ROLLEYES ATTACK!!!!Mark Taylor.
btw my answer is extremely bias and partial.
Nothing new therebtw my answer is extremely bias and partial.
The irony, I'm sure, is not lost on you - considering your forum name.Nothing new there
I agree completely with this, not enough Hayden-love on these forums. I know he has question marks over some (actually only one really) aspect of his game, and there will always be the perception of this era being too easy for batsman. However no batsman is perfect (only one has ever been close) and given Hayden's ability and achievments I think he's fit to rank alongside the better openers the game has ever seen.On Hayden yea he cashed in on some poor bowlers this era but it is not as if he hasn't had testing conditions & as man who has followed Hayden career in great detail i don't see why Hayden wouldn't be able to score runs in the 70s 80s & 90s especially given that he is without doubt the most talented & destructive batsman Australia have produced since the Simpson/Lawry era, people make it sound as if scoring runs then was impossible it isn't. Cutt Hayden some slack will ya fellas..
And I too have followed it in great detail and I don't see any reason why he would TBH.On Hayden yea he cashed in on some poor bowlers this era but it is not as if he hasn't had testing conditions & as man who has followed Hayden career in great detail i don't see why Hayden wouldn't be able to score runs in the 70s 80s & 90s
Agreed. As I believe that W.G. was the unequivocal greatest batsman of all-time, it only follows that he should be my greatest opener.
Not for me. I've no clue how to rate the guy in any sort of a modern sense.WG Grace
I dont see why not.Not for me. I've no clue how to rate the guy in any sort of a modern sense.
I agree, and the same thing is true for guys like Hobbs, and thats why he tops my list. However, the sport itself is quite different. I am not sure if the sport he dominated has as much resemblance to our sport for us to directly line him up. He certainly was a titan, and stands outside of history, so to speak.I dont see why not.
You wouldnt call yourself a better scientist than Newton, Jenner etc but chances are yourself and many others know far more than they did.
Same with modern batsmen, they have the benefit of accumulated knowledge without having to do anything revolutionary themselves..
He created modern cricket. Before him had little relation to after him.I agree, and the same thing is true for guys like Hobbs, and thats why he tops my list. However, the sport itself is quite different. I am not sure if the sport he dominated has as much resemblance to our sport for us to directly line him up. He certainly was a titan, and stands outside of history, so to speak.
Well i would love to hear your reason..And I too have followed it in great detail and I don't see any reason why he would TBH.
I concur. A few years ago I was part of the Hayden FTB brigade. Not anymore though.I agree completely with this, not enough Hayden-love on these forums. I know he has question marks over some (actually only one really) aspect of his game, and there will always be the perception of this era being too easy for batsman. However no batsman is perfect (only one has ever been close) and given Hayden's ability and achievments I think he's fit to rank alongside the better openers the game has ever seen.
One could argue a very strong case for him being the best opener Australia has ever produced...I know Simpson, Morris, Woodful, Ponsford etc were all wonderful players, however Hayden's career is something to behold.