-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Hayden vs Hussain
- Thread starter Swervy
- Start date
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Whoosh.
pup11
International Coach
As far as i am concerned Hayden v/s Hussain comparison makes no sense.
They are completly different players and their styles of batting are also completly different.
Hayden is an opener and Hussain isn't, Hussain had a cautious approach towards batting, but on the other hand Hayden with his Hulk like frame intimidates fast-bowler by charging them.
But as i said before on mental toughness i would rate Hussain above Hayden.
They are completly different players and their styles of batting are also completly different.
Hayden is an opener and Hussain isn't, Hussain had a cautious approach towards batting, but on the other hand Hayden with his Hulk like frame intimidates fast-bowler by charging them.
But as i said before on mental toughness i would rate Hussain above Hayden.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
How is that? He counts himself out. When you do well against teams where you have no expectation on you to do well and then do poorly when there is expectation that is the hallmark of a player without much mental toughness.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
There is simply no way on hell that Hussain was a better ODI player than Hayden, and Richard admits that.
open365
International Vice-Captain
Who did more to help his country win test matches?
Mathhew Hayden.
Who was the more consistent scorer by far?
Mathhew hayden.
Your point about Hayden only scoring against crap bowling is A) exagerated and B) Irrelevant.
It does not matter what standard bowling you face, runs still count the same, and by god Hayden scored a lot more of them than hussain. Maybe Hussain would average higher against Curtley ambrose on a seaming wicket, but the fact is facing bowling of that standard is incredibly rare so that fact is hypothetical and irrlevant.
Your job as a batsman is to score runs against the bowling that you have to face, and who did that better, Hussain or Hayden?
Your point may stand if Hussain averaged as much as Hayden did when they played in the same era, but it's not even close.
Mathhew Hayden.
Who was the more consistent scorer by far?
Mathhew hayden.
Your point about Hayden only scoring against crap bowling is A) exagerated and B) Irrelevant.
It does not matter what standard bowling you face, runs still count the same, and by god Hayden scored a lot more of them than hussain. Maybe Hussain would average higher against Curtley ambrose on a seaming wicket, but the fact is facing bowling of that standard is incredibly rare so that fact is hypothetical and irrlevant.
Your job as a batsman is to score runs against the bowling that you have to face, and who did that better, Hussain or Hayden?
Your point may stand if Hussain averaged as much as Hayden did when they played in the same era, but it's not even close.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Better batsman, not heavier run scorer, or most effective player, better batman.
Swervy
International Captain
well then I am going to say Jason Gillespie is a better batsman than Nasser Hussain!!!! I preferred watching some of Gillespies cover drives
because I love the way Gillespie can dig in against the bangladesh team and score big runs to save Australias bacon..Hussain couldnt do that.
That is just as valid an arguement as what Richard is saying
PhoenixFire
International Coach
Since when has being the better batsman been to do with preferred watching?well then I am going to say Jason Gillespie is a better batsman than Nasser Hussain!!!! I preferred watching some of Gillespies cover drives
because I love the way Gillespie can dig in against the bangladesh team and score big runs to save Australias bacon..Hussain couldnt do that.
That is just as valid an arguement as what Richard is saying
Goughy
Hall of Fame Member
The same time it started to have nothing to do with scoring more runs and being more effective
PhoenixFire
International Coach
No swervy was directly replying to the post where I quoted him earlier on. It has never (or shouldn't have) have had anything to do with being the better play to watch etc, purely the best batsman.
Swervy
International Captain
FAO Richard...
I dont know where we talked about you not being overly complimentary regarding Yousuf
Here is what you said:
I'd not go so far as to say Youhana has no talent for the Test-match game, but not an extraorinary amount.
And no, he's not their second-best Test-batsman, Younis Khan is quite clearly better than him, as long as this is not another false dawn (and I can't help getting the feeling that he's got it right this time, unlike the last 3 or 4).
But yes, that he's their third-best Test-batsman doesn't say a lot for their Test-side - which is why it's so remarkable that they escaped with a drawn Test-series.
