Matthew Hayden- I mean come on, seriously

[Burgey]

He lost it after 13 years of international cricket, which is not all that young. Its about miles put on the body as much as the age. Thats why you see two decade careers being seen less often now. Almost 400 ODI games and 130+ Test games take their toll, regardless of age.

Good post. And injuries as well - one can also look at the example of Jason Gillespie as a cricketer who aged prematurely owing to wear and tear and, in his case, some very serious injuries early on which compromised his longevity.

Back on Hayden, for those who think he's a nuffie, the view of the King might be worthy of note:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/viv-hails-hayden/2007/03/28/1174761567508.html

 

[Burgey]

Simple stuff, chap. Lets try it again : Relativistic comparison is meaningless without an empirical standard, unless ofcourse, you happen to be 3x better than your next-best competitor ala Bradman.

Simple enough ? Clear ? This is such a simple point, really. Do you agree or disagree- a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer please. No BS.



There is a saying in hindi- which i think you should comprehend : Sau sonar ki aur ek lohar ki

That is concise enough.

And there's a quote in English you need to comprehend - Jealousy's a curse.

I get the impression that were Ponting & Hayden not contemporary Australian players, you'd be lauding their achievements with gusto.

 

[Fiery]

The master of the pre-medicated six? Wouldn't that be Shoaib bowling an over?

Ha just noticed my faux pas

 

[C_C]

And there's a quote in English you need to comprehend - Jealousy's a curse.

I get the impression that were Ponting & Hayden not contemporary Australian players, you'd be lauding their achievements with gusto.

Pffft.
Like...really. As i used to say before- this is just ultimately a small thing in grand scheme of things- a dude whacking a ball with a stick and another chasing it. If i were or am jealous/emotional about something, i think it'd have to be more meaningful than a sport.

 

[C_C]

Its nice to see that you ignored my post from where I explained in detail Hayden's early career or was there too many words for you.

You've been around long enough to know that i am often accused of being too long-winded. So no, not too many words- i just dont agree with your version of events since i too, watched a lot of cricket through the 90s. Hayden was hopelessly outclassed back then because as i said, the guy has no backfoot play. Infact, Hayden did quite well in India and i think he could be a half-decent ( ie, 35-40-ish) average guy in the middle under good pitch/bowling attacks.
This is because he has quite decent front-foot play and can read spinners the best amongst Aussies since Mark Waugh. But as an opener, Hayden in the 90s is the same Hayden today technically and in skill level. He just has a lot more confidence today than in the 90s because he knows if he tries to bat the way he does against good fast bowlers on good surfaces like say Ambrose in Brisbane or Donald in Cape Town he'd get owned pretty quickly.

 

[Ikki]

I swear you have told Kaz that at least 15 times

Yes, and then Kaz has pointed Lara out about 15 times.

 

[C_C]

Yes, and then Kaz has pointed Lara out about 15 times.

Lara has a lot less mileage on himself than Tendulkar- Tendulkar has played for longer, and far more matches (slightly more tests and far more ODIs). Plus Lara didnt become a regular in both formats till he was 22-23 or so. Ie, when he was physically developed completely, instead of being exposed at a much tender age.

Exposure at a very young age = burnouts at an earlier age.

Dunno why such a simple thing doesn't go through your skull.

 

[honestbharani]

Fixed, Matt

WAT? That match was FIXED? That explains Hayden's success then.






joking.

 

[honestbharani]

I bet if you remove those two, and maybe one other batsman, the average would be much closer to their career average. So why would that be improbable? They did well against them. Thats what good players do. I'm sure there were other instances where Ambrose and Walsh got on top of Tendy and Dravid, and I wouldn't say: "Well, Tendulkar just had a bad series, it wasn't Ambrose doing well with the ball."

Ambit and Walsh were most definitely NOT anywhere near their best during that series. Trust me, I have seen them somewhere near their best circa 93 and 95 and this was nowhere close to it. They were still a class apart and a batsman had to bat really well against them to score runs, but they were NOT anywhere near their best.

 

[pup11]

The only problem with Matty Hayden is motivation if he is motivated to get something done then more or less he does it.

Yesterday Tony Cozier asked Hayden "on what background was he out of the Aussie odi side"? He simply said i don't know on what background i was out, but i wanted to do well once more in odi's for Australia.


Now you can clearly see a i determined Hayden is causing havoc for other teams and he looks almost unstoppable.

