Will Matt Hayden go down as an all-time great?

[silentstriker]

if you were an opposition opening bowler and you were ready to take the feild, who is the one person in the world you would fear bowling to??.

In terms of openers? Hobbs. Guys like Hayden and Sehwag will give bowlers chances, while guys like Boycott and Gavaskar will shut you down. It's a different mentality you have to go in. On a flat track, I'd hate going up against Hayden and Sehwag, but if there is some early juice (e.g, we aren't in the 21st century), I'd be fine going up against Sehwag and Hayden.

 

[Cevno]

Not sure why there's so much hang up about his away average, and the fact that there are blokes who've averaged more away from home. Sure, players like Hobbs, Hutton and Sunny have averaged more away than Haydos, but that's hardly surprising given they're also three of the top four or five openers of all time and occupy a plane that Hayden isn't and probably never will be on.

It's using the examples of your Taylors, your Sehwags and, more bafflingly, your Shastris to put down Hayden's status that I don't really understand. Gordon Greenidge averaged 42 away from home, less than any of the examples cited, including Hayden, and yet I daresay his status wouldn't be questioned to the extent Matty's is.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty comfortable with placing Hayden among the top dozen or so Test openers of all time. And more than comfortable giving him a spot in at least an all time Australian 2nd XI, pushing hard for selection in the 1st team.

Arguably agree with that(perhaps 15) but for me that does not classify him as a all-time great for me.For me he has been very good but great is different category altogether.

 

[Jono]

lol its laughable to beleive hayden would not be considered as a great player, or perhaps one day admired as a great of the game. put away the figures and stats for one minute and consider this, if you were an opposition opening bowler and you were ready to take the feild, who is the one person in the world you would fear bowling to??. and the answer to that is quite simply Mathew Hayden, now you might get him early if your lucky, but if you dont there is no other player that can truly take your attack apart from the outset. and make you look like you are an amature, he is a huge part of the reason why australia is were it is today, and i feel perhaps he will be missed most when he is gone. perhaps then he will gain a little more respect, from his criticts. Hayden and Langer were the best opening partnership going around, perhaps ever.

You honestly think that Hayden is the one batsman (THE ONE) who bowlers would least like bowling to?

Hmmm, I reckon some conventional right-arm outswing bowlers would prefer to bowl to Hayden than Ponting, Tendulkar or Lara.

 

[weldone]

OT but an interesting aspect of the Donald/McGrath thing - I've seen so many people essentially say that any success against Donald post-2000 is able to be ignored because he wasn't at his best and use this as a reason to ignore Haydon's and others' success against him. Yet McGrath isn't afforded the same grace. I tend to think it's because McGrath kept producing and taking wickets pretty much until he stopped (well past the same age Donald stopped) which is why I can never put McGrath and Donald on the same plane. Donald had a decent peak (record against Australia excepted) but it was short relative to McGrath's and if McGrath and others are to be judged over the course of their whole career, so should Donald.

Anyway, didn't Haydos only get one test against Donald in the 90's? He certainly did look all at sea against Ambrose in the late 90's too. I didn't rate him at all at that point either. Then 1999 rolls around and it's like someone taught him how to play spin and through the on-side. Suddenly, a transformed player. I'm willing to allow that flatter pitches and a few less great fast bowlers around have contributed a bit to his higher average, sure. But anyone who saw him batting for Australia in the 90's vs 00's would have seen he was a far, far better and more versatile batsman too. In the midst of a series where one bloke took 33 wickets in 3 Tests (a spinner no less), Haydos scored 503 runs and did it quickly. No-one who saw him bat in the 90's would have backed him to do that.

Agreed...

 

[weldone]

I guess my personal definition of "all time great" is whether they get mentioned when discussing all time World XIs. Hayden probably just misses out on that for me.

Yeah, till now it's true...Can't say if it'll be the same when he leaves cricket......

Anyways I'm not his fan; but I enjoy when he destroys bowlers with Arnold-like attitude (especially when with Punter in tests and with Gilli in ODIs).

 

[weldone]

You honestly think that Hayden is the one batsman (THE ONE) who bowlers would least like bowling to?

Hmmm, I reckon some conventional right-arm outswing bowlers would prefer to bowl to Hayden than Ponting, Tendulkar or Lara.

Hmmm....that is true....Actually a lot depends on what you mean by 'all time great'...If best 7-10 openers of all time in tests overall and best 2-3 openers of all-time in tests from Australia are called 'all-time greats' then Hayden is one...But if by 'all-time great' one means best 20 or so batsmans of all time in test cricket then till now in no way....

 

[subshakerz]

The simple answer is no. Hayden is a great player, and the best opener of the decade for sure. But, as someone else pointed out, an all-time great should be someone you consider for an All-Time XI, and Hayden doesn't make the cut.

There will always be a question mark over his ability against the pacemen. Just to clarify, I think he's terrific against the fast-medium variety like McGrath and Pollock, and a master against spin as well. It's just that when I've seen him go up against sheer pace and swing, like Shoaib and the Ashes 2005 bowlers, he suddenly doesnt look like the same bully.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

Yes, I think he will go down as a great opener.

All time great? As in the top five - six openers of all time? No. I don't see it.

+1

A great, not an all time great.

