Were the Australian batsmen Overrated?

[simmy]

Ponting said that only Flintoff would get into his side when the series started.

Wonder what he thinks now!

So overrated. Except for Langer... he is class, mentally and in his play.

 

[Shane Warne]

Ponting said that only Flintoff would get into his side when the series started.

Wonder what he thinks now!.

So overrated. Except for Langer... he is class, mentally and in his play.

Agreed.

 

[deeps]

I've long said this

The quality of bowling has deminished drastically. Gone are the days when Curtly ambrose would charge in, with the sole intent of hurting you. Getting you out was a second preference.

Nowadays, bowlers will bowl one bouncer here and there, and just walk back to their mark. There is no glare or confrontation. Essentially, the mental battle is so much easier.

Then come the pitches. Flat as a surfboard. No assistance for the bowlers, except in english conditions where the ball swings in the air.

All this, has made batting so much easier for batsman. Hayden has been around cricket for a long long time, but was never really that successful, until after the greats like Akram, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald had all retired, or gone past their prime.

The way i see it, in the past 15 years, there have been some great bowlers, such as the ones outlined above. Of the current playing bowlers, only a few are 'great'. These are Mcgrath, Warne, Muralitharan, Pollock and maybe a few i've missed.

These are all older players, who were around before. Sure, Harmison, Jones, Flintoff etc are good bowlers, but they aren't really in the same category of the waqars and wasims. They dnt put fear in the batsmans mind.

The likes of Steve Waugh have what it takes to counter the great bowling of ambrose etc. on a helpful pitch. If we were to put Hayden, Martyn, Katich etc. on one of those pitches, with Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh charging in, i'd put my money on none of them making more than 20.

Langer has wat it takes to grind out an innings as well. they change their style of play to suit the situation. Hayden refuses to change his style enough to suit the situation. He will block a few overs and then lose the plot.

 

[Shane Warne]

I've long said this

The quality of bowling has deminished drastically. Gone are the days when Curtly ambrose would charge in, with the sole intent of hurting you. Getting you out was a second preference.

Nowadays, bowlers will bowl one bouncer here and there, and just walk back to their mark. There is no glare or confrontation. Essentially, the mental battle is so much easier.

Then come the pitches. Flat as a surfboard. No assistance for the bowlers, except in english conditions where the ball swings in the air.

All this, has made batting so much easier for batsman. Hayden has been around cricket for a long long time, but was never really that successful, until after the greats like Akram, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald had all retired, or gone past their prime.

The way i see it, in the past 15 years, there have been some great bowlers, such as the ones outlined above. Of the current playing bowlers, only a few are 'great'. These are Mcgrath, Warne, Muralitharan, Pollock and maybe a few i've missed.

These are all older players, who were around before. Sure, Harmison, Jones, Flintoff etc are good bowlers, but they aren't really in the same category of the waqars and wasims. They put fear in the batsmans mind.

The likes of Steve Waugh have what it takes to counter the great bowling of ambrose etc. on a helpful pitch. If we were to put Hayden, Martyn, Katich etc. on one of those pitches, with Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh charging in, i'd put my money on none of them making more than 20.

Langer has wat it takes to grind out an innings as well. they change their style of play to suit the situation. Hayden refuses to change his style enough to suit the situation. He will block a few overs and then lose the plot.

Good points.

 

[C_C]

Underrated Aussie players : Langer, Kaspa, Katich
Overrated Aussie players : Hayden, Warne

Rest are more or less as good as they are rated IMO.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I feel, if you take the spread of Australian teams in their dominant period, Mark Waugh could also be called slightly overrated in tests, as for all his glorious strokeplay and occasional matchwinning brilliance he was never anything like as consistent as you would like, while he got credit for being a great.

Hayden's simply very much a confidence player I think. He overcomes his technical failings with brutal intensity, and his purple patch was, really, one of the best and most dominant ever seen. He never really deserved the best batsman in the world tag (from those few who gave it to him anyway), but he's clearly a very good player and was worthy of his spot. The way he demolished India in 2001 alone was quite remarkable.

And well, I don't think Warne is overrated.

The thing which makes the Australian batting lineup of recent times one of the best ever is, along with various other great batsmen like Steve Waugh, Langer, Martyn, Ponting etc, the Gilchrist factor. No team has ever had someone coming in at the end of a batting lineup who averaged close to 60 at a phenomenal strike rate throughout the bulk of his career, and you are basically adding an extra great batsman onto an already formiddable top 6.

