Can Hussey be the 2nd greatest ever?

[eglezdzdiyd]

ODIs and Tests are very different games my friend, very different indeed. Also it's much, much easier to bash around county attacks than it is to score heavily against Hoggard, Sidebottom, Flintoff and Jones (for example) on pitches that assist fast bowlers. I do think Hussey will suceed in conquering other countries, but he hasn't done so yet, which means he can't really be ranked amongst the greats.

i'm aware i'm a noob but, are you trying to talk up the pommy line up you just produced? Hardly brilliant.

 

[aussie tragic]

...Also it's much, much easier to bash around county attacks than it is to score heavily against Hoggard, Sidebottom, Flintoff and Jones (for example) on pitches that assist fast bowlers....

i'm aware i'm a noob but, are you trying to talk up the pommy line up you just produced? Hardly brilliant.

Well let's review their 2006-2007 form then:

Hoggard: 17 tests, 62 wkts @ 28.37, BB 7-109, SR 58.1
Flintoff: 11 tests, 34 wkts @ 34.44, BB 4-96, SR 65.4
Sidebottom: 8 tests, 28 wkts @ 30.03, BB 5-88, SR 64.9
Jones: 0 tests....

ummm, somehow I don't think Hussey would be shaking in his boots

 

[Migara]

Well he currently averages 80.66 in the sub continent ........after 2 tests.......

Against Bangladesh mind you. Nothing in India, Pakistan or SL. Nothing in New Zealand or England.

in Australia          13   21   6  1397 137  133* 133   93.13   6   5   0
in Bangladesh          2    3   0   242 182   37   23   80.66   1   0   0
in South Africa        3    5   1   257  89   75   73   64.25   0   3   0

I am firmly by my opinion. Should average 50+ in bowler friendly conditions to be called a legend (that's why I am sceptical about Mahela Jayawardane, who as an average 35-40 in bowler friendly conditions). Playing Bangas will not be truely representing plating in the sub continent.

 

[SJS]

Hussey has played in England for five seasons from 2001-2005. Of these 2004 was a poor season when he averaged only 36.83 with no century in 7 games. In the other four seasons he was very good indeed.

• 2001 : 2055 runs at 79.0. 5 hundreds with top score of 329*
• 2002 : 1442 runs at 68.7. 5 hundreds with top score of 310*
• 2003 : 1697 runs at 89.3. 6 hundreds with top score of 331*
• 2005 : 1074 runs at 76.7. 3 hundreds with top score of 253.

Thats an absolutely fantastic record. This from a player who was yet to play in a test match. Surely his credentials in England cant be doubted just because the Aussie sides of 2001 and 2005 had so many established stars in their batting line up that this obviously special player could still not make it. I have absolutely no doubt that he would have made a very solid contribution even in those Aussie sides.

I wonder which player played in England in the four seasons listed above and fared better than him in first class cricket.

 

[Perm]

i'm aware i'm a noob but, are you trying to talk up the pommy line up you just produced? Hardly brilliant.

No, but I was pointing out that it's probably the best attack that England could produce to suit swinging conditions.

 

[Perm]

Well let's review their 2006-2007 form then:

Hoggard: 17 tests, 62 wkts @ 28.37, BB 7-109, SR 58.1
Flintoff: 11 tests, 34 wkts @ 34.44, BB 4-96, SR 65.4
Sidebottom: 8 tests, 28 wkts @ 30.03, BB 5-88, SR 64.9
Jones: 0 tests....

ummm, somehow I don't think Hussey would be shaking in his boots

It was just an example, and Hoggard-Flintoff-Sidebottom-Jones (all fully fit) would be England's best bowling attack for a surface that is likely to assist seam and swing. Until Hussey proves himself in many kinds of tough conditions, facing quality bowlers then he can't be a great IMO.

That's not to say he won't dominate in these conditions, as I think he will.

 

[Richard]

Well let's review their 2006-2007 form then:

Hoggard: 17 tests, 62 wkts @ 28.37, BB 7-109, SR 58.1
Flintoff: 11 tests, 34 wkts @ 34.44, BB 4-96, SR 65.4
Sidebottom: 8 tests, 28 wkts @ 30.03, BB 5-88, SR 64.9
Jones: 0 tests....

ummm, somehow I don't think Hussey would be shaking in his boots

When summing-up Sidebottom's performance you'd do well to factor in an average which would take account of chances created, not merely those which were actually caught.

And Flintoff we might do well to take a time when he was fit (if that ever happens again) too TBH.

 

[Richard]

Hussey has played in England for five seasons from 2001-2005. Of these 2004 was a poor season when he averaged only 36.83 with no century in 7 games. In the other four seasons he was very good indeed.

• 2001 : 2055 runs at 79.0. 5 hundreds with top score of 329*
• 2002 : 1442 runs at 68.7. 5 hundreds with top score of 310*
• 2003 : 1697 runs at 89.3. 6 hundreds with top score of 331*
• 2005 : 1074 runs at 76.7. 3 hundreds with top score of 253.

Thats an absolutely fantastic record. This from a player who was yet to play in a test match. Surely his credentials in England cant be doubted just because the Aussie sides of 2001 and 2005 had so many established stars in their batting line up that this obviously special player could still not make it. I have absolutely no doubt that he would have made a very solid contribution even in those Aussie sides.

I wonder which player played in England in the four seasons listed above and fared better than him in first class cricket.

Simon Katich would probably come pretty close, though he'd have slightly different seasons played (not that there was any massive difference really, universally seen was a non-swinging ball and usually nothing pitches). And Martin Love, who played far less innings, couldn't be too far away I'd not imagine.

There was no way Hussey was even close to Australian honours in 2001, though. Nowhere close.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Haha, Huss loves his FC triples.

