From 83 he was the best bowler in the line up, with Holding increasingly injured and Garner definely being the clear no. 2.
He would have helped them more than anything else, considering his wpm, percentage of top end wickets, match winning performances and he was the spear head, the leader.
There's advantages for both sides, Murali had custom made home pitches and his wpm benefitted. Same with Hadlee.
It's give and take.
No, I corrected you about this
here in a post which
you admitted you didn't read properly so I'll summarise the findings:
Hadlee's WPM was better away than home: 5.35 vs. 4.67.
Hadlee's best years were his last seven, off the short run (252 wickets at 19.86). For these years:
His WPM was better away than home: 6.19 vs. 4.47.
His average was better away than home: 18.44 vs. 22.65.
He had six 10WM away, 0 at home.
He had six (of his eight) Player of the Series awards away, 0 at home.
The aggregate batting stats for NZ pitches during Hadlee's final seven years had a batting average of 32.65, more than one run higher than the global batting average of 31.49 during McGrath's batting era post-2000.
If Hadlee's home pitches had been tailor-made for him then Hadlee, being deadly on greentops, would probably have had better stats home than away as was the case at Notts:
home average: 12.96
away: 16.54 (still remarkable)
(thanks again to
@Coronis for this home and away split!)