 

[pup11]

Haydos since his comeback has got the following records under his belt:-

1. Highest individual score in an odi innings by an Australian- 181*

2.Quickest century in WC history(in terms of balls faced)- 66 balls

3.Highest individual score in an innings by an Australian in WC history- 158


4.Only Australian player to get 2 consecutive centuries in WC history- 101 and 158.


So thats one hell of a comeback, isn't it?

 

[silentstriker]

Yes, and then Kaz has pointed Lara out about 15 times.

And people ignore it because it makes no sense. Starting at 16 is different from starting at 21. There is a big difference.

Besides, just because Walsh was able to bowl fast for twenty years, doesn't mean you expect every bowler to be able to do that.

 

[Ikki]

Lara has a lot less mileage on himself than Tendulkar- Tendulkar has played for longer, and far more matches (slightly more tests and far more ODIs). Plus Lara didnt become a regular in both formats till he was 22-23 or so. Ie, when he was physically developed completely, instead of being exposed at a much tender age.

Exposure at a very young age = burnouts at an earlier age.

Dunno why such a simple thing doesn't go through your skull.

Lara started 1 year after Sachin and has 4 tests less overall. The mileage is more than similar. What is not similar is that 28+ Sachin has been pretty crappy, yet Lara has steadied and remained a class batsmen.

To argue that someone, even debuting at age 16, burns out at age 28 is the most ridiculous argument you can bring to insult any sportsmen. The age of 28 is the peak of almost all sportsmen in their physical and mental capacity. Pele started when he was 16 (and this is football we're talking here) yet he was still prime at age 30 winning the world cup in 70. Don't try and tell me Pele didn't face as pressure from Brazil fans just because India has more people in it.

Absolutely stupid argument to be honest.

 

[Ikki]

And people ignore it because it makes no sense. Starting at 16 is different from starting at 21. There is a big difference.

Besides, just because Walsh was able to bowl fast for twenty years, doesn't mean you expect every bowler to be able to do that.

It makes plenty of sense. Because while falling off at age 28 is something, to keep being one of the best batsmen around consistently till age 37-38 is another. By your theory of 'mileage' Lara should have dropped into Tendulkar's current form 4 years ago. He hasn't, and any assertion that 'mileage' is Sachin's only problem is absolutely inane.

 

[silentstriker]

It makes plenty of sense. Because while falling off at age 28 is something, to keep being one of the best batsmen around consistently till age 37-38 is another. By your theory of 'mileage' Lara should have dropped into Tendulkar's current form 4 years ago. He hasn't, and any assertion that 'mileage' is Sachin's only problem is absolutely inane.

Only valid if they had started playing around the same age, as has been mentioned by others.

 

[Ikki]

Only valid if they had started playing around the same age, as has been mentioned by others.

You seem to miss the point. If playing for 12-13 years is what the mileage issue is about, then we can jot down that from 16 to 28 is Sachin's good years. Taking that same point for Lara, that means Lara who debuted at 21 would start hitting Sachin's bad form at age 33+. Yet he HASN'T. Get it? From 33-37 Lara has averaged 57 dude. The last 4 years he's averaged that much and done that against the best sides. It's really simple, my friend.

 

[simmy]

Hayden for me is a flat track bully. But a very very good bully.

 

[silentstriker]

You seem to miss the point. If playing for 12-13 years is what the mileage issue is about

It's not. Read it again. Starting at 21 is different from starting at 16, even with same mileage. And that is not even getting into the fact that believe it or not, some players can naturally last longer than others (eg Walsh).

 

[Ikki]

It's not. Read it again. Starting at 21 is different from starting at 16, even with same mileage. And that is not even getting into the fact that believe it or not, some players can naturally last longer than others (eg Walsh).

Sorry mate, if I'm not clear with my implications, but I keep saying the same point.

It's understandable for someone who is 16 years old to burn out early, just as it would be understandable for a 37-38 year old batsmen to drop form. Yet Lara hasn't. It goes both ways. HOWEVER, what is really silly is trying to excuse Sachin's form since 28 years of age. That's just crap. From 32 sure, that's more than understandable, but at 28? You must be having a laugh.

It seems no one wants to accept that Sachin is not batting well. People will have dips in form for any old thing: life is hectic, injury, been too high for too long. It's something everyone will have to deal with. Sachin is not that special in this regard. For the past 4 years, overall, Sachin hasn't been playing very well AT all. Some people have to wake up and start accepting that, instead of making excuses for his every flaw.

 

[silentstriker]

What the hell? Who exactly said he was batting well for the last four years?