***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Mister Wright]

What is this crap about big averages against Zimbabwe? Do you know how many tests Australia has played against Zimbabwe in the last decade? THREE. And against Bangladesh? Two.

Hayden has never dominated a great attack, but how many players do? For some reason, everybody has this idea that every other period in test history has been like the 90s with 4 or 5 all-time great attacks, but it's really not true at all. He has, however, done the business against India in Indian conditions where he scored 500 runs in a three test series, scored a brilliant career-defining century in sweltering heat on a turning pitch against an attack of Waqar/Shoaib/Razzaq/Saqlain/Kaneria, and dominated test cricket the world over in a purple patch that saw him average in the 70s for a period of several years. His average was not "about 75 after the triple century against Zimbabwe", it was about 57 then and has fallen in his slump since. Your short memory with him also doesn't seem to extend as far back as the LAST Ashes series, where he scored three centuries against a a varying bowling attack that included Hoggard, Harmison and Giles at various points, as well as Caddick who is obviously a perfectly decent bowler.

Hayden isn't the best test opener of all time or anything, but you don't average 50+ for 71 tests and 57 odd in a first class career that includes years of batting on green tops without being a good player, and to say that Strauss who is unproven in test cricket and certainly struggles against spin and Trescothick who has been a career-long walking target against bowlers who can move it away from him are "much better" is absolutely ridiculous.

And as far as Gilchrist goes, well that's even worse. Gilchrist has always been an inconsistent batsmen as fits his playing style, but the fact that he's been consistent enough to average in the mid 50s and maintain a strike rate in the 80s is testament to how incredible he has been. Gilchrist is, quite simply, a once in a lifetime cricketer who has single-handedly redefined the position he plays. To suggest this England attack is so good that the guys he has scored against in the past like Donald/Pollock/Ntini and Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib are useless village bowlers that he just bullied is absolutely insane.

Frankly, this whole discussion about the Australian team is going further and further off the planet. This England team is a good team, but they have a hell of a long way to go to even be worthy of comparison to a team that has dominated test cricket for a dozen years. And for all the talk of how Australia have just been a pack of overrated hacks living off weak attacks, it's funny that nobody else in the world has managed to beat every other team and have 3 or 4 batsmen averaging in the 50s, isn't it? I don't suppose it could be that the Australian team has actually been incredibly, amazingly good and they've just been outplayed in one series?

I have been on these forums for a while now, I usually don't read posts any longer than 10 lines at most, but this is by far IMO the best post ever made in my time here on the forums. Great point, well put and well backed up. Keep it up.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I have been on these forums for a while now, I usually don't read posts any longer than 10 lines at most, but this is by far IMO the best post ever made in my time here on the forums. Great point, well put and well backed up. Keep it up.

Haha wow, big claims there. Thanks mate.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Hayden's not a great player of swing, but he's better than this series suggests. I think he's past it anyway, he's not been playing very well for over a year, it's not just Hoggard and Flintoff who have dominated him. He failed in India too, and he's usually brilliant on turning wickets. He even failed on flat pitches at home against a lethal attack of Kyle Mills and James Franklin.

I'll give this to him, he's tried his fecking best save the rash Golden shot, he's rained himself in and seen off the new ball a few times so it shows he's thinking. He knows he can't play schuwing and it's possibly too late to start buggering about with his technique; he's always planted the big foot and hit the ball hard and it's worked for him.

As Boycs said t'other day though, ya can't do that when t' ball is swingin', you have to play it as late as possible. Langer plays it very well, perhaps a word from him to Hayden is in order, bit late in the series but.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

I have been on these forums for a while now, I usually don't read posts any longer than 10 lines at most, but this is by far IMO the best post ever made in my time here on the forums. Great point, well put and well backed up. Keep it up.

???????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????

Including this, that's four lines so you should be okay

 

[Mister Wright]

I'll give this to him, he's tried his fecking best save the rash Golden shot, he's rained himself in and seen off the new ball a few times so it shows he's thinking. He knows he can't play schuwing and it's possibly too late to start buggering about with his technique; he's always planted the big foot and hit the ball hard and it's worked for him.

As Boycs said t'other day though, ya can't do that when t' ball is swingin', you have to play it as late as possible. Langer plays it very well, perhaps a word from him to Hayden is in order, bit late in the series but.

