*Official* Matthew Hayden Career Discussion

[Sanz]

It is 'robelinda' not "Robellina".

 

[Burgey]

I know I am opening a can of worms here but if Hayden is a Ftb then what about Lillee?Would people say he isn't an Atg or atleast rate him below others who have stellar records home and away,in and out of the sc?

Are you Bhupindersingh in disguise?

He played four tests on the SC at the fag end of a great career. Ask anyone who faced him as to what they thought of him as a bowler. There should also be some footage around of places like Adelaide, Sydney and the MCG for an idea of what the pitches were like there. Melbourne was so low and slow Lillee in one test reduced his run up to four steps and bowled medium pace cutters. He was a great, great bowler.

 

[morgieb]

My views on Haydos - he is an FTB, but a damn effective one imo. Scoring runs in easy conditions > scoring less runs in tougher conditions. Averaging 52 >>>> averaging 41, pretty much.

 

[howardj]

The Big Man's autobiog is out now.

Not sure whether to buy it.

 

[Ikki]

I'm reading it now. Not bad. Got it as a Bday present and got his signature.

 

[andyc]

SMH, what ignorance is this.

With all due respect stay out of this discussion sir, you have conclusively proven you total lack of understanding of Hayden career & while totally misunderstanding the above post. All you are doing now is trolling me now, so for both our sakes & sanity lets not have anything more to say to each other on this matter in this thread.

Leave this Hayden discussion to people like myself, Top Cat, Robellina. AUS fans who definately saw most of Hayden tests matches live & would this have the proper judgement of his career, unlike the average observer of AUS cricket matters like yourself.

This is in no way acceptable, aussie. It's a forum on the internet; people are allowed to enter into any discussion they want. If you want to dictate who can and can't enter a conversation, you can talk about cricket at the pub with your mates.

Also, please remember that just because something may seem to be true for you, it may not be the same case for everyone; simply insisting that your points make sense and anything else defies logic isn't going to lead to constructive conversation.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Are you Bhupindersingh in disguise?

He played four tests on the SC at the fag end of a great career. Ask anyone who faced him as to what they thought of him as a bowler. There should also be some footage around of places like Adelaide, Sydney and the MCG for an idea of what the pitches were like there. Melbourne was so low and slow Lillee in one test reduced his run up to four steps and bowled medium pace cutters. He was a great, great bowler.

I am not arguing that he wasn't an ATG bowler.I only started watching cricket seriously in 1990,so I will happily concede that the opinions and viewpoints of those who saw him play>raw numbers any day of the week.

But if people are going to call Hayden,who at least scored centuries in England,South Africa,a FTB simply for his below par record,then one should have no qualms about Lillee's record being questioned-yes he only played 4 tests in the SC(didn't he refuse to tour India a couple of times btw?),but you could argue that his record isn't as complete as a McGrath's or an Imran Khan's.Does that mean he isn't an ATG though?Definitely not.

Coming to Hayden,I don't think he was a FTB at all.Did enough in adverse conditions for mine.Whether he is ATG or not is arguable(I would have him a rung below Ponting) but FTB he was not!

 

[Sanz]

I didn't know I started this thread. But good that the old thread is split.

Okay, So those who continue to call Hayden a FTB, can you please make a case a case for your argument as opposed to repeating the broken record like Mumbai 2001 to Cairns 2004.

List out all the tests where he faced a quality attack and failed or Succeeded, compare it with his contemporaries and see how well or worse he did.

 

[aussie]

I didn't know I started this thread. But good that the old thread is split.

Okay, So those who continue to call Hayden a FTB, can you please make a case a case for your argument as opposed to repeating the broken record like Mumbai 2001 to Cairns 2004.

List out all the tests where he faced a quality attack and failed or Succeeded, compare it with his contemporaries and see how well or worse he did.

SMH.

Nobody continues to call Hayden a FTB. The point his he was a FTB for a large portion of his test career during his batting peak from Mumabi 2001 - Cairns 20004 (which is an undisputed fact), then he corrected those faults of that period @ the back end of his career & retired no longer a FTB. Do you understand this?????.

