SehwagVsGilchrist

[Burgey]

Ponting, India, miserable failure... not good enough to lick the other great batsmen's shoes then???????

Wtf has that got to do with anything? You're just inviting a response of 'tendulkar's been ordinary v non-minnows since 2001, averaging far less than a true great should'. It would be about as relevant.

 

[Pratters]

Funny, how when it's the other way round, nothing gets said and how when I get constantly attacked for no reason, without being provoked by Evermind, Pratters and Precambrian that you lot just let it slide.

You have no knowledge of Jono's past history as a poster. Then you go to call him illeterate. You earn the respect of the forum by posting quality posts, not by insulting members left right and centre. I have nothing against you personally, so don't take it to heart.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Disagree. Sehwag > Hayden. It is a mighty joke to compare Hayden to Kallis and Dravid. Although the Pietersen comparison has its merits.

It's a mighty joke to say that Sehwag's better then Hayden, because at the moment he isn't even close and I don't see him getting close. He won't score as many 100's as Hayden did, bank on it. Hayden is so in the same class as Dravid & Kallis. Hayden is of very similar stature to Kallis and Hayden has scored 5 more centuries then Dravid.

I'd rate, Sachin Tendulkar, Ricky Ponting, Brian Lara, Steve Waugh, Jacques Kallis, Rahul Dravid and Matthew Hayden as the best batsman of the modern era and there would be another good 8-10 batsman I'd rate ahead of Sehwag.

What are you arriving at son? Both Hayden and Sehwag are openers, and hence their success is not related to the success of their teammates, going by what I understand your post. what is the point then?

Yeah that's right but Sehwag is favoured by playing so much of his cricket in the subcontient, where their is rarely any movement in the air and off the seam. Sehwag is favoured by the conditions of the subcontient, that's why his scored so many 100's in drawn matches and highscoring matches.

Sehwag is actually very much similar to Marcus Trescothick & Chris Gayle as both play their shots without any footmovement. Obviously, Trescothick & Gayle aren't as fortunate to have played in such favourable conditions and that's why they average in the low 40's.

No wonder then, Hayden's best performances have come on subcontinental Indian tracks. He is the ultimate flat track bully. Sehwag has played some corkers on difficult pitches like the Melbourne 2003 track, Colombo 2008 (He made 201 and India were allout for 300something), Chennai 2008 (80 odd of 60 balls in a tough chase against England in the 4th innings) etc.

Melbourne 2003 track? Hayden scored a 100 in the same match and Ponting scored a double-ton. Poor example, considering you claim Hayden is the 'ulimate flat track bully'. Melbourne is difficult to bat in when it is overcast as the ball tends to swing around. Hayden's century against England in 2006 at the MCG is a perfect example of difficult conditions, in a difficult situation. England were all-bowled out for 160 and Australia were 5-80 before, in overcast conditions before Hayden's 153 helped Australia secured an outright victory. Chennai 2008? How many runs were scored in that match by sides? From what I recall, Andrew Strauss scored 2 hundreds in that match and the pitch was flat enough for Yuvraj to make runs on.

What Sehwag has done is average 9.80 from 5 innings in South Africa as an opener. That's not just an example of a batsman out of form and struggling but an example that he cannot play the conditions. I've never seen a batsman averaging over 50 struggle so much. When Hayden was struggling, he was averaging 30 but to average single figures just tells another story.

Here are some of Hayden's finest innings:

203 vs India, 2001. (Total team score: 391)
Cricinfo - 3rd Test: India v Australia at Chennai, Mar 18-22, 2001

153 vs. England, 2006 (Australia were 5/84, very overcast conditions aswell)
Cricinfo - 4th Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 26-28, 2006

138 vs. England, 2005 (Fighting for his career, absolute last chance, his innings was halted on several occasions due to bad light)
Cricinfo - 5th Test: England v Australia at The Oval, Sep 8-12, 2005

130 vs. Sri Lanka, 2004 (After trailing by 160 runs coming into the 2nd innings, Hayden's ton inevability helps Australia to a great victory)
Cricinfo - 1st Test: Sri Lanka v Australia at Galle, Mar 8-12, 2004

122 vs. South Africa, 2002 (Setup a massive score, this innings was so good that the great Steve Waugh went onto say afterwards that he had never seen someone bat better and that it was embarrassing to bat with Hayden because Hayden was so good. Also claimed the conditions were tough to bat on.)
Cricinfo - 1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002

119 vs. India, 2001 (After being 5-99, Hayden's hundred helps Australia build a decent lead, which helps Australia to victory, under 1000 runs were scored in the entire match)
Cricinfo - 1st Test: India v Australia at Mumbai, Feb 27-Mar 1, 2001

