matthew hayden or brian lara?

[Don Ricardo]

Lara is the best batsman in the world when he is in a phase of being "hungry for runs"- the problem is that he seems to slip in and out of this phase. The good thing about hayden is that he is simply a run machine and always craves more. On pure talent, though, lara is much better.

 

[Jono]

Lara hands down. That's nothing to take away from Hayden, he's a great aggressive opener but in my opinion not in Lara's league. Not many are.

Regarding Hayden's record, wasn't he dropped even before he broke Lara's record? I remember him hitting it straight and being dropped to a sitter (Not the diving one someone mentioned). Maybe my memory is incorrect but this does stick out in my mind.

None the less it was a great knock, just not as good as Lara's.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Regarding Hayden's record, wasn't he dropped even before he broke Lara's record? I remember him hitting it straight and being dropped to a sitter (Not the diving one someone mentioned). Maybe my memory is incorrect but this does stick out in my mind.

None the less it was a great knock, just not as good as Lara's.

I heard he was dropped on 335.

 

[hourn]

So could Lara, he's only 34!

Brings up Hayden's record in England... [/B]

well lets put it this way, he's 2-3 years younger than Lara, and given that Hayden is generally seen as one of the fittest in the aus team, he's likely to play on for a few years past Lara.

and his poor form in England will simply be a reason for him to be hungrier for runs

 

[godofcricket]

Lara for me, i rate him as a better batsman than hayden or tendulkar. Matthew hayden hasn't got the class which Lara has...winning matches in style and taking the attack to the oppoisition even when there batting is in trouble....hes very agressive, the best i have seen.

 

[twctopcat]

There's only a couple of years difference between the two and i cannot see hayden getting anywhere near what lara has and will achieve by the end of his career. If lara has another 3-4 years he could well come close to alan border's record of test runs and beat it. Hayden will not come close to this however. All the more remarkable about lara is the fact that he has accumulated his runs under the pressure of often being the main source of runs for the windies. If he played for australia, his record could well be even more brilliant.

 

[SquidAU]

Although I have not seen either innings, I would say Lara was much better than Hayden. Lara has always scored runs, even when everything is falling apart around him. Can't say that for Hayden. You all have to remember Hayden made his test debut a decade ago and was in and out of the side till recently (last few years) and he is going through a purple patch that is bound to end sooner or later. I still remember when Hayden was touted as the next big thing when he first started in Sheffield Shield years ago...just could not produce in Test cricket till recently....

As for ppl that say he is a flat track bully, how is it then he made a truckload of runs in India when everyone else in the Aussie side was having trouble against the spin of Singh (can't spell his first name)....

 

[Rik]

well lets put it this way, he's 2-3 years younger than Lara, and given that Hayden is generally seen as one of the fittest in the aus team, he's likely to play on for a few years past Lara.

and his poor form in England will simply be a reason for him to be hungrier for runs

Lara's quite fit these days, I reccon he could go on for a while longer.

Hayden's poor form in England came because he didn't adapt to the conditions, which is odd for someone who played so often in England. There are certain reasons why people don't score runs in certain countries though, so just saying he's hungry for runs won't make him get them. Although the fact that he's likely to be facing Giles, Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff might. Although who knows, Hoggy's a different bowler in England and Anderson might strike gold

 

[Mister Wright]

Lara's quite fit these days, I reccon he could go on for a while longer.

Hayden's poor form in England came because he didn't adapt to the conditions, which is odd for someone who played so often in England. There are certain reasons why people don't score runs in certain countries though, so just saying he's hungry for runs won't make him get them. Although the fact that he's likely to be facing Giles, Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff might. Although who knows, Hoggy's a different bowler in England and Anderson might strike gold

The reason why Hayden didn't play that well in Enland last time was because he was sufferieng from a knee injury which didn't enable him to get full weight on his front leg. I think you'll find most of his dismissals were from LBW and caught at straight at the wicket, rather than nicks to the slips as most Hayden-knockers would have us believe.

 

[Rik]

The reason why Hayden didn't play that well in Enland last time was because he was sufferieng from a knee injury which didn't enable him to get full weight on his front leg. I think you'll find most of his dismissals were from LBW and caught at straight at the wicket, rather than nicks to the slips as most Hayden-knockers would have us believe.

He didn't appear to be carrying any injury and moved pretty freely. He was LWB a lot or caught in the outfield, hitting out. Certainly the LBW from Caddick which knocked him over was his most embarrising moment, but my favorite is when he tried pulling Caddy during one of his 2 ducks in the ODI series, and was caught at mid-on, by one of the world's worst fielders, Mullally, no less.

 

[Mister Wright]

He didn't appear to be carrying any injury and moved pretty freely. He was LWB a lot or caught in the outfield, hitting out. Certainly the LBW from Caddick which knocked him over was his most embarrising moment, but my favorite is when he tried pulling Caddy during one of his 2 ducks in the ODI series, and was caught at mid-on, by one of the world's worst fielders, Mullally, no less.

