Mark Waugh vs Damien Martyn

[Briony]

IIRC Dean Jones was dropped after topping the averages against SL, while Waugh was retained after making successive pairs.

 

[Spark]

Mate, pretty much every series that Australia lost in the 90s (not many, i know) could be traced back to a Mark Waugh failure. And that includes all of the 'final frontiers'. If they wanted blood, they could quite easily have gone for it.

Yeah but none of them were Ashes losses. There's a difference. I'm not saying it's correct (and I'm on record here saying the complete Ashes-centric focus, doing nothing until an Ashes series come along then throwing the baby out with the bathwater when we lose is a really quite terrible philosophy). Series losses are one thing but you don't get the massive public baying for blood that you get after you lose an Ashes series. I agree, if they wanted blood, they could have gone for it, but...

 

[Briony]

YouTube - Mark Waugh 121* vs South Africa 1997/98 3rd test Adelaide

That was the test where Donald was injured. Apart from Pollock ( who bowled sparingly at Waugh), it was an ordinary attack for a flat Adelaide pitch. McMillan, pie chucking Klusener and the ordinary Symcox. They bowled a lot of short rubbish too for him to feast upon.

He rather liked Adelaide did Mark Waugh.

 

[weldone]

Waugh, but to be fair Marto was the best player in his family.

Fair point.

But Ian Chappell won't take this, he clearly thinks that Mark Waugh was the best batsman in his family.

One can sympathise with Ian though, he has every right to be partial to a more flamboyant character over a much better batsman from the same family.

 

[Teja.]

But Ian Chappell won't take this, he clearly thinks that Mark Waugh was the best batsman in his family.

Steve Waugh doesn't fit into Ian Chappell's 'Excitementpls' view of the game. Chappell can be a massive idiot at times and it certainly takes one to call Mark a better bat than Steve. Lol at his 'Steve was selfish and cared too much about his average' POV.

 

[vcs]

Haha, did Chappelli really say that? It's not even as if Mark Waugh's SR is that much better than Steve's.

 

[Teja.]

"As far as I am concerned Steve Waugh was a selfish cricketer" In "Hitting Out". He also makes dire comments about Steve being a selfish bat who cared too much about his average, directly/indirectly in lots of articles. WAC the bloke is. Complete idiot.

 

[Jono]

Always thought his problems were mental and that it would eventually click into place for him. I think he would have been alongside Ponting chasing all these records. Big call but I rate him that much.

That's more than a big call mate.

You're basically saying Bevan would have been one of Australia's best 5-6 test batsman of all time.

 

[vcs]

What was Bevan's FC record compared to Lehmann, Hodge etc. (his other talented contemporaries who didn't get the chances their talent deserved)? 68 centuries at an average of 57+ seems pretty impressive..

 

[Jono]

Bevan was a machine near the end of his FC career. Early-to-mid 2000s he was absolutely dominant.

 

[Ikki]

That's more than a big call mate.

You're basically saying Bevan would have been one of Australia's best 5-6 test batsman of all time.

I reckon if he had got it together at Test level he would have had Hussey-esque periods where it would have seemed impossible to get him out. He was that good in my eyes. Again, it never sits well with me that he didn't get to where his ability merited in my eyes. But as TC said, he got more than enough chances and at the time of his career Australia had many options. Was wonderful against Pak and WI though so I don't buy critique against him not having the ability to play quality pace for a long time.

To vcs: he was easily amongst the best batsmen in the last 20 years. He averaged 57.32 in FC cricket. (edit: as you've noted)

Bevo himself on the reasons it went wrong: http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/480796.html

 

[smash84]

For me Bevan is the greatest ODI batsman of all time

 

[Son Of Coco]

I reckon if he had got it together at Test level he would have had Hussey-esque periods where it would have seemed impossible to get him out. He was that good in my eyes. Again, it never sits well with me that he didn't get to where his ability merited in my eyes. But as TC said, he got more than enough chances and at the time of his career Australia had many options. Was wonderful against Pak and WI though so I don't buy critique against him not having the ability to play quality pace for a long time.

To vcs: he was easily amongst the best batsmen in the last 20 years. He averaged 57.32 in FC cricket. (edit: as you've noted)

Bevo himself on the reasons it went wrong: Michael Bevan: 'My problems at Test level were psychological, not technical' | Specials | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Bevo was basically our Graeme Hick.

It was unfortunate for him that while he may well have worked out his weaknesses at test level, as his efforts in FC possibly suggest later in his career, he wasn't going to get back in the Aussie team in the early to mid 2000's anyway.

We'd probably love to have him there now, if he was performing the way he did in the latter part of his career.