119 vs. Pakistan, 2002 (Batted for over 7 hours in 50 degree heat, where every other batsman failed to past 50, under 500 runs were scored in the match, was against Shoaib when he was at his peak)
Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v Pakistan at Sharjah, Oct 11-12, 2002

102 vs. South Africa, 2002 (Tough pitch from memory)
Cricinfo - 2nd Test: South Africa v Australia at Durban, Mar 24-28, 2006

94 vs. South Africa, 2006 (Another tough pitch, controlled the innings with wickets falling around him and earnt high praise after he got out)
Cricinfo - 1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Cape Town, Mar 16-18, 2006

 

[silentstriker]

Playing in the subcontinent helps, but he is not a horrible traveler.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Playing in the subcontinent helps, but he is not a horrible traveler.

He averages 43 outside the subcontient. The same identical average as Marcus Trescothick's overall record.

 

[Precambrian]

He averages 43 outside the subcontient. The same identical average as Marcus Trescothick's overall record.

What does Hayden averages outside Australia?

 

[Evermind]

The reason people don't take you seriously, ben, is that you pull incorrect stats out of your ass.

"Ponting averaged 46 on the last tour of India"

No, he averaged 38.

"All of Sehwag's hundreds have come in draws"

No, he has also scored them in victories and losses.

Sometimes they're accurate, but completely pointless.

"Sehwag averages 9.8 from 5 innings as an opener in SA."

That's 2.5 games we're talking about. If he scores a 100* next game as an opener, his average will be astronomical, and as accurate an assessment of his ability there as the 9.80. What next, Ponting went for a duck in that ONE GAME 3 years ago and so he sucks? Don't be stupid.

Since so many of the stats you quote are simply wrong or irrelevant, there's no need to go further. I'd argue against you, but I don't want to be known as a minnow-basher.

 

[andyc]

The reason people don't take you seriously, ben, is that you pull incorrect stats out of your ass.

"Ponting averaged 46 on the last tour of India"

No, he averaged 38.

TBF, as Gelman pointed out, that is factually correct. Just a bit misleading.

 

[Evermind]

TBF, as Gelman pointed out, that is factually correct. Just a bit misleading.

Just saw that.

So ben is not entirely stupid but just intellectually dishonest. Rather be the former TBH.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

What does Hayden averages outside Australia?

A country is not a continent though.

Pitches in the subcontient are fairly similar to eachother and a subcontient player plays about 70-80% of his career in the subcontient - so obviously his record in the subcontient is going to outweight his average outside of the subcontient. It's basically like having a longer career at home. Here is a relevant statistic when it comes to comparing Hayden & Sehwag and the contrasting conditons they play in...

Sehwag averages 56 in the subcontient and 43 outside the subcontient.
Hayden averages 50 in the subcontient and 50 outside the subcontient.

As far as the Ponting average in India goes, I only went-by that because during the latter end of that series they showed a graphic of the leading runscorers in the series and Ponting averaged 46. I just assumed and obviously forgot that he failed in his last Test innings of that series, which would've brought his average down. My bad.

 

[Athlai]

A country is not a continent though.

Besides Australia.

 

[Precambrian]

A country is not a continent though.

Pitches in the subcontient are fairly similar to eachother and a subcontient player plays about 70-80% of his career in the subcontient - so obviously his record in the subcontient is going to outweight his average outside of the subcontient. It's basically like having a longer career at home. Here is a relevant statistic when it comes to comparing Hayden & Sehwag and the contrasting conditons they play in...

Sehwag averages 56 in the subcontient and 43 outside the subcontient.
Hayden averages 50 in the subcontient and 50 outside the subcontient.

As far as the Ponting average in India goes, I only went-by that because during the latter end of that series they showed a graphic of the leading runscorers in the series and Ponting averaged 46. I just assumed and obviously forgot that he failed in his last Test innings of that series, which would've brought his average down. My bad.

Your argument is so poor that my fingers are revolting to type the reply to it, but I will.

Hayden's average is so high only because he bats well in his own backyard and murders them on flat Aussie wickets. Out of that, barring one exceptional series in 2001, Haydos has been strictly average even in the subcontinent, and poor in England.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Your argument is so poor that my fingers are revolting to type the reply to it, but I will.

Hayden's average is so high only because he bats well in his own backyard and murders them on flat Aussie wickets. Out of that, barring one exceptional series in 2001, Haydos has been strictly average even in the subcontinent, and poor in England.

So averaging 49 in South Africa since 2000 (arguably the most difficult place to bat in world cricket since 2000) against the likes of Pollock, Donald, Ntini, Nel and Kallis is just 'average' then is it? Ok.

