The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[mr_mister]

So he'd had time to practice in the conditions? It did always seem pretty random that he did so damn well in that series where all the other established aussie batsmen did pretty meh

Like he was just a typical flat-track bully against pace for a lot of his career(not criticizing him but there were lots of roads and not much quality bowling opposition during his prime) and here's this legendary series in between sub-par performances

 

[honestbharani]

He had some experience of the conditions before that tour, put it that way. It may have been a few months ahead and I don't think he was facing test quality bowling or anything but he definitely had a feel of the conditions before that series.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Was Baugh really much of a better keeper than Ramdin?

Ramdin wasn't even a good batsman anyway

Ramdin was the best keeper in the region. Baugh was the better batsman. If only our selectors could have noticed that and play both of them.

 

[a massive zebra]

Baugh averaged 17 in Tests so he surely wasn't worth his place in the side for his batting alone?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Baugh averaged 17 in Tests so he surely wasn't worth his place in the side for his batting alone?

Was speaking from the FC record POV:

Baugh 31.51
Ramdin 30.02

 

[TheJediBrah]

Baugh averaged 17 in Tests so he surely wasn't worth his place in the side for his batting alone?

I'm not sure there were more than 2 or 3 specialist batsmen in the region who were worth their place in the side for batting alone tbh

 

[Red]

Hayden is a bit of a myth. Hardly ever played an innings I'd consider clutch, especially against good or very good pace attacks.

 

[stephen]

Hayden is a bit of a myth. Hardly ever played an innings I'd consider clutch, especially against good or very good pace attacks.

It's hard for an opener to play a clutch innings because usually they're either setting up the game or they're out.

The fifth test in the 2005 Ashes could be considered clutch given he was likely to be axed if he didn't ton up. His UAE knock was about as good as you'll ever see as well. He destroyed the ATG South African attack when they toured in 02 (I think). Even before his return he played a decent knock in 97 on that WACA pitch in the mid 90s against Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop.

But as I said, openers rarely play clutch innings. They usually have to be content with setting up the match, which Hayden regularly did.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Hayden is a bit of a myth. Hardly ever played an innings I'd consider clutch, especially against good or very good pace attacks.

lol rubbish. I can think of plenty. Just the other day I was watching highlights of his 130 in the second innings against Sri Lanka in 2004, on a pitch turning square against Murali, when Aus had a 160 run 1st innings deficit.

And as stephen alludes to a big reason he made a lot of 100s that don't seem to be "clutch" and scored in one-sided games is because he was opening the batting and made the games one sided himself by dominating from the start.

He definitely was at his best in batting friendly conditions though, maybe more so than others, but counting that against him is also dumb. It's still something that he was better at than others.

 

[Flametree]

Hayden can't be ignored pretty much for one series in India alone, regardless of what he did otherwise.

As for Ramdin, maybe he just underperformed against NZ, but he was really really terrible every time I saw him. I think you could say that he practically cost them the series last time NZ toured - kept not laying a glove on simple chances and then watching Williamson et al score mountains of runs.

 

[stephen]

I think part of the problem Hayden's reputation faces was that other than South Africa (Donald, Pollock, Ntini and Kallis in 01, Pollock, Ntini, Kallis and Nel later) and England 05, there were few great pace attacks in his time. He dominated SA in 01 home and away. There were very few tours in 02 (when he was at his absolute peak). He was out of form for a while leading into the 05 series but then still managed to ton up in the last match while the Ashes (and his spot) were still on the line. I think if he'd been given more of a run earlier in his career he would have established himself sooner. But the Australian heirarchy decided to give him limited tests against the ATG West Indies attack of Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop and away tours against South Africa to try and establish himself. It was crazy player management.

His overall record against South Africa looks a lot worse than it actually was because of his final series where he was well and truly past it and his first tour before he'd established himself. But he dominated them in between times, including when they had very strong pace attacks (the best in the world outside Australia). He also didn't do too badly against McGrath in the shield matches he played against him.

Saying that Hayden couldn't play swing or pace is to ignore all the times that he did.

 

[Red]

lol rubbish. I can think of plenty. Just the other day I was watching highlights of his 130 in the second innings against Sri Lanka in 2004, on a pitch turning square against Murali, when Aus had a 160 run 1st innings deficit.