Although it would be a useless exercise comparing Hayden to his contemporaries of the 2000s era, given many have failed to eradicte their faults like Hayden did. Any specific batsman you would like to compare Hayden to?.

 

[Sanz]

Okay take the period between Mumbai 2001 - Cairns 2004. Test by test and analyze.

 

[aussie]

Okay take the period between Mumbai 2001 - Cairns 2004. Test by test and analyze.

That would be a useless analysis. Since without even having to check i am confident during that period, his contemporaries scored fairly heavily just like him againts joke attacks (pace attacks) on roads. No good pace bowling attack existed worldwide consistently between 2001-2004 except for Australia's.

The only thing you can really compare given i said Hayden corrected his faults @ the back end of his career. Is to look @ the entire 2000s era (2000-2009) & compare how many hundreds Hayden scored againts quality pace attacks compared to his contemporaries.

 

[Sanz]

That would be a useless analysis. Since without even having to check i am confident during that period, his contemporaries scored fairly heavily just like him againts joke attacks (pace attacks) on roads. No good pace bowling attack existed worldwide consistently between 2001-2004 except for Australia's.

The only thing you can really compare given i said Hayden corrected his faults @ the back end of his career. Is to look @ the entire 2000s era (2000-2009) & compare how many hundreds Hayden scored againts quality pace attacks compared to his contemporaries.

That is unbelievable argument, Blew my mind.

 

[robelinda]

Think I'd have to agree, i'm not sure any other pace attack in that time period was more consistent than Australia's, and I dont think its a far fected argument- we were outstanding in that period, for the most part, certainly a lot better than Eng, WI, SA, NZ, India, SL.

 

[Flem274*]

Seriously aussie, you're going to call Hayden a FTB, yet say he's not a FTB, and then when asked to provided evidence you say the excercise is useless? All the while acting like you know better than everyone?

Back it up or shut up.

 

[NUFAN]

I must admit that I never once heard Hayden on the stump-cam mic swear, ridicule or take lunch money from a flat track, therefore he is not a flat track bully.

 

[aussie]

Think I'd have to agree, i'm not sure any other pace attack in that time period was more consistent than Australia's, and I dont think its a far fected argument- we were outstanding in that period, for the most part, certainly a lot better than Eng, WI, SA, NZ, India, SL.

The intelligent elder has arrived.

 

[aussie]

Seriously aussie, you're going to call Hayden a FTB, yet say he's not a FTB, and then when asked to provided evidence you say the excercise is useless? All the while acting like you know better than everyone?

Back it up or shut up.

SMH. No you shut up. This has gotten utterly ridiculous.

You making this thing sound as if Hayden carrer debate on CW started just now. I along with many other have argued it to death many times over the last 5 years on this site. A simple search on CW would find manyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy arguments of this being repeated over & over.

I already explained to poster Sanz earlier in this thread why Hayden was a FTB & how he corrected his faults:

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2352225-post13.html

He is right. Unfortunately i dont think you understand Hayden's career.

Since take if from me & man who say all Hayden test live in this 2000s era & who is big fan of his, who i always pick him to open in Australia's ATXI. Hayden was a supreme FTB from Mumbai 2001 - Cairns 2004, that is without question. He never faced a quality pace bowling attack in bowling friendly conditons during that period, he just dominated qulaity spin on turners & joke pace attacks on roads.

The only time in that Mumabi 01 - Cairns 04 period he faced a quality pace attack in bowler friendly condtions was Ashes 01 & while all the other AUS batsmen did well. Hayden was the only inf from batsman who didn't score a hundred & struggled againts the swing.

His failures in Ashes 05 was a direct consequence of it being the first time since Ashes 01 that he faced a quality pace attack & those old technical flaws where readily exposed. But he corrected that flaw with his Oval hundred, runs vs SA 05/06, MCG 06 & IND 07/08.

