Inzamam vs Hayden; Test Batting

[Teja.]

Who was the better batsman overall? Hayden on one hand, averaged slightly higher but his test career(meaningfully) was only 7-8 years long. Inzamam had a significantly longer career and scored negligibly less on average.

Inzamam for me.

 

[Spark]

Needs poll. Add one.

Or alternatively you could tell me how to do it

 

[Teja.]

Needs poll. Add one.

Or alternatively you could tell me how to do it

I had to look around for a few minutes too.

It's in the 'thread tools' tab at the top of the OP.

 

[benchmark00]

 

[weldone]

Interesting comparison. Sehwag, Inzamam, Sangakkara, Gilchrist, Hayden - all close together for me. I shall probably like them in that order atm.

 

[weeman27bob]

Inzaman was, at least in my eyes, considerably more useful to Pakistan than Hayden was to Australia. He also averaged 78 in won games, which is pretty impressive.

 

[Himannv]

Would rather watch Imogen Thomas than either of those two fat ugly men.

 

[Prince EWS]

While I'm not necessarily saying I'd vote for Hayden (it's something I'd really have to think about and I'm actually now unsure of my position on some aspects of batsmanship) I thought I'd make some general points about Inzy here. I definitely have always felt Inzamam to be a slightly over-rated when compared to other greats in some circles.

Inzaman was, at least in my eyes, considerably more useful to Pakistan than Hayden was to Australia.

Quite, but I don't think it's really relevant as it's more a reflection of the comparative strength of Australia compared to Pakistan than anything else. You could just as easily say that Andy Blignaut was more useful to Zimbabwe than Jason Gillespie was to Australia but there's no doubt who the better cricketer was and it wasn't Arnoldus Mauritius. That Hayden wouldn't have been such a loss to Australia given their depth and overall strength doesn't change the fact that his performances were in the same general ball-park as Inzamam's.

He also averaged 78 in won games, which is pretty impressive.

I've always felt this stat out of proper context is pretty meaningless. While it could (and probably does, in Inzy's case) suggest an ability to perform under pressure and get the team home in close matches, it can also suggest the exact opposite. and indicate that a player only scores when the going is easy. Ian Bell, for example, averages 60 in wins around 30 in losses; a stat I've seen brought up to support the theory that he's somewhat of a coat-tail-rider.

What's always bothered me about Inzy, though, is his (relatively, for a great batsman) poor record in the three biggest tests for a batsman's ability to play pace throughout his career. He averaged 30 in Australia and 31 in South Africa, which is poor by anyone's standards, and an average of 42 in England hardly measures up to the rest of his numbers either. Lately, due to the really small sample sizes we're dealing with, I've definitely come more and more around to the idea of late that sometimes a poor record in a country is just a coincidence owing to lack of form at the time of that tour, particularly when players have performed well in similar conditions across a long career. However, 53 innings in the era's most challenging pace-bowling countries is definitely not a small sample size and he produced an average of just 35 in them overall. There's a firm argument to suggest that being indestructible at home at home (where you play half your games, don't forget) and merely able to hold your own in alien conditions isn't necessarily worse for your team than being more balanced and producing similar overall numbers, and there's an element of reading too much into coincidences and anomalies too, but when you're comparing such great and such even players, you do have to split them on something, so he ranks lower for me than most. Funnily enough I have similar reservations about Hayden - only averages in the 35 region in SA and England - but he's generally rated lower than Inzy by most and unlike Inzy, he at least performed at home against South Africa.

 

[hang on]

in reference to weldone's comment, i have always - partly subconsciously perhaps - classified cricketers by their quality into discrete clusters.

for example, in the 70s and 80s, it was richards, gavaskar and chappell in the first tier. followed miandad, border. and then the others like gower, gooch, boycott. (extended timelines, i realise...)

in the 90s and onwards, it has always been tendulkar and lara in the first tier with perhaps ponting and waugh (both briefly) in the same category. and then kallis, dravid, flower, sehwag, hayden, gilchrist, inzi pietersen et al.

regarding inzi v. hayden, inzi takes it over buzz by a gut's breadth.