And being 'average' in the subcontient since 2001 is averaging 61 against Pakistan in 2002 (against Shoaib, Waqar, Saqlain, Kaneria & Razzaq) and 47 against Sri Lanka in 2004, against Murali & Vaas, is it? Ok.

 

[SJS]

Its unfortunate what has happened on this thread. But we all know this isn't the first time and sure wont be the last.

Hayden doesn't need any comparisons with Sehwag to be shown to be the phenomenon that he was, I had once written a piece on the awe he must inspire amongst the bowlers when they saw this giant of a man advancing down the wicket menacingly towards them even before they have decided what kind of a ball they are going to bowl - and that even if they were bowlers some batsmen would be scared to face in the first place. Then he proceeds to dispatch you disdainfully to the farthest corners of the ground in a manner one has not seen since Viv Richards was roaring on the cricket grounds of the world. Hayden was a real nightmare for bowlers and there can not be any doubt about that. Then he went about it the same way match after match and series after series and it began to look as if he would overtake or at least challenge most batting records that existed then. He reached the one he did not look the best candidate to reach (the highest Test innings) since like Sehwag, one does not associate mammoth Test match innings with someone who seems to dare the bowlers as Hayden used to. And yes for a spell, he was rated by many, and by a majority on this board, as the best batsman on the planet and who could argue against those stats.

So Hayden has done enough in his career not to need any certificates from any of us or to win a poll on the CW to have his place in history as one of the most dominating batsmen, literally, figuratively and physically of his time and of all others.

Nor does he need a fawning worshipping fan or fan group to prove his greatness by comparing him to another great of the same era. Its not required and it serves no purpose. But what is worse is for statistics to be used, ingenuously or just cleverly to make the point. Players like Hayden and Sehwag are the last players to be evaluated purely on their statistics. The only reason we need the stats of these two greats is because its difficult to conceive players who batted with the mindset of the Constantines and the Jessops and yet managed to average like the Gavaskars and the Merchants.

There is a reason why the fabulous average of Barrington does not fool any one who saw him and Compton both bat into rating the former as the better player. Statistics can not be used to assess the merits of such batsmen and least of all flimsy straw-in-the-wind stats that are the last refuge of the less knowledgeable cricket buff. I am sorry if this sounds condescending for I really tried to find alternative words for that last sentence but couldnt think of another way to say what I wanted to.

Its impossible to argue over two players and not be able to bring out some points in favour of either. At times they could be very valid points too but often they are just points based on random statistics (we used to have a thread where we said you can prove anything with random stats). Bradman versus Hobbs used to be a very popular one once. Who was the greatest batsman ever?. Trust me inspite of Bradman's awe inspiring stats, there are enough points which can be made for Hobbs too just as there are so many that can be made for Bradman. But if one was to get into a discussion on the subject where people who really knew their cricket, one should end up at least feeling good (about the debate) and even enlightened and more knowledgeable than before.

Often when I try interject in a debate here particularly about older cricketers no one has seen play, I try to quote verbatim from my books. Its very time consuming but it helps for people may not accept my opinion but if the same comes through the words of, say Hammond and Bradman, it carries more weight. Most of the times when I have done that, going into the archives that is, I have bumped into something new or something I had probably read years ago but it had never registered. And on the odd occasion, I will find that I was wrong. Yes, something that I have believed for forty years could be wrong. But the only way for me to find that out is for me to be told otherwise by someone who knows and the only way I will then know better is if I am ready to listen.

If all of us came here just to shout our own points of view, we could still do it, but for me CW is such a great place because there are some really knowledgeable cricket lovers here and one has learnt something from them and trust me some of them are pretty young

 

[honestbharani]

Wtf has that got to do with anything? You're just inviting a response of 'tendulkar's been ordinary v non-minnows since 2001, averaging far less than a true great should'. It would be about as relevant.

He used the sample space of Sehwag in RSA to say Sehwag was a miserable failure.. So by the same logic, Ponting in India is just as bad.. So he is a miserable failure too...



I just gave another example which fits his theory...




And BTW, Sachin against non-minnows since 2001, really? Care to check up the figures???

 

[Shri]

Am I the only one who skipped the 1/11, 1/18, etc stuff here completely?

 

[Sanz]

This thread started off so well, but, like most comparison threads, it has followed the same route to become crap. I must say, its not just Warne Vs. Murali threads but almost all comparison threads end up same way.

Can we put a ban on comparison threads for a while in order to encourage members to be more creative with thread topics ?

 

[honestbharani]

A country is not a continent though.

Pitches in the subcontient are fairly similar to eachother and a subcontient player plays about 70-80% of his career in the subcontient - so obviously his record in the subcontient is going to outweight his average outside of the subcontient. It's basically like having a longer career at home. Here is a relevant statistic when it comes to comparing Hayden & Sehwag and the contrasting conditons they play in...