He then goes on to tell me, that what i'm saying is a broken record. Now wants me to prove Hayden was better againts his contemporaries between 2001-2004, scoring runs againts quality pace attacks. When i fact no other bowling attack in the world during that period, had a quality pace attack except for Australia (his own team).

 

[robelinda]

Elder, hey I'm not that old! I havent seen Bradman play!

Seriously though, pace bowling wasnt particularly strong in the early 2000's, Pakistan still had Wasim and Waqar, but they werent causing Australia many problems, though they did ok in England in 2001. Shoaib when fit was hit and miss. WI were just getting used to life after Walsh, and were blackwashed 5-0 in Aus. SA too were discovering life after Donald, and Pollock had become slow and steady, the backup seamers were hopeless, Nel was probably the best and he was/is decidedly average. England were still trotting out Gough, Caddick, Cork, Tudor.

Hayden was seriously good in that 02 test series vs Pakistan, and played the WI quicks well on the 03 tour. SA did unleash Hayward on the Aussies but he was unable to sustain aggression, Hayden walloped him.

By the way, Hayden's book is fabulous. You gotta read his stories about his battles with Shoaib Akhtar, hilarious stuff. Hayden totally won the mental battle there, in a big way.

All in all, I gotta say I dont know what the deal is here, I dont care at all if someone thinks Hayden is a FTB, he made 30 tons, bloody champ. Loved his batting, love his commentary. Anyone who sticks it up Boycott is a legend! So funny when Boycott walked out of commentary, up yours Geoffrey!

 

[Flem274*]

SMH. No you shut up. This has gotten utterly ridiculous

You making this thing sound as if Hayden carrer debate on CW started just now. I along with many other have argued it to death many times over the last 5 years on this site. A simple search on CW would find manyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy arguments of this being repeated over & over.

Doesn't matter. You want to start the arguments, you better bring something to the table.

And wasting the search function on your posts will only happen if I compose an Aussie: Greatest Slips collection.

I already explained to poster Sanz earlier in this thread why Hayden was a FTB & how he corrected his faults:

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2352225-post13.html

That post contradicts itself about ten thousand times. Including Hayden in an all time Australian eleven despite being, in your view, a flat track bully is astonishing.

He then goes on to tell me, that what i'm saying is a broken record. Now wants me to prove Hayden was better againts his contemporaries between 2001-2004, scoring runs againts quality pace attacks. When i fact no other bowling attack in the world during that period, had a quality pace attack except for Australia (his own team).

Cool story bro. Pollock and Ntini not good enough for ya? What about Caddick, Hoggard and Gough? The Pakistanis?

 

[aussie]

Doesn't matter. You want to start the arguments, you better bring something to the table.

And wasting the search function on your posts will only happen if I compose an Aussie: Greatest Slips collection.

I already brought something to the table, which was brought before years ago in many different arguments. The other AUS posters in this thread had a fairly sane discussion about it, its only youself & Sanz - the non AUS supporters who are making the ludicrous comments.

That post contradicts itself about ten thousand times. Including Hayden in an all time Australian eleven despite being, in your view, a flat track bully is astonishing.

DEAR GOD. SMFH.

For the one million time. My view in that post is Hayden WAS a FTB. Who at the back end of his test career (post Ashes 05) corrected that flaws which made him a FTB. Which is why i always pick him in my AUS ATXI, since he showed that key adaptability, that alot of other FTBs in the 2000s era didn't.Which convinced me, that the post Ashes 05 Hayden would have been a very solid opener if he had to face quality pace bowling consistently. Do you understand the difference???????????.

Cool story bro. Pollock and Ntini not good enough for ya? What about Caddick, Hoggard and Gough? The Pakistanis?

. When i see such comments i really have to wonder if some you pay keen attention to detail to evolution & decline of players careers on CW.

If is common cricket knowledge that Pollock declined significantly in the 2000s era, compared to the bowler he was between 1995/96 - 2001/02 (after the series vs AUS when he suffered his second career injury - a shoulder injury).