I've seen signs from Hayden that he is ready to break through the mental barrier in his last 3 innings. He has showed application and started to look very free in his last innings. But as is the case when players hit a rough trot their first mistake is usually their last mistake for that innings.

If anyone can remember back to the previous Ashes series Ponting had just come off a shocking tour of India and had done nothing in the first 3 tests of the Ashes series, then come the 4th he should have been out, but was given not out by the 3rd umpire, and then went on to plunder the attack and make a hundred. Unfortunately Hayden hasn't been given that chance, as every early one he has given he has been out. The other way to get out of a form slump is to hit your way out, again hasn't been given the opportunity due to the situation of the series. The other is a break and he hasn't had that chance either apart from a few fishing trips.

 

[Mister Wright]

???????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????

Including this, that's four lines so you should be okay

Then soon after we have the worst post I have ever seen on my time here at the forums....

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I'll give this to him, he's tried his fecking best save the rash Golden shot, he's rained himself in and seen off the new ball a few times so it shows he's thinking. He knows he can't play schuwing and it's possibly too late to start buggering about with his technique; he's always planted the big foot and hit the ball hard and it's worked for him.

As Boycs said t'other day though, ya can't do that when t' ball is swingin', you have to play it as late as possible. Langer plays it very well, perhaps a word from him to Hayden is in order, bit late in the series but.

Someone like Kyle who probably went to some games at the Gabba back in Hayden's heydey could probably make this point better than me, but it's worth remembering that Hayden was THE star batsman of Australian domestic cricket for most of the 90s, and scored runs to Graeme Hick proportions, and he got an early go in test cricket but struggled for mainly mental reasons and was dropped, and never got a solid run in the team until he took India apart in 2001.

In the 90s, the Gabba was one of the hardest grounds in the world to play on. Summer in Queensland is often humid and overcast and the pitches were usually extremely bowler friendly and grassy then. The "Gabba green-top" got the same billing in Australian cricket as the "Headingley terror track" does in England. Australian domestic cricket in the 90s was of a very high standard as you would expect with the generation of players who would go on to dominate once the Boons and Borders had retired all playing, and Hayden averaged nigh on 60 in his home games, despite all that. The guy doesn't have an orthodox technique against swing and seam, but he CAN play it. Rather than playing classically by shortening his backlift, playing late and defensively, Hayden largely (I believe, anyway) specialised in leaving the ball extremely well and not playing when he could avoid it (this aspect of his game has really gone downhill recently), and when he did have to play he drove extremely hard at the ball and tried to force the bowler to drop back off a good length so he could play the swing more comfortably. Hayden has one of the best and most brutal straight drives you will ever see (when he was in his purple patch in test cricket this really came to the fore), and he took attacks apart on difficult pitches this way.

It's very easy to criticise his technique because it's not a great one in many ways, but it did work for him and there's a reason he was so successful. It's not working for him any more and it hasn't been for a fair while now, and I think Hayden's time is just about done now. Can't write off his achievements as a player though, and he will retire as an opener with a 50+ average in test cricket and 55+ in FC cricket and be remembered as a wonderful player because of that.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Then soon after we have the worst post I have ever seen on my time here at the forums....

You've clearly not seen any posts by "aussie", the Englishman then; gadzooks, I do despair sometimes.

I have a question: if you chaps had a fellow Aussie who supported England during the
Ashes, what would become of him/her?

I'd venture you'd take him out to the dark lands and set a razorback on him.

 

[Mister Wright]

Someone like Kyle who probably went to some games at the Gabba back in Hayden's heydey could probably make this point better than me.

Once again you are spot on with everything you have said. Hayden was without doubt the best opener in Australian domestic cricket in the early to mid 90s. He should have been selected in 1992 or whenever it was for the last test against India and had the early running against Slater on the '93 Ashes tour, but Slater had the better tour match form.

Hayden's major ability as a batsman was excellent leaving, although it seemed strange that his first few test dismissals were from leaving the ball, more to do with nerves than anything IMO.

It would often be frustrating watching Hayden bat, he would be about 4 or 5 after an hour of play but would go to lunch about 60, his patience was his main strength. It didn't matter how much the bowlers swung the ball Hayden would not play at them. However since his purple patch of 1000 years in the test side he has been smashing runs since the first ball and IMO this has hindered his ability to play swing as effectively as he used to.