If you were to drop a high-profile player it'd be Youhana every time - in Tests.
Personally there are few I would rather not watch bat than Youhana and there have been 3 or 4 occasions when he's batted in a manner I find totally pointless and as boring as anything on a cricket field.
and here is an incredibly familiar looking type of debate
from about 2 years ago)
Swerves: In the last 5 and a half years in games NOT against Bangladesh Youhana has played 39 tests, scored 2872 runs at 46.32 with 10 centuries and 11 50's
In the same timeframe, ganguly has played 47 tests, scored 2274 runs at 32.95 with 4 100's and 10 50's
Quite clearly since the turn of the century Youhana has been the far more successful player
Richard:Oh, yes, indeed, but Ganguly has played far stronger attacks than Youhana.
Think about it... when was the last time Youhana succeeded against a decent attack?
Youhana - whose ability is highly debatable).
Just to put the picture straight on that one...you see even you can get things wrong!!!!
I dont know where we talked about you not being overly complimentary regarding Yousuf
Here is what you said:
I'd not go so far as to say Youhana has no talent for the Test-match game, but not an extraorinary amount.
And no, he's not their second-best Test-batsman, Younis Khan is quite clearly better than him, as long as this is not another false dawn (and I can't help getting the feeling that he's got it right this time, unlike the last 3 or 4).
But yes, that he's their third-best Test-batsman doesn't say a lot for their Test-side - which is why it's so remarkable that they escaped with a drawn Test-series.
If you were to drop a high-profile player it'd be Youhana every time - in Tests.
Personally there are few I would rather not watch bat than Youhana and there have been 3 or 4 occasions when he's batted in a manner I find totally pointless and as boring as anything on a cricket field.
and here is an incredibly familiar looking type of debate
from about 2 years ago)Swerves: In the last 5 and a half years in games NOT against Bangladesh Youhana has played 39 tests, scored 2872 runs at 46.32 with 10 centuries and 11 50's
In the same timeframe, ganguly has played 47 tests, scored 2274 runs at 32.95 with 4 100's and 10 50's
Quite clearly since the turn of the century Youhana has been the far more successful player
Richard:Oh, yes, indeed, but Ganguly has played far stronger attacks than Youhana.
Think about it... when was the last time Youhana succeeded against a decent attack?
Youhana - whose ability is highly debatable).
Just to put the picture straight on that one...you see even you can get things wrong!!!!
PhoenixFire
International Coach
To be fair, Youhana then was a totally different player to Mohammed Yousuf now. He is one of the favourite players actually.
Swervy
International Captain
I know being the better batsman has nothing to do with who is the better to watch....but really the only way you can measure someones batting ability is to measure how well the batsman has dished out the batsmans currency, and that is runs.
When you have two players and you are looking at averages and all that, if the two players average in roughly the same ball park then it comes down to opinion in a lot of cases.
But when one batsman averages 55 and the other average 37, you just cannot get away from the FACT that one batsman is vastly superior to the other when you take into account the full art of batting. Haydens weaknesses are well documented, and accepted by people on here, and yet Hussains weaknesses seem to be dismissed by the likes of Richard as hardly being important.
So for me , in this case, Hayden = more effective, bigger scoring, better batsman by a country mile...and I cannot beleive anyone would argue otherwise, even accepting Haydens weaknesses.
Swervy
International Captain
It was more a reply to something Richard said earlier (I think it was on this thread or maybe another one, cant remember)
Its just that he loves to remind every one about when he has got things right (...erm........ok..I will come back with some examples of those in a few years time, maybe)...(actually he said something about him saying 4 years ago that Taunton was batsman friendly or something, and no-one agreed with him blah blah), and yet those people who could actually see the reason why Harmison was for one time rated no.1 in the world, he continually goes on about being foolish etc etc.
Well here you go, Richard also makes outlandish claims about players he has hardly watched based on statistics, who other people can see potential in, who then go onto prove Dick wrong.
And what Yousuf goes to show is that players can all of a sudden flourish, pretty much like Hayden has done.