Then between BANG 2001/02 to PAK 03/04 (the faisalabad test when he took his last 5 wicket haul), was his last decent/quality period as a test bowler. Then from 03/04 to 07/08 he was very average, hE had become medium pace, all his zip had gone. In a test in Sri Lanka 06 i remember he was reduced to bowling off-spin even. Shaun Pollock on the decline | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Shaun Pollock on the decline

Shaun Pollock and Chaminda Vaas have both lost considerable pace over the last couple of years, but while Vaas continues to be a force as a bowler, Pollock's numbers have declined alarmingly

S Rajesh

August 11, 2006

Text size: A | A

Shaun Pollock tries his hand at offspin. Over the last 15 Tests, Pollock the bowler has struggled to be a potent force © AFP




The second Test between Sri Lanka and South Africa in Colombo was among the most exciting matches in recent times - wickets and runs came at a brisk rate, and neither team dominated for long stretches - but in the midst of all that excitement, a little side story that got ignored completely was the performances of two aging stars who are battling to shine like they did in their pomp.

Shaun Pollock is 33 years old, while Chaminda Vaas is just five months short of 33; both missed the first Test due to various reasons, and both returned remarkably similar figures in the second: Vaas bowled 37 overs, and managed meagre returns of 1 for 124; Pollock bowled two fewer overs and got a solitary wicket for 112 (though more than just the figures, what was a telling sign of Pollock's decline was to see him resort to offspin after being tonked over his head for six by Sanath Jayasuriya). With the bat, though, both had more success, indicating perhaps the direction in which both their careers might be headed - Pollock scored 71 runs in the match to Vaas's 68, with each getting to a half-century.

In the most recent four Tests - including the tour to England earlier this year and the Test against South Africa - Vaas only has a tally of six wickets at 64.83, but generally over the last couple of years his bowling has been fairly incisive. Easily the more alarming decline has been Pollock's - in his last 15 Tests the bowling average has ballooned to 37, more than one-and-a-half times his career average, which itself has gone up from 21.79 to 23.42 during this period. While he took a wicket every 56 balls in his first 87 matches, in his last 15 that figure is a less-than-distinguished 82, with no five-wicket hauls. Pollock's career summary in his last 15 Tests also reveals one other shocking number - an overseas average of 73, with a strike rate of a wicket every 141 balls.

Vaas's recent numbers, on the other hand, stand up to scrutiny much better - the batting average touches 30, while with the ball too he has been a handful, averaging 25.44 with a strike rate which is ten balls lesser than his career stat. (Click here for Vaas's career summary over his last 15 Tests.)

Vaas and Pollock as batsmen Last 15 - Runs Average Career Average Difference
Chaminda Vaas 550 30.55 22.75 7.80
Shaun Pollock 515 28.61 31.95 -3.34


Vaas and Pollock as bowlers Last 15 - Wickets Average Career average Difference
Chaminda Vaas 52 25.44 29.51 4.07
Shaun Pollock 42 37.16 23.42 -13.74



It's also interesting to compare the numbers of Vaas and Pollock with the performances of the great allrounders of the past in their last few matches. Among the four great ones in the 1980s, Ian Botham was easily the one with the most undistinguished last 15 matches: both his batting and his bowling stats dipped to far below their usual normal. Kapil Dev became a less potent force with the ball towards the end, taking only 30 wickets in his last 15 matches, but he still managed a bowling average of 29.33. However, the number of overs he bowled per Test came down drastically from 36 in his first 116 matches, to just 27 in his last 15. Imran Khan's hardly bowled much in his sunset days, but became a giant of a batsman, averaging nearly 73, while Richard Hadlee's skills with both ball and bat remained virtually untarnished with age. And the greatest of them all, Garry Sobers, averaged more than 50 with the bat and less than 30 with the ball in his last 15 Tests. You can't argue with numbers like those.