Hayden has always been a great player of swing, but with the Aussies recent policy of dominating from ball one it has now affected him when he needs his patience game the most against quality swing bowlers.

I think if you look back to his 68 in the final test of the 2001 series he played with the patience that had been deserting him early in that series, and he looked a much, much better player of swing. If he's selected for the final test I hope he brings this patience back.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Someone like Kyle who probably went to some games at the Gabba back in Hayden's heydey could probably make this point better than me, but it's worth remembering that Hayden was THE star batsman of Australian domestic cricket for most of the 90s, and scored runs to Graeme Hick proportions, and he got an early go in test cricket but struggled for mainly mental reasons and was dropped, and never got a solid run in the team until he took India apart in 2001.

In the 90s, the Gabba was one of the hardest grounds in the world to play on. Summer in Queensland is often humid and overcast and the pitches were usually extremely bowler friendly and grassy then. The "Gabba green-top" got the same billing in Australian cricket as the "Headingley terror track" does in England. Australian domestic cricket in the 90s was of a very high standard as you would expect with the generation of players who would go on to dominate once the Boons and Borders had retired all playing, and Hayden averaged nigh on 60 in his home games, despite all that. The guy doesn't have an orthodox technique against swing and seam, but he CAN play it. Rather than playing classically by shortening his backlift, playing late and defensively, Hayden largely (I believe, anyway) specialised in leaving the ball extremely well and not playing when he could avoid it (this aspect of his game has really gone downhill recently), and when he did have to play he drove extremely hard at the ball and tried to force the bowler to drop back off a good length so he could play the swing more comfortably. Hayden has one of the best and most brutal straight drives you will ever see (when he was in his purple patch in test cricket this really came to the fore), and he took attacks apart on difficult pitches this way.

It's very easy to criticise his technique because it's not a great one in many ways, but it did work for him and there's a reason he was so successful. It's not working for him any more and it hasn't been for a fair while now, and I think Hayden's time is just about done now. Can't write off his achievements as a player though, and he will retire as an opener with a 50+ average in test cricket and 55+ in FC cricket and be remembered as a wonderful player because of that.

I don't usually read posts more than 70 sentences long, but that is spot on.

Look he is/was a fine player, and I have seen his on-drives and they were splendid. He tried walking to the bowling early on and it didn't work and he was slated by many, including Aussies on here; maybe he should have carried on and forced the short length etc, but it's doubtful Mick would've thrown away the plan we've so clearly had against him all series; a similar plan Ponting had for Tres was just outside off, unfortunately for you your two best exponents of it have either been injured of OOF.

 

[Mister Wright]

You've clearly not seen any posts by "aussie", the Englishman then; gadzooks, I do despair sometimes.

I have a question: if you chaps had a fellow Aussie who supported England during the
Ashes, what would become of him/her?

I'd venture you'd take him out to the dark lands and set a razorback on him.

Look, even I who would prefer competitive cricket to an Australian belting (when we win) cannot stomach England getting the Ashes back. So, I would say if they are an Aussie supporting England, they are not a true Aussie.

I even found myself willing Clarke on for a century, even if I would cop some flack on the forum, as I also found myself willing Lee to rip through the England order, even though I think Clarke is not ready for test cricket, and Lee is not a test cricketer. That's how badly I don't want England getting the Ashes.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Hayden has always been a great player of swing, but with the Aussies recent policy of dominating from ball one it has now affected him when he needs his patience game the most against quality swing bowlers.

I just can't believe that old chap, sorry; "great" players of swing don't plant the big foot down and hope it doesn't come back off a length.

 

[Mister Wright]

I just can't believe that old chap, sorry; "great" players of swing don't plant the big foot down and hope it doesn't come back off a length.

Did you read the rest of the post?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

It would often be frustrating watching Hayden bat, he would be about 4 or 5 after an hour of play but would go to lunch about 60, his patience was his main strength. It didn't matter how much the bowlers swung the ball Hayden would not play at them. However since his purple patch of 1000 years in the test side he has been smashing runs since the first ball and IMO this has hindered his ability to play swing as effectively as he used to.

