch, boycott. (extended timelines, i realise...)

in the 90s and onwards, it has always been tendulkar and lara in the first tier with perhaps ponting and waugh (both briefly) in the same category. and then kallis, dravid, flower, sehwag, hayden, gilchrist, inzi pietersen et al.

regarding inzi v. hayden, inzi takes it over buzz by a gut's breadth.

How. Dare. You.

 

[vcs]

Is this even a valid comparison ? Hayden was arguably top 5 openers of all time.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

people don't realise how difficult task opening the batting is.

Hayden by a country mile.


And btw Inzamam was a sitting duck against ATG bowlers last decade. And he was nobody in 90s.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Why don't you add Ambrose and Walsh to that filter?

 

[dravid1830]

Why don't you add Ambrose and Walsh to that filter?

Last decade is the key word. Inzamam was not a bomb in 90s. His most of the exploit were
in last decade.I didn't add Donald too.

And seriously people don't understand how difficult opening the batting is.

 

[Ikki]

Hayden. But not by much. Generally think they're in the same tier.

 

[smash84]

I have voted for inzi because when he played well he carried Pakistan through. Also the fact that Hayden was pretty ordinary in the early part of his career when he had to face good quality attacks. Not saying Hayden was not that good but his peak coincided with a time when ATG attacks of the 90s had dwindled.

With inzi i do have to admit though that at times he was more of a percieved threat than a reality but for me Inzi just clinches it.

 

[hang on]

Last decade is the key word. Inzamam was not a bomb in 90s. His most of the exploit were
in last decade.I didn't add Donald too.

And seriously people don't understand how difficult opening the batting is.

not sure that that is the case.

 

[smash84]

yeah I do think people understand how difficult opening the innings is. Ask any Pakistan fan

 

[GIMH]

Inzy's late career form against England was frightening, **** scared me. Hayden overall though.

 

[TT Boy]

Haydos.

 

[shankar]

Quite.

Batting averages of touring batsmen in South Africa since 1990, by position

Opening		27.59
Number 3	32.16
Number 4	32.61
Number 5	34.63

It drops away after that, although that's obviously because the quality of batsmen starts dropping away. Using simple multiplication, Hayden's average of ~ 34 in South Africa would be the equivalent of averaging ~ 43 down at 5 where Inzy often batted.

The gap is reduced significantly in the post 2002 period (when Hayden scored his runs) where the averages are

Opening		34.31
Number 3	35.70
Number 4	36.55
Number 5	37.32

 

[GotSpin]

Inzi for his entries into this video

YouTube - ‪The Top Ten Weird Dismissals Of Cricket!!‬‏

 

[PhoenixFire]

Inzamam one of my 5 favourite cricketers ever, so I'd probably go with him as there isn't much to choose between them.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Hayden. Its close, though.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Inzaman got 205 more runs in 17 more matches. So Hayden comes out ahead if you add in the match difference.

 

[Daemon]

Inzaman got 205 more runs in 17 more matches. So Hayden comes out ahead if you add in the match difference.

That's got to be the worst way of comparison ever

 

[BlazeDragon]

That's got to be the worst way of comparison ever

Statistically. All the other ways comparisons have been made already.

 

[Prince EWS]

That's got to be the worst way of comparison ever

Haha yeah; he did a similar thing in the McGrath/Wasim thread I think. Reckon the idea just dawned on him.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Haha yeah; he did a similar thing in the McGrath/Wasim thread I think. Reckon the idea just dawned on him.

Ah! I gotta start doing this with details now instead of just looking at stats. What a pain.

Honestly though I think Hayden helped his team get more victories than Inzamam.

 

[ankitj]

I have said it a few time before and I will repeat: average in wins is an ass statistic.

In general any post facto filter on data is a bad idea. Match won or lost is not a condition that applies when a match is on unlike quality of opposition and type of pitch. So you can't necessarily say that it makes performance more challenging.

Secondly, filter by wins also biases the sample the wrong way. Any team wins more matches against weaker teams and in favourable conditions. So % of matches against Aus/SA or matches abroad will go down when you zero down to Inzy's stat in wins. If anything, that tells you that average in losses/draws is a better stat to look at.

Thirdly, if you are the only star performer in your batting lineup your team will mostly win matches only on back of your performances and you will have a better average in wins. Just compare Andy Flower's average in wins to that of Tendulkars and Pontings whose teams win matches even on the back of Sehwags, Laxmans, Gilchrists, Haydens etc.

 

[Burgey]

Different players, different roles. I don't know that it's easy to compare them.

I'll always love the aggrieved look Inzi got when he was comically run out.