 

[archie mac]

If you 'don't perform' being a key sentence. I don't deny that Mark Waugh didnt perform. He was a decent player with a perfectly good record. He always did enough to keep his place. However, if you ask me there were many candidates waiting in the wings who never got an opportunity to play for Australia in their prime. Darren Lehmann could well have been one of the greatest Australian batters ever, and I mean every word of that. Its a shame that he got his first consistent run for Australia after his 32nd birthday.

It would have been a bold and risky move to drop a proven test match player like M. Waugh for someone who could potentially be way better. However, such a move is not exactly atypical of the Australian selectors. Martyn himself was dropped for Hussey after 5 poor Ashes tests in 2005, despite the fact that he had been the pick of the batsmen for the previous year and a half.

I think Lehmann would have done better first time around, but still don't think he was as good as MW. Mark's FC record is impressive

Mate, pretty much every series that Australia lost in the 90s (not many, i know) could be traced back to a Mark Waugh failure. And that includes all of the 'final frontiers'. If they wanted blood, they could quite easily have gone for it.

Silliest statement I have read since the Bradman STR thread

That was the test where Donald was injured. Apart from Pollock ( who bowled sparingly at Waugh), it was an ordinary attack for a flat Adelaide pitch. McMillan, pie chucking Klusener and the ordinary Symcox. They bowled a lot of short rubbish too for him to feast upon.

He rather liked Adelaide did Mark Waugh.

How come other Aussie batsman failed if it was so easy Watched every ball of that match was not an easy pitch in that last innings and he played a great hand

 

[tooextracool]

I think Lehmann would have done better first time around, but still don't think he was as good as MW. Mark's FC record is impressive



Silliest statement I have read since the Bradman STR thread

As good as M.Waugh's FC record is, it is not a patch on Lehmann. When you consider that Lehmann spent half of his FC career at Headingley, that is a serious record.

You seem to be a Waugh mark, in which case Im not surprised at your judgment of Mark Waugh's career. Almost every expert I've talked to has thought that Mark Waugh underperformed at the test match level. If you ask me the one thing that is synonymous with Mark Waugh in the mid-late 90s is the nibble outside off stump.

 

[archie mac]

As good as M.Waugh's FC record is, it is not a patch on Lehmann. When you consider that Lehmann spent half of his FC career at Headingley, that is a serious record.

You seem to be a Waugh mark, in which case Im not surprised at your judgment of Mark Waugh's career. Almost every expert I've talked to has thought that Mark Waugh underperformed at the test match level. If you ask me the one thing that is synonymous with Mark Waugh in the mid-late 90s is the nibble outside off stump.

I also think he underperformed at Test level. However that was not the comment I was replying to

Just on Lehmann he played a lot of his career at Adelaide where he performed much better than he did once he changed to Vic and the MCG. Also the attacks he faced in county cricket as a rule were not as strong as SS matches during Australia's dominance. He faced some great bowlers in the county game but most teams only had one world class bowler.

Let me say Lehmann was a fine player imho. Just don't think he was a better batsman then MW and it seems the selectors agreed

 

[abmk]

Not much to separate them, I'd go with Martyn by a slim margin .....

 

[Briony]

Fair point.

But Ian Chappell won't take this, he clearly thinks that Mark Waugh was the best batsman in his family.

One can sympathise with Ian though, he has every right to be partial to a more flamboyant character over a much better batsman from the same family.

Chappelli also once said that if Mark was batting anywhere in the world he'd hop on the next plane to go and watch him but if Steve was batting in his backyard, he'd go to the back room and draw the blinds.

Undoubtedly he had a bias towards Mark and statistically there's no comparison between the two or even if you compare the tough runs they made as a way of contrast. The only thing in Mark's favour is that he batted higher in the order but both Waughs eschewed the #3 position while Mark's first class record is boosted by playing county cricket.

 

[abmk]

^^

yes, yes, we get it. Mark Waugh is the Mohammed Sami of batting !!

 

[Top_Cat]

I reckon if he had got it together at Test level he would have had Hussey-esque periods where it would have seemed impossible to get him out. He was that good in my eyes. Again, it never sits well with me that he didn't get to where his ability merited in my eyes. But as TC said, he got more than enough chances and at the time of his career Australia had many options. Was wonderful against Pak and WI though so I don't buy critique against him not having the ability to play quality pace for a long time.

That's pushing it, I reckon. No Test tons against either when he was in prime position to do so. Especially in Adelaide, with the WI absolutely ripe for the picking on a road with no Ambrose to face, he stodged it and ended up short. Batted quite well in Perth and just ran out of partners, though.

Can barely a remember a single time he actually looked comfortable in Tests. Everyone still goes on about his play against the short ball but as I've said before, he really had big edges. Most bowlers knew the best way to get him was to tuck him up for a while and cut off his scoring then throw out the wide one. Couldn't resist. By the time he fixed it, was too late.