• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Hayden vs Hussain

tooextracool

International Coach
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.
 

Swervy

International Captain
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.

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.
 

pup11

International Coach
When you guys talk about sheer natural talent Haydos is miles ahead of Hussain, Haydos is an intimidating batsman to bowl to and when he is in his zone not many bowlers in world cricket can control him and over the years he has improved his technique too.


Haydos believes in dominating bowling attacks and Hussain was a batsman who used to work on a bowler's patience to score his runs, i think Hussain was mentally more tougher than Matty.
 

Fiery

Banned
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.
Spot on
 

tooextracool

International Coach
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.
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.

As i have already mentioned it is tough to compare players across eras. Had Hayden not failed back in the 90s then it would be a clear cut argument. but because he did, one cannot claim that he is better than someone who actually succeeded during that era simply because he(Hussain) didnt succeed with flying colors as Hayden has done in a much easier era for batting.
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
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
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
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.
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...
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Is it the same Nasser Hussain we are talking about who couldn't get a place in Tamilnadu XI ?
 

Swervy

International Captain
Richard seems to be giving this thread a wide berth for some reason ?

I wonder if he has seen how ludicrous it all is?

He is actually very quick to tell us all about the things he has got right and everyone else has got wrong in the past (although who was 'right' and who was 'wrong' in the harmison situation is still up for debate really, we probably wont know the answers until he retires) but he does avoid mentioning things like when he said Mohamed Yousuf was a crap test player and could only score vs teams like B'desh etc.

I would suspect he will avoid this thread for quite some while, until some time when Hayden has a bad run of form and Dick will dig this thread up again, and say 'I told you so'
 

Top