 

[Richard]

Who doesn't?

Pretty sure at least 2 of the 4(?) he scored were avoidable with a simple taking of a catch, mind.

 

[Manee]

Pretty sure at least 2 of the 4(?) he scored were avoidable with a simple taking of a catch, mind.

C'mon Rich, don't discredit innings because of dropped catches, it is ludicrous. Everyone gets dropped every so often, it is about capitalising when you are dropped.

 

[Richard]

It is, but that doesn't change the fact that said triples would have been mere(!) 228s or suchlike had catches which should have been taken been taken.

 

[SJS]

There was no way Hussey was even close to Australian honours in 2001, though. Nowhere close.

Oh yes I know that. I never said that he was or that he deserved to be in the side. Just that he was very good and wasn't in the side because that Aussie side was so strong.

 

[BoyBrumby]

One question that keeps recurring to me is what affect his late introduction to the test arena has had? On the one hand it has denied him several years' worth of tests (and obviously denied the public the chance to watch him in those tests), but on the other hand it has meant that he was pretty much the finished article when he appeared. I'm only guessing, but I would imagine he had the latest debut (in terms of age) of all the players in AT's lists.

 

[aussie tragic]

One question that keeps recurring to me is what affect his late introduction to the test arena has had? On the one hand it has denied him several years' worth of tests (and obviously denied the public the chance to watch him in those tests), but on the other hand it has meant that he was pretty much the finished article when he appeared. I'm only guessing, but I would imagine he had the latest debut (in terms of age) of all the players in AT's lists.

I always thought Mark Waugh, Lehman and Hussey had an advantage as they were already seasoned cricketers at their test debut, while all other players were still learning the game at 1st class level (no idea why it didn’t work for Hick).

In answer to your question, Hussey was indeed the oldest debutant at 30, however Herb Sutcliffe was close at 29…..all others in the 40 Innings list debuted much younger as listed in brackets below:

(1) Don Bradman: 3528 runs @ 95.35, HS 334, 14 centuries, 5 fifties (20)
(2) Everton Weekes: 2431 runs @ 62.33, HS 297, 9 centuries, 10 fifties (22)
(3) Neil Harvey: 2409 runs @ 66.91, HS 205, 10 centuries, 8 fifties (19)
(4) Herb Sutcliffe: 2340 runs @ 65.67, HS 176, 8 centuries, 13 fifties (29)
(5) Viv Richards: 2339 runs @ 61.55, HS 291, 8 centuries, 7 fifties (22)

(6) Denis Compton: 2294 runs @ 69.51, HS 208, 10 centuries, 9 fifties (19)
(7) Graeme Pollock: 2252 runs @ 62.55, HS 274, 7 centuries, 11 fifties (19)
(8) Doug Walters: 2226 runs @ 61.83, HS 242, 7 centuries, 14 fifties (19)
(9) Brian Lara: 2218 runs @ 56.87, HS 375, 4 centuries, 12 fifties (21)
(10) George Headley: 2190 runs @ 60.83, HS 270*, 10 centuries, 5 fifties (20)

(11) Arthur Morris: 2184 runs @ 59.02, HS 206, 10 centuries, 5 fifties (24)
(12) Graeme Smith: 2171 runs @ 58.67, HS 277, 7 centuries, 5 fifties (21)
(13) Virender Sehwag: 2145 runs @ 53.62, HS 309, 7 centuries, 6 fifties (23)
(14) Frank Worrell: 2144 runs @ 59.55, HS 261, 7 centuries, 8 fifties (23)
(15) Wally Hammond: 2107 runs @ 58.52, HS 251, 7 centuries, 7 fifties (24)

 

[BoyBrumby]

In answer to your question, Hussey was indeed the oldest debutant at 30, however Herb Sutcliffe was close at 29.

That's very interesting. I genuinely had no idea he was so late to debut. After looking at his cricinfo profile it seems his arrival into FC cricket was delayed somewhat by the Great War, but it was still another 5 years before he made his test bow.

As he is, other than Sir Donald obviously, the only other player to have played 50 tests and average over 60 at the end of his career it could bode well for Hussey's late blooming as a test player.

With regards to Hick there was a rather good interview with the man himself by Kevin Mitchell in The Guardian (Link) where he suggests he stagnated as a player during his qualification period:

One reason, he thinks, that he failed to score the Test runs people thought him capable of is that he spent seven years, from 1984 until 1991, in the 'comfort zone' of the county game, completing a qualification period in order to be eligible to play for England. It took the edge off his development as a batsman.

 

[nightprowler10]

Well he currently averages 80.66 in the sub continent ........after 2 tests.......

Wait till he faces the current Pakistani bowling attack. HA!




Oh boy...

 

[Richard]

I always thought Mark Waugh, Lehman and Hussey had an advantage as they were already seasoned cricketers at their test debut, while all other players were still learning the game at 1st class level (no idea why it didn’t work for Hick).

Lehmann didn't exactly take advantage, though.

Could be applied to Mark Waugh, Gilchrist and Hussey. Pretty much every other top-notch Australian batsman of recent times apart from Michael Slater has come in really young, usually not done particularly well, gone to domestic cricket again - sometimes for many years - and returned eventually to score at Test level.

Could even go back to Boon, then there's Stephen Waugh, Langer, Martyn, Hayden, Ponting, Lehmann himself, Katich, Clarke, Jaques even. Bevan was unfortunate enough, unlike some, to not get the opportunity.

 

[neville cardus]

I like Cumming. He's an experienced opener with alot of balls IMO.

Shortly after said batsman had his head removed, hooking at a bouncer from South Africa's most promising paceman recently, I picked up the following gem:

"A hooker who's Cumming is bound to have a Steyn problem."

 

[Richard]