Kevin Pietersen vs Michael Hussey

[Perm]

Michael Hussey has been the better batsman to date, but I'd prefer to watch Kevin Pietersen.

 

[burr]

Pietersen is the more talented player however Hussey atm is certainly the more complete batsman, the way he eliminates all risk early in his innings really is remarkable, the bowler knows if he's going to get Hussey out early he needs to bowl an exceptional delivery. He knows his limitations so well and I really dont think theres a more adaptable batsman on the planet atm.

Hussey a better player, yet Pietersen as has already been mentioned certainly more valuable to his side. And I get the impression history will remember Pietersen as the better player, he's going to have a significantly longer career (100+ tests compared to Hussey who might play 60) and he certainly hasnt reached the peak of his powers in terms of maturity and the mental aspect yet, theres still much improvement in him, whereas Hussey is at his peak right now.

Agree.

IMO he's a bit like Michael Bevan. Despite the phenomenal amount of runs he scores he's strangely unattractive to watch, like a lot of stiff-armed left-handed run-machines from Aussie like Langer, Hayden, Taylor, etc. Give me a Gower any day

Agree.

 

[Mister Wright]

As good as Hussey is, he doesn't go on to big, big hundreds, although that is negated by continually getting centuries. I'd much rather watch Pietersen bat any day of the week. Watching Hussey, for me, is pretty boring, there's really no 'wow' factor, as it all looks too easy for him. Pietersen on the other hand can create shots out of nowhere. Where as Hussey is more of a natural batsman.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

We'll find that out after we see him in a WC semi final.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

As good as Hussey is, he doesn't go on to big, big hundreds, although that is negated by continually getting centuries. I'd much rather watch Pietersen bat any day of the week. Watching Hussey, for me, is pretty boring, there's really no 'wow' factor, as it all looks too easy for him.

AWTA. One feels he'd fit in wonderfully in the 1980s or 90s. He strikes in the low 50s, unusual for an Aussie, and he's a practised leaver.

Almost a shame he's at his height now, when he can be denigrated as an FTB of sorts. I think he would've been met with the same success in any era, with such an airtight technique.

 

[Perm]

As good as Hussey is, he doesn't go on to big, big hundreds, although that is negated by continually getting centuries.

Something else I'd noticed is that Hussey usually doesn't lose his concentration just after reaching his century. For example, the centuries he has scored read as follows -

137
133*
122
182*
103
133
132

He's only had the one big century, in excess of 150, but quite a few between 120 and 140. It's almost as though after he scores a century, he has only failed once (103), consistently got starts, and made the one big score (182*) If that makes any sense

 

[bond21]

The question is whos better - Hussey or Pietersen.

The answer is Michael Hussey

The question is not who will be better in 10 years. Thats just stupid.

Pietersen is too inconsistent, Hussey is the most consistent batsman in the world. Everytime he walks out to bat you generally know hes going to score over 50.

 

[bond21]

I would rather watch McGrath bat but that doesnt make him a better batsman...

Husseys not boring to watch, his cover drive is the best in the world, he pulls a lot of balls and has a solid defense.

People think Pietersen is better because he stands out in the english team. Hes their best batsman by a mile. Slot him into a decent team like SA or Australia and suddenly he loses his spotlight.

Anyway i hope this isnt a best batsman in the world poll, because its neither of them.

Ponting is the best batsman in the world, pretty much common knowledge.

 

[Speersy]

I would rather watch McGrath bat but that doesnt make him a better batsman...

Murali for me

Hussey has not lost a test yet, that has to be some kind of record for sure.

 

[usarav]

Kevin Pietersen is better

Both are equally good but haing watched both people's game,I would prefer Pietersen.

 

[Richard]

Watching Hussey, for me, is pretty boring, there's really no 'wow' factor, as it all looks too easy for him. Pietersen on the other hand can create shots out of nowhere. Where as Hussey is more of a natural batsman.

I don't neccessarily find Hussey boring the way I do the Gilchrists and Haydens, but you're smack on the money about the fact that it just looks absurdly easy for him. There's nothing unorthdox (sic) or out-of-the-ordinary about him - he's just way, way better at picking the right shot than most people.

Someone once said that virtually everything about Pietersen's batting is manufactured, and whoever it was (may possibly have been David Lloyd) was smack on the money for mine. Orthdox (sic) strokes are probably in the minority for him.

 

[UncleTheOne]

Husseys not boring to watch, his cover drive is the best in the world,

vaughan's cover drive >> hussey's cover drive

but hussey over kp for me.

 

[Fiery]

I don't neccessarily find Hussey boring the way I do the Gilchrists and Haydens, but you're smack on the money about the fact that it just looks absurdly easy for him. There's nothing unorthdox (sic) or out-of-the-ordinary about him - he's just way, way better at picking the right shot than most people.

Someone once said that virtually everything about Pietersen's batting is manufactured, and whoever it was (may possibly have been David Lloyd) was smack on the money for mine. Orthdox (sic) strokes are probably in the minority for him.

Adam Gilchrist boring

 

[Richard]

Yeah, scores too quickly. I like a contest between bat and ball - any time the scoring becomes too fast I get bored very quickly. Sadly, this is very often when Gilchrist is at the crease.

I can admire his skill, but I can never enjoy watching him bat.

 

[Fiery]

Yeah, scores too quickly. I like a contest between bat and ball - any time the scoring becomes too fast I get bored very quickly. Sadly, this is very often when Gilchrist is at the crease.

I can admire his skill, but I can never enjoy watching him bat.

I dunno Rich. I don't even know why you watch the game at times lad. If he played for England would you have a different perspective?

 

[Richard]

Nope.

I watch the game because, mostly, I enjoy it. Fortunately, the Gilchrists of this World are in a tiny, tiny minority. Probably only Vivian Richards of recent times classes alongside him.

 

[Fiery]

Nope.

I watch the game because, mostly, I enjoy it. Fortunately, the Gilchrists of this World are in a tiny, tiny minority. Probably only Vivian Richards of recent times classes alongside him.

So you didn't think much of Viv either? Nooooooooooo!!!!!!!

You're taking this stuffy Englishman routine a bit too far now mate

 

[social]

Hussey is 32

KP is 27

Given his dedication to fitness and training plus the hunger, it's easy to see Hussey playing until close to 40.

KP doesnt strike me as the same - he'll be gone to showbiz or whatever by 35

Therefore, longevity is out as they'll retire at the same time

Unfortunately, it comes down to skill and 30+ runs per innings leaves only one answer - Hussey

 

[Richard]

So you didn't think much of Viv either? Nooooooooooo!!!!!!!

Well I have the temerity to not rate him 2nd-best after Bradman, yes, which is a crime against humanity to some people.

But this is not about how I rate players - it's about how much I enjoy watching them. I doubt I'd have enjoyed watching Vivian Richards much either, of course, but you never know.

You're taking this stuffy Englishman routine a bit too far now mate

Stuffiness has nothing to do with it.

 

[Fiery]

Well I have the temerity to not rate him 2nd-best after Bradman, yes, which is a crime against humanity to some people.

But this is not about how I rate players - it's about how much I enjoy watching them. I doubt I'd have enjoyed watching Vivian Richards much either, of course, but you never know.

Stuffiness has nothing to do with it.

I might need to check your pulse