 

[social]

I havent needed to read this thread to recognise that certain people would be in one camp, others in another, the rest have an opinion

Bottom line is that he is one of the greatest ever because his figures demand it!

People who crap on about Hobbs and Sutcliffe (sorry, just who did these geniuses bat against?) simply ignore the fact that they rate Tendy, Lara, Dravid, Kallis, Ponting etc so highly and dismiss Hayden - it's just nonsense for a player with 30 tons at well over 50

 

[PhoenixFire]

It's debatle whether he should be, but I have no doubt that he will be.

 

[nightprowler10]

Yes, I think he will go down as a great opener.

All time great? As in the top five - six openers of all time? No. I don't see it.

Agreed with this.

 

[Jono]

Hayden's away record:
Venue Mat Inns NO 50s 100s HS Runs Avg
Home 51 89 8 16 21 380 5061 62.48
Away 43 78 5 11 9 203 3181 43.58

Lara's away record:
Venue Mat Inns NO 50s 100s HS Runs Avg
Home 65 111 5 26 17 *400 6217 58.65
Away 66 121 1 22 17 277 5736 47.80

Sachin's away record:
Venue Mat Inns NO 50s 100s HS Runs Avg
Home 62 102 11 21 16 217 5056 55.56
Away 84 135 14 28 23 *248 6726 55.59

Not for a minute suggesting Hayden is/was better than Lara (Lara's away record is quite a bit better anyway), but just putting things in perspective. Particularly since people always say Lara and Sachin are impossible to split (which they are), yet ignore Lara's inferior away record compared to Sachin's.

If Hayden's away record should be held against him, so should Lara's.

 

[subshakerz]

I havent needed to read this thread to recognise that certain people would be in one camp, others in another, the rest have an opinion

Bottom line is that he is one of the greatest ever because his figures demand it!

People who crap on about Hobbs and Sutcliffe (sorry, just who did these geniuses bat against?) simply ignore the fact that they rate Tendy, Lara, Dravid, Kallis, Ponting etc so highly and dismiss Hayden - it's just nonsense for a player with 30 tons at well over 50

I don't think anyone is dismissing him. I don't think there's any doubt that he's world class, but would you consider him a serious contender for an all-time great opening slot? That's the debate.

 

[adharcric]

Great opening batsman but not all-time great batsman. He's certainly the best opener of his time and he may even warrant a place in a top 10 all-time openers list but you'd have to be pretty biased to even remotely consider him for an all-time side. He's much more than a FTB but the flat pitches and weak attacks have certainly boosted his average, just as they have Dravid's and Ponting's to an extent. Tell you what, I may even put him right with Kallis but behind Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Dravid among the batsmen of this generation.

 

[Craig]

I havent needed to read this thread to recognise that certain people would be in one camp, others in another, the rest have an opinion

Bottom line is that he is one of the greatest ever because his figures demand it!

People who crap on about Hobbs and Sutcliffe (sorry, just who did these geniuses bat against?) simply ignore the fact that they rate Tendy, Lara, Dravid, Kallis, Ponting etc so highly and dismiss Hayden - it's just nonsense for a player with 30 tons at well over 50

Then why did you post in it?

 

[howardj]

As Ive stated, I don't regard Matt as an all time great.

However, in the end, you must compare a man to his contemporaries.

And, on that front, he stacks up damn well against other openers of his time; of this time.

 

[Burgey]

Don't think he's an "all-time" great world wide, but for Aussie openers he'd certainly belong in the argument for an all time spot.
We saw him struggle in 2005, but I really wonder how many batsmen don't struggle against the fast, swinging ball. By that I mean if any of the really good/ great players had to contend with really accurate and fast swing bowling, wouldn't their performances tail off as well? Of course, some techniques stand up to it better than others, but then Hayden's technique vs spin is fantastic for an opener.

I think sometimes people's opinions of him are influenced by the fact he isn't the best player to watch compared with some others. That, and the fact that he is also known to carry on like a toss pot occasionally on the field.

 

[taitmachine]

I think he will have to, yet I do understand everyones hesitation in automatically elevating him to that position.

Not to long ago I put together my world best team from 1990-present. Every player just about picked themselves, but for the openers. There has not been world class openers around for some time now and Hayden stood tall above all others - yet he still didnt seem to fit in with a team full of superstars.

A lot of talk about him not being against the great bowlers like Ambrose, Donald etc and a lack of great bowlers now. However the last 7-8 years there has not been that quality yet what other openers have stood out and dominated like Hayden. Is it we have no good bowlers and no good openers the last few years? Unlikely.

The fact is opening is the toughest batting gig no matter where and against any team and to be averaging 50+ is quite freakish so he does deserve to be seen as a great player becasue of the position he plays.

 

[Top_Cat]

A lot of talk about him not being against the great bowlers like Ambrose, Donald etc and a lack of great bowlers now. However the last 7-8 years there has not been that quality yet what other openers have stood out and dominated like Hayden. Is it we have no good bowlers and no good openers the last few years? Unlikely.

Yep, I agree here. I see so many people talk up the bowlers of the 90's and under-rate the bowlers of the 00's. It's unfair on the batsmen who've done well in the 00's.

 

[Craig]

Richard to be reading this thread somewhere, somehow AWS.

$20 on a second account appearing