SehwagVsGilchrist

[Evermind]

Not once has he scored a 100 in a low-scoring match. Hayden has scored several hundreds where under 1,000 runs have been scored in the entire match.

That's the difference between Hayden and Sehwag. Hayden is way ahead and always will be.

Yes but Sehwag has scored a triple hundred and Haydun has not yet but he retired.

 

[Evermind]

If Haydun was so good, WHY DID HE RETIRE?

The fact that he retired and Sewag is still playing PROVES that Sehwag is better.

 

[SJS]

Hayden actually made runs in difficult conditions. Something that Sehwag has never done because all of his hundreds have come from draws.

Thats true although some of the 'drawn' games in which Sehwag made his hundreds had very strange results according to howstatdotcom

1. 105 versus South Africa at OUTsurance Oval - Nov 2001

South Africa won by 9 wickets.​

2. 147 versus England at Wankhede - Oct 2002

India won by innings !​

3. 195 versus Australia at Melbourne - December 2003

Australia won by 9 wickets​

4. 309 versus Pakistan at Multan - March 2004

India won by an innings !​

5. 201 versus Pakistan at Chinnaswami Stadium - March 2005

Pakistan won by 168 runs !​

6. 201 versus Sri Lanka at Galle - March 2008

India won by 170 runs​

Now isn't that strange. How can six games be drawn and have a winner each at the same time? There has to be a trick in it. An optical illusion ?

I got it. I am illiterate

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Hayden has scored twice as many hundreds as Sehwag. Sehwag hasn't even be ranked the best batsman in the world whilst Hayden was ranked number 1 for the majority of 2002-2004.

Don't worry, as soon as Sehwag's eyes fade on him in a few years time and his averaging 45 then the comparison between him and Hayden will look ridiculous. Sehwag's record as an opener in South Africa tells the entire story of how good Sehwag is in bowler-friendly conditions.

 

[Julian87]

Gilchrist was the better keeper.

 

[SJS]

Has anyone compared Sehwag's and Hayden's comparative figures in Sri Lanka? 68.8 against 40.1 seems a little bit of a difference ......

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Has anyone compared Sehwag's and Hayden's comparative figures in Sri Lanka? 68.8 against 40.1 seems a little bit of a difference ......

Neither of them have failed in Sri Lanka as opposed to since 2000 in South Africa, Sehwag has failed miserably, averaging 9.80 from 5 innings, opening the batting whilst Hayden has averaged 49.09 from 11 innings. Hayden also averaged 47 against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka.

If you wanted to go as far as comparing how both batsman go on pitches that they aren't used to then you'd compare how Hayden goes in the subcontient and how Sehwag goes outside the subcontient. If you deduct the minnows (Bangladesh only) then here are the statistics...

Matthew Hayden: 17 matches, 32 innings, 2 not out, 1556 runs @ 51.86, 4 hundreds
Virender Sehwag: 22 matches, 38 innings, 1 not out, 1593 runs @ 43.05, 4 hundreds

 

[silentstriker]

Sehwag's record as an opener in South Africa tells the entire story of how good Sehwag is in bowler-friendly conditions.

Hayden's record in SA isn't too great either.

 

[Ikki]

Sehwag's 3rd/4th innings are quite poor. Until he fixes that, I won't consider him Hayden's equal. A batsman should score when the pitch is aging and is harder to bat on. Not primarily when it's without much threat.

Hayden's only played 66 matches, also. Wait a while. In Hayden's first 66 he was averaging 54.

 

[Precambrian]

Not once has he scored a 100 in a low-scoring match. Hayden has scored several hundreds where under 1,000 runs have been scored in the entire match.

That's the difference between Hayden and Sehwag. Hayden is way ahead and always will be.

Hello? Remember Melbourne 2003? Remember the 201 against SL in 2008?

 

[Precambrian]

Sehwag's 3rd/4th innings are quite poor. Until he fixes that, I won't consider him Hayden's equal. A batsman should score when the pitch is aging and is harder to bat on. Not primarily when it's without much threat.

Hayden's only played 66 matches, also. Wait a while. In Hayden's first 66 he was averaging 54.

Another stupid logic. Australian pitches, on which Hayden has made his mark, are known to be pretty hard even through the 5th day. Not the case with subconti pitches.

 

[Precambrian]

Hayden has scored twice as many hundreds as Sehwag. Sehwag hasn't even be ranked the best batsman in the world whilst Hayden was ranked number 1 for the majority of 2002-2004.

Don't worry, as soon as Sehwag's eyes fade on him in a few years time and his averaging 45 then the comparison between him and Hayden will look ridiculous. Sehwag's record as an opener in South Africa tells the entire story of how good Sehwag is in bowler-friendly conditions.

Ponting averages just 20 after 15 matches in India. Failure? Anyone?

 

[Ikki]

Another stupid logic. Australian pitches, on which Hayden has made his mark, are known to be pretty hard even through the 5th day. Not the case with subconti pitches.

They're just flat and low then?

 

[Precambrian]

They're just flat and low then?

Ask the recent Australian team who toured India whether they are the easiest pitches to bat on. :P

 

[Jono]

Sehwag's 3rd/4th innings are quite poor. Until he fixes that, I won't consider him Hayden's equal. A batsman should score when the pitch is aging and is harder to bat on. Not primarily when it's without much threat.

Hayden's only played 66 matches, also. Wait a while. In Hayden's first 66 he was averaging 54.

Cannot believe how you use stats when you like them.

How do you rate Steve Waugh? Bet you reckon he's better than Sachin and Dravid, yet look at his 4th innings record.

4th innings stats are so misleading. I think Top Cat has exposed this folly.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

LOL

Australian pitches are greenish for the first session of a team's innings whilst Indian pitches are ideal for top-order batsman and offer no movement off the seam.

Australian pitches are hard all the way through the Test? Did you watch the Sydney Test earlier this year? The pitch was cracked by day 3!

Sehwag's record in South Africa as an opener speaks for itself. Tailenders have performed better. Sehwag's been the batsman that has benefitted from bigger bats, smaller boundaries and flatter pitches over the past decade.

 

[Jono]

Love how Australian pitches are suddenly minefields to bat on.

This place is amazing sometimes

 

[Ikki]

Cannot believe how you use stats when you like them.

How do you rate Steve Waugh? Bet you reckon he's better than Sachin and Dravid, yet look at his 4th innings record.

4th innings stats are so misleading. I think Top Cat has exposed this folly.

No, they aren't misleading and Waugh's 3rd/4th innings record is hardly one that can be defended.

IIRC TC was talking about how people said Waugh didn't tend to save the team in dire circumstances because his 3rd/4th innings was poor. And then he showed many innings where he made match-wining/saving knocks.

Over 100 Tests, there's little misleading about them, especially for Waugh. To use him as a "rule" rather than an aberration is what is really misleading. 2 100s and 12 50s in 94 innings says it all.

 

[Ikki]

Ask the recent Australian team who toured India whether they are the easiest pitches to bat on. :P

Ask them whether S.Africa's was easier to bat on . I gave you a generalisation for your generalisation.

 

[Evermind]

Love how Australian pitches are suddenly minefields to bat on.

This place is amazing sometimes

The Adelaide greentop is every batsman's nightmare TBH.