 

[weldone]

in the 90s and onwards, it has always been tendulkar and lara in the first tier with perhaps ponting and waugh (both briefly) in the same category. and then kallis, dravid, flower, sehwag, hayden, gilchrist, inzi pietersen et al.

regarding inzi v. hayden, inzi takes it over buzz by a gut's breadth.

I was just thinking if I had to rank all batsmen whom I've watched live in test matches how that would look...would probably be closer to your clustering of batsmen from 90s onwards, with some differences

1. Sachin Tendulkar
2. Brian Lara
3. Steve Waugh
4. Allan Border
5. Ricky Ponting
6. Jacques Kallis
7. Rahul Dravid
8. Virender Sehwag
9. Kumar Sangakkara
10. Inzamam-ul Haq
11. Adam Gilchrist
12. Matthew Hayden
13. Andy Flower
14. Graham Gooch
15. VVS Laxman
16. Shivnarine Chanderpaul
17. Aravinda Desilva
18. Mahela Jayawardena
19. Mohammad Yousuf
20. Saeed Anwar

I like Pietersen, and I think he has all the talent to be among top 10 in this list. But somehow, he hasn't done justice to his talent thus far, and I shall keep him just out of the top 20 for now.

 

[Cevno]

Inzamam tbh.

Very Tempted to vote for Imogen Thomas though.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Would rather watch Imogen Thomas than either of those two fat ugly men.

I wouldn't wanna watch her, can't say what i would want to do though as i'd get banned off the forum.

 

[Cevno]

You can stay Unnamed though.

 

[vcs]

Agree with PEWS about Inzy's record in/against Australia/SA.

I'd take Hayden, just, because openers like him who can intimidate the opposition are rarer to come by.. whereas there are more batsmen who can play a similar role to Inzy, with varying levels of effectiveness (Steve Waugh, Laxman, Martyn, etc.). Also Hayden could hurt you more with the really huge innings compared to Inzy, which is just a gut feeling.

Inzy's my favourite of the two by a loooong way, though.

 

[silentstriker]

Inzy. One of my favorite players.

 

[Top_Cat]

Funnily enough I have similar reservations about Hayden - only averages in the 35 region in SA and England - but he's generally rated lower than Inzy by most and unlike Inzy, he at least performed at home against South Africa.

Averaging 30-odd as an opener is harder than averaging 30-odd as a middle-order player, though. SA in general is a bit of a graveyard for openers, without checking, Hayden would be one of the better performers since re-admission.

EDIT: Speaking of foreign openers. Obviously, home-grown openers have done well.

 

[vcs]

An Inzamam vs. Miandad comparison would be interesting.. more like-for-like, both being middle-order batsmen with a reputation for fire-fighting. Has it been done on here before?

 

[Prince EWS]

Averaging 30-odd as an opener is harder than averaging 30-odd as a middle-order player, though. SA in general is a bit of a graveyard for openers, without checking, Hayden would be one of the better performers since re-admission.

EDIT: Speaking of foreign openers. Obviously, home-grown openers have done well.

Quite.

Batting averages of touring batsmen in South Africa since 1990, by position

Opening		27.59
Number 3	32.16
Number 4	32.61
Number 5	34.63

It drops away after that, although that's obviously because the quality of batsmen starts dropping away. Using simple multiplication, Hayden's average of ~ 34 in South Africa would be the equivalent of averaging ~ 43 down at 5 where Inzy often batted.

 

[dravid1830]

Is this even a valid comparison ? Hayden was arguably top 5 openers of all time.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

people don't realise how difficult task opening the batting is.

Hayden by a country mile.


And btw Inzamam was a sitting duck against ATG bowlers last decade. And he was nobody in 90s.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Top_Cat]

Bit harsh, for mine. Played the occasional top knock against some great bowling attacks. But yeah, in general, one thing I remember about Inzi was that the threat was generally greater than reality. Sad because, much like in front of a Bay Marie, when he got going, nothing short of a freight train was going to stop him.

That or a catch like this. Still an incredible grab.

EDIT: Incidentally, check out this section of the video;

Ponting takes a catch

Ponting throws the ball in the air, Fleming watches it coming down again, at about 2:27 it lands on Ponting's shoulder and he doesn't even react. Bloke must have shoulders of granite to not even flinch!