And as stephen alludes to a big reason he made a lot of 100s that don't seem to be "clutch" and scored in one-sided games is because he was opening the batting and made the games one sided himself by dominating from the start.

He definitely was at his best in batting friendly conditions though, maybe more so than others, but counting that against him is also dumb. It's still something that he was better at than others.

My point about him being a myth because he didn’t play many clutch innings against decent pace attacks is countered “rubbish” because he played an innings against Murali on a turning pitch? Lol. Ok!

 

[TheJediBrah]

My point about him being a myth because he didn’t play many clutch innings against decent pace attacks is countered “rubbish” because he played an innings against Murali on a turning pitch? Lol. Ok!

nah try reading that again

 

[mr_mister]

he's not a myth but failing against the tougher attacks of the 90s and then mainly crunching popgun attacks in the 2000s is a bit damning on his record

despite the majority of his runs coming in easy conditions he still had plenty of awesome moments though like the India '01 series, that century in the scorching heat against Pak in '02, the SL series jedi mentioned. as well as doing consistently well against 21st century SA

plus the 380 despite being against Zim was still a 380, tremendous feat of endurance


if he only had the 21st century career it wouldn't look bad at all, but his test career leading up to the India 01 series is a bit of a blemish. Averaged 24 after 13 tests, was quite lucky to even get the chance to establish himself like he did in India. And the poor '01 ashes performance right after it when nearly everyone else fired is also a bit damning, as England were still mainly using their 90s bowling stars at that point like Gough, Caddick and Mullally. so it can be used to argue the theory that Hayden benefited from a changing of the guard concerning each country's frontline bowlers rather than some kind of newfound determination/increase of his ability once 2002 came around and he became unstoppable

 

[TheJediBrah]

he's not a myth but failing against the tougher attacks of the 90s and then mainly crunching popgun attacks in the 2000s is a bit damning on his record

despite the majority of his runs coming in easy conditions he still had plenty of awesome moments though like the India '01 series, that century in the scorching heat against Pak in '02, the SL series jedi mentioned. as well as doing consistently well against 21st century SA

plus the 380 despite being against Zim was still a 380, tremendous feat of endurance


if he only had the 21st century career it wouldn't look bad at all, but his test career leading up to the India 01 series is a bit of a blemish. Averaged 24 after 13 tests, was quite lucky to even get the chance to establish himself like he did in India. And the poor ashes right after it when nearly everyone else fired is also a bit damning, as England were still mainly using their 90s bowling stars at that point like Gough and Caddick. so it can be used to argue the theory that Hayden benefited from a changing of the guard concerning each country's frontline bowlers rather than some kind of newfound determination/increase of his ability

again though, he wasn't the only one playing in those conditions and he still did better than any other openers.

 

[mr_mister]

yeah i know all that and agree. but just the fact he actually was tried and failed in the 90s unlike say, G Smith or Michel Clarke, could be used to argue when conditions were tougher and sides were full of ATG bowlers he couldn't cope. i don't fully agree but i can see the reasons for the argument

 

[TheJediBrah]

It could definitely be an argument but it is one pretty easily debunked given his inexperience in the 90s

 

[mr_mister]

yeah he was younger but it's not like he was a teenager. especially odd are the 2000 WI series and 2001 ashes series flops when everyone else made tons of runs, he was nearly 30 then and had dominated shield attacks for years at that point. i know they are only 2 bad series sandwiching an awesome series, but he still was a bit lucky he was persisted with especially with players like Elliott and Cox probably deserving of an opening spot too

 

[TheJediBrah]

yeah he was younger but it's not like he was a teenager. especially odd are the 2000 WI series and 2001 ashes series flops when everyone else made tons of runs, he was nearly 30 then and had dominated shield attacks for years at that point. i know they are only 2 bad series sandwiching an awesome series, but he still was a bit lucky he was persisted with especially with players like Elliott and Cox probably deserving of an opening spot too

They weren't exactly against quality fast bowling in those series anyway

 

[mr_mister]

no, but there was still Walsh and Gough/Caddick and other remnants of the 90s lingering in those sides. And they were the guys who kept getting him out

I love Hayden but getting to play 2 five test series within 6 months of each other and not tonning up once is interesting. especially for that era where there so was much talent waiting for a chance. the india series bought him a lot of kudos i guess