Well, when he came back from England he had to have a few weeks off and started the season late for Queensland. He was in doubt for the fourth test of that ashes series, but still played.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

As for ppl that say he is a flat track bully, how is it then he made a truckload of runs in India when everyone else in the Aussie side was having trouble against the spin of Singh (can't spell his first name)....

That really doesn't help the defence. The Indian pitches are about as flat as they come. They take spin, but they're still excellent for batting.

 

[scud101]

Lara by miles. Hayden is good, not as good as Lara though.

 

[hourn]

one of the things about cricket which makes it unique is that, unlike the majority of sports, stats actually have some sort of meaning.

and a lot of people like to put down Hayden as nothing more than a slogger who gets lucky, the facts are has an average which only two openers in the history of the test cricket (with reasonble qualifications) have bettered - Graeme Smith and Herb Sutcliffe.

And Hayden has now scored more runs than Sutcliffe (i think - at worst hes not far of him), so he has a right to be deemed as one of the champions of the game.

People will try to put technical flaws in his batting, the standard of bowling isn't as good as it was, the tracks are flat etc,. etc,.

the technical flaws has a valid point. His not the most gracious batsmen, but it isn't always the most gracious batsmen who make the runs. His technique is sound, without being great, but there are few guys in the world who hit the ball harder, if any.

And likewise, no really knows whether guys like Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Barrington, Rantijinshi, Ponsford, Armstrong, Hill etc,. had solid techniques. All you can really do to ascertain that is read books, and that is someones opinion which may differ from your own.

Say there was no TV today, 100 years from now people could be reading baout Matty Hayden and what a fantastic striker of the ball he was, and how he very rarely played false strikes. They wouldn't know whether it was true or not, but you read it enough times you have to believe it.

Same situation with guys we've never seen play, even if it is very dodgy old video tape - it's still hard on those things to pick out stuff.


and no one can really say how good or not the standard of bowling is - i reckon cricket is about as strong as it's ever been. Probably not the strongest, but it's closer to being the strongest than it is to being the weakest.

pitches are better now than ever, but not to the extent some would like to think. Can't be bothered to check but i'd say the average runs per wicket is not alll that much higher than what it was in other eras (aside from pre WWI when the average per wicket was about 18 runs).

but on Hayden's side is the pressures of proffesoinal cricket. Cricketers have never come under the scrutiny and constant pressure that the guys in other eras have faced. Nor has their ever been such an intense workload put on the players.

BTW, this isn't a Hayden v Lara argument from me, cause i rate Lara the better batsmen over his career. At the moment though I'd take Hayden.

This is more just an argument that Hayden does have his place amongst cricket's elite batsmen, as do quite a few others of today's era aside from just Tendulkar and Lara. Dravid too has a case similar to Hayden's, while Ponting and Gilchrist are well on their way, and Smith is making big headlines early in his career.

 

[mavric41]

I have been watching Hayden since his debut for Queensland as a 19 year old (btw he scored 149). People saying he was in and out of the side really don't know the circumstances.

His test debut was against South Africa where he was told the night before he would play instead of Mark Taylor who was sick. In that game he was struck on the hand by Allan Donald first or second ball and broke a bone in his hand. He stuck it out and refused to retire hurt but it was not a spectacular debut.

The next time he was given an opportunity was against the West Indies in Australia when Walsh and Ambrose were at their peak. He was the only top 6 batsman to make a hundred against them in that series (Healy made 161 n.o. and Blewett 99) but also failed a few times as well. After 3 more tests in South Africa where he performed ok he was then dropped for the upcoming tour of England.

It was only the faith that Steve Waugh showed in him that allowed him to be given another go where he replaced Greg Blewett in the 3rd test for the NZ tour (Blewett 46 tests and only 4 centuries).

He then performed reasonably against the WIndies on the next tour with at least one potential century denied him at the Gabba when Slater ran him out when he was well set. (Slater also ran him out in the second test) Then came his coming of age series in India which cemented his place in the side and gave him the confidence that he could succeed.

Rik, you are quite correct when you said he had a poor Ashes tour next but Mister Wright was accurate about his knee injury and additionally he was opening with Slater, who was later revealed to be undergoing personal problems which put his own interests first.

Hayden bats best when he can work with a partner he trusts . In the last 3 years it has first been Langer and now Ponting.

There is no doubt that Lara is a more naturally gifted batsman but lets not forget the problems that he has also had. I admire Hayden for overcoming the obstacles put before him and making himself good enough to be regarded along side Lara.

Why pick between them? They both are excellant batsmen who perform different roles in their teams. Its like picking between a fast bowler and a spin bowler. They are both bowlers who perform different roles.

I just like watching them both bat.

 

[hyounis786]

if u read carefully i am asking who is the better player overall aka -one whu has provided a lot for their country and made a positive affect

 

[Armadillo]

theyre both not the most stylish of players but somehow theyre extremely successful

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I would consider Brian Lara in full flow extremely stylish.

 

[Tom Halsey]

So do I.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Neither of them have textbook techniques, but Lara is nonetheless great to watch in full flow, and Hayden's immense power is quite a sight at its best.

I'd take Lara over Hayden, for reasons mentioned earlier.