A half-century of hundreds
The other veteran bowler in the Sri Lankan side, though, has been wheeling away over after over, and adding bucketfuls of wickets to his tally every match. With his 12-wicket haul in the second Test, Murali equalled his own record of taking ten or more wickets in four consecutive Tests. However, had he conceded three more runs in the second innings, Murali would have achieved another first - he would have become the first bowler in the history of Test cricket to concede 100 or more runs in an innings 50 times. Murali has so far taken 175 wickets in the 49 innings in which he has gone for more than 100, with only Anil Kumble anywhere close to him. In fact other than Murali, only three other bowlers - Kumble, Shane Warne and Botham - have had a three-figure number in their runs column more than 30 times. The table below gives the top eight, and it's interesting that Danish Kaneria already has 26 such instances in 39 Tests - that's as many as Abdul Qadir managed in his entire career - and the ratio of Tests to 100-plus innings is far lesser than any other bowler who has given away more than 100 at least 16 times.

Bowlers who've conceded 100 or more runs most number of times Bowler Innings Wickets Average Tests/ 100+ innings ratio
Muttiah Muralitharan 49 175 37.21 2.20
Anil Kumble 43 132 43.62 2.56
Shane Warne 37 117 38.15 3.78
Ian Botham 31 88 42.31 3.29
Danish Kaneria 26 76 43.03 1.50
Abdul Qadir 26 74 42.51 2.58
Kapil Dev 25 70 44.10 5.24
BS Chandrasekhar 22 74 36.84 2.64/

Same thing goes for Ntini. I already illustrated how his career progressed & why he was NOT a quality test bowler when Hayden faced him during the 2001-2004 period:

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2352985-post32.html

No sir. Ntini in 2001/02 vs AUS was a piss poor test bowler. This is how i'd summarise Ntini's test career:

In the early years of his career between 98-2003 Ntni averaged (evening leaving out ZIM & BANG) 29. Now this i found very suprising since i remember seeing Ntini bowl live vs ENG 98, AUS 2001/02 & WI 20001 & he was really a nothing test bowler, i was expecting an average of in the mid 30s or something. I don't know if because during the period he was able to carried behind Donald/Pollock etc, but IMO stats of those early days dont reflect his career well at all.

- Then From Lord's 2003 - Georgetown 2005 this is when he first qualified as test quality. Before then he anything special in test cricket.

- Then from Trinidad 2005 - Nagpur 2008. He peaked & at point here was arguably the best fast bowler in the buisness, especially when SA where playing AUS around 05/06.

- Then from England 2008 - England 2010. He declined significantly & was dropped.

So based on that it fairly clear Ntini was crap when he faced AUS in 2001/02. You compare that Ntini back then to the one AUS encounted in 2005/06 when he seriously tested all our batsmen & the gap in quality is super significant.

Its is very common knowledge that the Gough/Caddick partnership which lead England to those superb results in 2000, declined during the 2001 Ashes when Hayden faced them. Plus even in decline Hayden was the only in form Australia batsman coming of his monumental tour of India 2001, who failed to register a hundred on that tour. Which basically proves my point about his struggles in test ATT againts the moving ball.

Also with Hoggard, it also very common cricket knowledge that the Hoggard Hayden faced between 2001-2004 (Ashes 02/03) was very average. He was in the early stages of his career back then & he was only good when the ball was swinging. I'm sure you haven't forgetton what he did to your NZ side @ Christchurch 2002. Hoggard hadn't become a complete test bowler until India 2006 when he leart to reverse-swing the ball. So what you have here is Hayden spanking Hoggard on flat pitches in Ashes 02/03, but Hoggard being one of the bowlers to expose Hayden's technical faults in Ashes 05. Again proving my point of his struggles againts the moving ball & quality bowling in test during that period.

Pakistan never had a good attack when Hayden faced them between 2001-2004. Again this is very common knowledge that after Wasim/Waqar went & Saqlain declined significantly after people began to pick his doosra. PAK attack was a mess, with Akhtar being in & out of the team due to injuries etc for the majority of the decade. Its only in recent years has Pakistan finally put together a quality bowling attack & surprise surprise Hayden has retired.