Yeah, this is the same way I felt about his play of swing. Actually, the last time Australia faced significant swing before this series (actually, far MORE swing than anything seen in this series) was just a couple of games back in the second test against New Zealand. Franklin largely wasted it but both he and Martin were swinging the ball a foot or more on just about every delivery, and while Langer got put down and played and missed a lot Hayden saw them off superbly and finished up making 61 off 147 balls, his best score in some time, after being about 20 not out at lunch. He simply refused to play at anything unless he absolutely had to, and it worked perfectly for him. Unfortunately, as he so often has in the last year, he got past 50 and then got out playing a completely ridiculous shot straight to a fielder off Franklin.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Look, even I who would prefer competitive cricket to an Australian belting (when we win) cannot stomach England getting the Ashes back. So, I would say if they are an Aussie supporting England, they are not a true Aussie.

I even found myself willing Clarke on for a century, even if I would cop some flack on the forum, as I also found myself willing Lee to rip through the England order, even though I think Clarke is not ready for test cricket, and Lee is not a test cricketer. That's how badly I don't want England getting the Ashes.

Quite fecking right you are! Which is why I'm so bloody ****ed off with aussie, whom I figured must be a plastic fan, with grandad in Van Diemen's Land or some such. As it is he saw the '97 side win and has supported them ever since; jeez I started seriously watching in '89 so by rights I should be a big Aus fan too.

Pathetic, his parents must be really proud.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Did you read the rest of the post?

I did.

 

[Slow Love™]

What is this crap about big averages against Zimbabwe? Do you know how many tests Australia has played against Zimbabwe in the last decade? THREE. And against Bangladesh? Two.

Hayden has never dominated a great attack, but how many players do? For some reason, everybody has this idea that every other period in test history has been like the 90s with 4 or 5 all-time great attacks, but it's really not true at all. He has, however, done the business against India in Indian conditions where he scored 500 runs in a three test series, scored a brilliant career-defining century in sweltering heat on a turning pitch against an attack of Waqar/Shoaib/Razzaq/Saqlain/Kaneria, and dominated test cricket the world over in a purple patch that saw him average in the 70s for a period of several years. His average was not "about 75 after the triple century against Zimbabwe", it was about 57 then and has fallen in his slump since. Your short memory with him also doesn't seem to extend as far back as the LAST Ashes series, where he scored three centuries against a a varying bowling attack that included Hoggard, Harmison and Giles at various points, as well as Caddick who is obviously a perfectly decent bowler.

Hayden isn't the best test opener of all time or anything, but you don't average 50+ for 71 tests and 57 odd in a first class career that includes years of batting on green tops without being a good player, and to say that Strauss who is unproven in test cricket and certainly struggles against spin and Trescothick who has been a career-long walking target against bowlers who can move it away from him are "much better" is absolutely ridiculous.

And as far as Gilchrist goes, well that's even worse. Gilchrist has always been an inconsistent batsmen as fits his playing style, but the fact that he's been consistent enough to average in the mid 50s and maintain a strike rate in the 80s is testament to how incredible he has been. Gilchrist is, quite simply, a once in a lifetime cricketer who has single-handedly redefined the position he plays. To suggest this England attack is so good that the guys he has scored against in the past like Donald/Pollock/Ntini and Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib are useless village bowlers that he just bullied is absolutely insane.

Frankly, this whole discussion about the Australian team is going further and further off the planet. This England team is a good team, but they have a hell of a long way to go to even be worthy of comparison to a team that has dominated test cricket for a dozen years. And for all the talk of how Australia have just been a pack of overrated hacks living off weak attacks, it's funny that nobody else in the world has managed to beat every other team and have 3 or 4 batsmen averaging in the 50s, isn't it? I don't suppose it could be that the Australian team has actually been incredibly, amazingly good and they've just been outplayed in one series?

Just to re-iterate, this was a marvellous post - you covered everything. It should definitely be used as an important part of the search for a cure to matty1818's laughable assertions:

 

[greg]

Hayden's just getting old - look at his fielding, he never used to drop ANYTHING and yet he's shelled 3 or 4 in this series.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Why does Neil keep closing threads just when I am about to post in them?

Posting here because he won't close this one (awaits for this post to be deleted post haste).

 

[Neil Pickup]

Why does Neil keep closing threads just when I am about to post in them?

Posting here because he won't close this one (awaits for this post to be deleted post haste).

'Cos today seems to have a pretty high flamebait quotient!