 

[C_C]

I think Warney is an excellent bowler and probably the best ever leggie, but in all honesty, he is overrated.
His record is superior to most mainly due to his longetivity and having an awesome bowling cast to support him but he's rarely succeeded against teams who can play spin and there isnt much to choose between Warney and Kumble/Chandra/Bedi etc.....

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I think Warney is an excellent bowler and probably the best ever leggie, but in all honesty, he is overrated.
His record is superior to most mainly due to his longetivity and having an awesome bowling cast to support him but he's rarely succeeded against teams who can play spin and there isnt much to choose between Warney and Kumble/Chandra/Bedi etc.....

Going to have to bail on responding to this, because it usually turns into an argument and I don't want the thread to get closed. I'm sure we've been over it before anyway.

 

[C_C]

 

[Sanz]

Over rated - Hayden,Martyn
Underrated - Langer, Katich

 

[honestbharani]

I guess everyone agrees that Langer is under rated and Hayden is over rated. Quite an opening partnership, that, isn't it?

 

[PY]

Katich is a perfect example of how they are overrated. Playing wafty shots outside offstump whilst batting time is pathetic and he has been doing it all series.

Not unlike Trescothick then, lost count in the times he has done that when England need to occupy time at the crease.

 

[simmy]

Tres gets runs though. Katich has done nothing on this tour.

 

[simmy]

Underrated Aussie players : Langer, Kaspa, Katich
Overrated Aussie players : Hayden, Warne

Rest are more or less as good as they are rated IMO.

Warne is not overrated! Can spin the ball on any track, has every type of spinning and non-spinning delivery available to him. He's the most genius cricketer I have ever seen play.

 

[howardj]

All this, has made batting so much easier for batsman. Hayden has been around cricket for a long long time, but was never really that successful, until after the greats like Akram, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Donald had all retired, or gone past their prime.

.

Glad someone else noticed this. I cheered like mad for Haydos when growing up, but it's fair to say that he's always been owned by the great fast bowlers. Watching Ambrose bowl to him in 1996/97 was a massive mis-match. Likewise, he could hardly get it off the square against Walsh. Again this series, with Harmison and Flintoff, he looks out-classed. He's a good player, but it's fair to say that it's lucky he played in this era.

 

[cameeel]

How can the all-time leading test wicket taker be called over-rated. by the logic, wasnt allan border an over rated batsman?

 

[C_C]

How can the all-time leading test wicket taker be called over-rated. by the logic, wasnt allan border an over rated batsman?

Warney is a great bowler but he is given too much credit IMO...he has rarely done it against excellent oppositions of spin and has benifitted a LOT from McGrath-Gillespie removing the top order with consistency, exposing the middle and lower middle order far more frequently than what Murali or Kumble is accustomed to.
It is hardly surprising therefore, that when McGrath is absent and Warney is bowling more in Murali-esque or Kumble-esque bowling support, he averages 27+ with the ball.
Which is why i see comparing him with Murali akin to comparing Hobbs to Bradman.
Both are great but one is simply categorically superior.

 

[marc71178]

Sorry, but which of the 2 spinners has vastly inflated his figures against Zimbabwe?

 

[tassietiger]

If any of these players you are talking about hit a decent patch of form you'll soon realise who is overrated. One player in the Australian team has been up to their usual standard, and that is McGrath before he was injured. Ponting's innings was not so much an in-form knock as determination to get runs. Even Warney hasn't been quite as damaging as he normally is (not taking into account his work with the bat). It's not that they're getting old, they just inconveniently synchronised their bad patches. The whole lot would normally smash the poo that they are being bowled.

The whole team need to sit down and take a good hard look at themselves, and then the English team. Then look at the scoreline. That should embarrass them enough to make them really fix this whole debacle up.

And the selectors should stick with Gillespie. He'd be first-picked in the Pommy bowling lineup and not without good reason. They stuck with Langer, Martyn and Symonds when they had bad patches, so stick with the big Diz. At least he can bat at the other end while Gilchrist is smacking his triple century off 5 overs (yes, Flintoff will bowl)

 

[tassietiger]

Glad someone else noticed this. I cheered like mad for Haydos when growing up, but it's fair to say that he's always been owned by the great fast bowlers. Watching Ambrose bowl to him in 1996/97 was a massive mis-match. Likewise, he could hardly get it off the square against Walsh. Again this series, with Harmison and Flintoff, he looks out-classed. He's a good player, but it's fair to say that it's lucky he played in this era.

Well is it fair to say Flintoff was 'owned' by the bowlers of a few years ago? Apparently not, because you can't base it on 'before Flintoff was good'.

Hayden was not the batsman then that he is now, and I'm sure if he had his time over, he would've made a better fist of it.