You can't just say "well, he probably would have scored runs" when the only few occasions he has faced high quality pace he's been found wanting.
Thats true but as i'm trying to tell you based on what i saw of him post Ashes in conditions where you people usually claim he would fail he didn't. If Hayden was totally useless againts any bowling of quality he wouldn't have made those runs againts SA based on the criteria that you guys use.
But also if you are going to use that criteria againts Hayden as i mentioned every prolific batsman in this era has to be questioned also which included Ponting, Dravid, Kallis, MoYo, Sehwag, KP.
In the 70s/80s, India had Kapil Dev, New Zealand had Hadlee, Pakistan had Imran/Wasim, England had Botham/Willis/Snow/Hendrick, Australia had Lillee/Thomson and West Indies had a whole list of names. There is no comparison between that time and now, or even the 90s.
West Indies were obviously better back then, Pakistan were pretty similar in the 80's & 90's while Australia were comparable if not slightly better in the recent decade to back then.
I reckon India pace bowling stocks in my time of watching cricket (97 to now) starting from Srinath are better than what was back in the 70's & 80's where only Kapil quality bowler & yet even the great dev wouldn't even be ranked amongst the top 30 fast-bowlers of all-time.
The NZ bowling attack than i've seen i very sure was not better back then where Hadlee was the only quality bowler backed up by mediocre bunch of Chatfield, Morrison, Collinge.
NZ have had propably over the past decade produced the best crop of fast-bowlers in there history in Bond, Allot, Doull, Cairns, O'Connor, Nash but guess what they all have had injury woes.
England as social said hardly terrifying plus when you compare then to the likes of Fraser, Gough, Caddick, Malcolm of the 90's (even though England were very poor then) its not a major difference.
The bottomline is, when he actually faced high quality pace, he's been made to look ordinary. It's only logical to assume that when placed in an era when quality pace is more abundant, as an opening batsman, this weakness will be exposed more.
As i said before he has proven he has the ability to adapt if he were placed in those era's. Plus can't belive i forgot to mention he's obviously more naturally talented than any australian batsmen since the Simpson/Lawry period so i don't see why he couldn't have done well in then when many others with lesser ability managed to forge pretty solid careers like Taylor, Marsh, Wessels, Stackpole and i'm sure you would agree he was WAY better than some of the unsung openers like Wood, Laird, Dyson, McCosker
Ha social is right to say you blokes make it sound as if scoring runs in the 70's, 80's & 90's was impossible...
Had he somehow 'adjusted' to pace after he struggled early in his career, he wouldnt have struggled against Shoaib and the Ashes quartet later on.
Who said he did? thats why he struggled in the Ashes & Shoaib. Plus it must be said when he faced Shoaib in 2004/05 then later in the 2005 Ashes he was going through his first career batting slump after cementing his place in 2001.
But i do believe also that he would have still failed in the Ashes since he had to reinvent himself out of the bully-mode that he had established between India 2001 & SRI 2004. That was a big change that most batsmen careers could never recover from, thats change is why i say again Hayden could prosper in those 3 decades.
Yes, he may have a great career record, but so does Sehwag, and nobody suggests Sehwag is an all-time great.
Well let me say now since i don't think i've said it before i don't believe Hayden along with any other prolific batsmen of this era will go down as an all-time greats but i am totally againts how people like you are criminally under-rating his ability.
Batsmen of this era unless they average 60+ given that a large period since 2000 has been the second easiest era of batting since the 1930's (but sitll its a fair way above the 1930's) given the flat pitches & quality of bowlers. They would just be ranked as very-good to excellent in my view.
But if we want to get into arguments of modern batsmen would struggle againts swing, & they wouldn't make runs in X or Y era. They are occassions when they get tested & how they come out of it we can judge how they may have probably done i.e my examples of Hayden & Ponting & how the blokes like Kallis, Dravid, MoYo, Sehwag have done againts Australia
