tooextracool
International Coach
Theres more chance of Liam Plunkett and Sajid Mahmood being successful in international cricket than Richard brainwashing me tbh.I hope Richard hasn't brainwashed you to think a new era of cricket began in 2001
Theres more chance of Liam Plunkett and Sajid Mahmood being successful in international cricket than Richard brainwashing me tbh.I hope Richard hasn't brainwashed you to think a new era of cricket began in 2001
Do you honestly think Hayden got better this century? Given that he showed the exact same flaws in both the Ashes of 2001 as the Ashes of 2005 i can hardly see how anyone could claim so. Yes he improved out of sight against spin as opposed to what he used to be when he first burst onto the scene in the 90s, but there is no way anyone can claim that Hayden overcame his technical deficiencies against pace from the 90s, because AFAIC they have been shown up plenty of times during this decade.players do get better though
Do you honestly think Hayden got better this century? Given that he showed the exact same flaws in both the Ashes of 2001 as the Ashes of 2005 i can hardly see how anyone could claim so. Yes he improved out of sight against spin as opposed to what he used to be when he first burst onto the scene in the 90s, but there is no way anyone can claim that Hayden overcame his technical deficiencies against pace from the 90s, because AFAIC they have been shown up plenty of times during this decade.
Spot onbut if your waknesses are completely overshadowed by your strengths, and even the most ardent Hayden skeptic cannot deny the fact that he churns out runs at a high pace, then there isnt too much of a problem.
If we were playing in 90s like conditions whatever they , maybe Hayden could have improved on his skills vs the moving ball, given his exposure to it. Who knows?
Look, heres the facts, Hayden averages mid 50s in a period where scoring is up 10%.
Hussain was very middle of the range in both the 90s and 2000s. It doesnt take a genius to see that despite Haydens weaknesses, his strengths outweigh those of Hussains.
The fact is that you only get a handful of chances at the test match level to prove yourself. If you dont score enough runs at the top level within well 5-6 tests you probably wouldnt get too many games after(Hayden was not only fortunate to get a recall, but he also got a recall just as the bowling quality started to deteriorate), and as such one could hardly expect Hayden to get 'significant exposure' to the moving ball at the highest level, which clearly wasnt happening in domestic cricket.but if your waknesses are completely overshadowed by your strengths, and even the most ardent Hayden skeptic cannot deny the fact that he churns out runs at a high pace, then there isnt too much of a problem.
If we were playing in 90s like conditions whatever they , maybe Hayden could have improved on his skills vs the moving ball, given his exposure to it. Who knows?
Look, heres the facts, Hayden averages mid 50s in a period where scoring is up 10%.
Hussain was very middle of the range in both the 90s and 2000s. It doesnt take a genius to see that despite Haydens weaknesses, his strengths outweigh those of Hussains.
So good that they average 70+ for over 5 years?players do get better though
tooextracool;11826219 because AFAIC they have been shown up plenty of times during this decade.[/QUOTE said:To the degree that he has 27 tons @ 53 - I wish that someone had shown me up so badly
Coming next: Muralitharan v Vic Marks
Spot the Englishman.
YES THIS POST WAS MADE IN JEST!!!!
or Muralitharan v Neil PickupComing next: Muralitharan v Vic Marks
The dawn of the new era changes to suit whatever theory he's presenting as fact on the forum at the time...I thought Richard was of the opinion that the new era started in the early '90s.
in addition, this "comparison" is almost completely focussing on hayden's weaknesses and not talking about whether hussain had any strengths whatsoever, apart from some solid grit he didn't....hayden has his weakness against pace but his strengths against spin and his attitude and the way he came back after his initial failure in international cricket cannot be just ignored because it has just been spectacular for the most part...also, you cannot forget that hayden held his own in a strong aussie lineup while they were at the top of the cricketing world and there was a lot of competition for the batting spots....comparatively, hussain held his place in the england team partly because the batting lineup was mostly mediocre for a long period in the 90s and partly because he was a really good captain...but if your waknesses are completely overshadowed by your strengths, and even the most ardent Hayden skeptic cannot deny the fact that he churns out runs at a high pace, then there isnt too much of a problem.
If we were playing in 90s like conditions whatever they , maybe Hayden could have improved on his skills vs the moving ball, given his exposure to it. Who knows?
Look, heres the facts, Hayden averages mid 50s in a period where scoring is up 10%.
Hussain was very middle of the range in both the 90s and 2000s. It doesnt take a genius to see that despite Haydens weaknesses, his strengths outweigh those of Hussains.
Richard seems to be giving this thread a wide berth for some reason ?