Sehwag averages 56 in the subcontient and 43 outside the subcontient.
Hayden averages 50 in the subcontient and 50 outside the subcontient.

As far as the Ponting average in India goes, I only went-by that because during the latter end of that series they showed a graphic of the leading runscorers in the series and Ponting averaged 46. I just assumed and obviously forgot that he failed in his last Test innings of that series, which would've brought his average down. My bad.

India toured Sri Lanka only once with Sehwag was a regular test player and we toured Pakistan twice... That is 3 tours in his career of almost 8 years... How is that going to MAJORLY affect his rating? And why is it difficult to look at Hayden's figues home and away and see how it compares with Sehwag????



I agree reg. your assessment about Sehwag being similar to Gayle and Tresco but so was Hayden. Ok, he was a little bit better than Sehwag but then Hayden had time to work on his weaknesses as well.. Let us see how Sehwag goes as he gets more matches and experience into himself... Where Sehwag (and Hayden, for that matter) differ from blokes like Tresco (Gayle, I feel, has talent similar to these two, so his issue, for me, is different), is that they are ridiculously good when the conditions are favourable to them.. They do things that not even a Lara or a Tendulkar or a Ponting can do most of the times... They score so fast (Sehwag quite quicker than Hayden) that they invariably create winning opportunities on flat tracks.. That is sometimes as difficult to achieve as achieving a draw on a difficult track... Hayden for me is about 25% better than Sehwag in swinging and seaming conditions (I put them equal in spinning tracks) but that is made up by the fact that Sehwag is almost that much ahead in terms of destructiveness on the good batting tracks, where you need all the time you can gain to force a result... And he constructs bigger knocks than Hayden does too.... All these things need to be factored in...


And the thing about flat tracks is... it is STILL cricket. I can understand someone like Jayawardene who almost invariably struggles in difficult conditions and cashes in on easy paced tracks but with someone like Sehwag.... when he struggles, most of the time the others struggle too and for those occassions when he gets found out while others do well, there is the fact that he does so so much more than most other players on the flat tracks which gives his side a HUGE chance to get a result if they are good enough....


I have said before that Haydos and Sehwag are criminally underrated here... Nothing has changed..

 

[0RI0N]

Am I the only one who skipped the 1/11, 1/18, etc stuff here completely?

/no

 

[wfdu_ben91]

India toured Sri Lanka only once with Sehwag was a regular test player and we toured Pakistan twice... That is 3 tours in his career of almost 8 years... How is that going to MAJORLY affect his rating? And why is it difficult to look at Hayden's figues home and away and see how it compares with Sehwag????



I agree reg. your assessment about Sehwag being similar to Gayle and Tresco but so was Hayden. Ok, he was a little bit better than Sehwag but then Hayden had time to work on his weaknesses as well.. Let us see how Sehwag goes as he gets more matches and experience into himself... Where Sehwag (and Hayden, for that matter) differ from blokes like Tresco (Gayle, I feel, has talent similar to these two, so his issue, for me, is different), is that they are ridiculously good when the conditions are favourable to them.. They do things that not even a Lara or a Tendulkar or a Ponting can do most of the times... They score so fast (Sehwag quite quicker than Hayden) that they invariably create winning opportunities on flat tracks.. That is sometimes as difficult to achieve as achieving a draw on a difficult track... Hayden for me is about 25% better than Sehwag in swinging and seaming conditions (I put them equal in spinning tracks) but that is made up by the fact that Sehwag is almost that much ahead in terms of destructiveness on the good batting tracks, where you need all the time you can gain to force a result... And he constructs bigger knocks than Hayden does too.... All these things need to be factored in...


And the thing about flat tracks is... it is STILL cricket. I can understand someone like Jayawardene who almost invariably struggles in difficult conditions and cashes in on easy paced tracks but with someone like Sehwag.... when he struggles, most of the time the others struggle too and for those occassions when he gets found out while others do well, there is the fact that he does so so much more than most other players on the flat tracks which gives his side a HUGE chance to get a result if they are good enough....


I have said before that Haydos and Sehwag are criminally underrated here... Nothing has changed..

Yeah but Hayden has been one of the major reasons for Australia's dominance. His success as an Opening Batsman has helped everyone single middle-order batsman that has played for Australia over the past decade.

Hell, even Ricky Ponting has benefitted from playing along side Hayden. Ponting averaged in the low 40's before Hayden got a permanant spot in the Australian team.

To say that Hayden would've struggled in a lesser team, is just incorrect because if anything he would've made them stronger.