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

[vic_orthdox]

lol...yeah. But SL only said "batsmen",

The rest of SL's post referred to Australian opening batsmen though.

 

[age_master]

Inconsistency caused by being on the sidelines for so long, I'd imagine. He's only just starting to realise what being a Test bowler is all about; week-in, week-out good performances and not just when the side is up against it. See McGrath.

indeed for mine he is constantly looking better and better for mine. bowled some beutiful spells.

 

[Top_Cat]

You know, Hayden himself has not been making the runs against tough bowling by any stretch of the imagination. In the 2001 series in India, we had only one bowler called Harbhajan and he countered him well. I am pretty sure he never faced Ambrose/Walsh or Wasim/Waqar or Donald/Pollock at their primes (atleast, I am sure he didn't make many runs). So what you said about Tresco can be said about Hayden as well, except that Tresco has to face the brilliant Aussie attack and Hayden doesn't.

You know, you really shouldn't belittle the achievements of a guy who's scored runs at home and away against bowling attacks including bowlers like Pollock, Murali, Vaas (in SL), Shoaib, Saqlain, Kumble and Harbi. Argue all you want that he's very out of form right now and may never recapture it or should be dropped, etc. and you'll get no disagreement from me but it's not as if his current form invalidates all he has achieved previously.

He's scored tough hundreds on the sub-continent (as part of winning and losing sides in India and SL), managed to score runs when the team is under pressure (home series' against India 2003/4) and managed to belt the living daylights out of other opponents at home. He has, however, failed in conditions where the ball moves in the air. Like I said, this does not make the rest of his record meaningless.

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't think you can call him unlucky to have bowled no balls. That is basically his fault. But I do agree that he has bowled better than what his figures suggest. I am just worried what it will do to his confidence to see a deep cover when he is about to bowl his first ball.

Probably the same thing as that which happens to the English bowlers when they've seen the same thing throughout this series.

 

[Choora]

Example number #8934563697397689363746 for why averages don't always tell the whole story. Let's not forget that it's not as if Lee has had a year or two of solid form at Test level against Test-standard batting attacks to build on; he only just made it back into the side this series after two years on the sidelines playing FC cricket. This, in fact, looks to be the platform which he'll build on for the next year.

Anyway, he's taken 19 wickets for the series which puts him equal second for both sides with Flintoff behind Warne. Considering his attacking nature, it's expected he'll go for some runs. He's there to take wickets and if the number of wickets is any indication, he's done the job well.

.

hmmm.. i remember your predictions about Lee and Afridi, Lee becomming the top 5 bowlers in the world in two years time, and Afridi becomming the two bowling all rounder in two year time.So far none of them have been convincing though!

I personally think Tait has more potential than Lee, if he's given a long run, the guy might become a top performer in future.

 

[vic_orthdox]

hmmm.. i remember your predictions about Lee and Afridi, Lee becomming the top 5 bowlers in the world in two years time, and Afridi becomming the two bowling all rounder in two year time.So far none of them have been convincing though!

I personally think Tait has more potential than Lee, if he's given a long run, the guy might become a top performer in future.

If you don't think that Afridi has improved - especially in his bowling - since that time that T_C made those remarks, then there's something wrong.

 

[honestbharani]

Probably the same thing as that which happens to the English bowlers when they've seen the same thing throughout this series.

But the point is Vaughan does it often with England. It is not often that it happens for Brett Lee or the other Australian bowlers. You get my point?

 

[honestbharani]

You know, you really shouldn't belittle the achievements of a guy who's scored runs at home and away against bowling attacks including bowlers like Pollock, Murali, Vaas (in SL), Shoaib, Saqlain, Kumble and Harbi. Argue all you want that he's very out of form right now and may never recapture it or should be dropped, etc. and you'll get no disagreement from me but it's not as if his current form invalidates all he has achieved previously.

He's scored tough hundreds on the sub-continent (as part of winning and losing sides in India and SL), managed to score runs when the team is under pressure (home series' against India 2003/4) and managed to belt the living daylights out of other opponents at home. He has, however, failed in conditions where the ball moves in the air. Like I said, this does not make the rest of his record meaningless.

don't think there was any question about his ability to handle spin well. IMO, he is one of the better players of spin in the world. The problem is the way he encounters quality fast bowling, and ever since 2002, I do believe he has gotten too ****y for his own good as a batsman. He is playing too many shots and showing too little respect for the bowlers and he has consequently struggled. The fact that he has still made runs despite that attitude are because 1. he has good power 2. the bowling is not all that flash around the world.



Taking your own words here, leave out the spinners, and you have mentioned Shoaib and Vaas and Pollock as the bowlers... Vaas is not all that flash in test cricket, esp. away from home. Pollock has been average for a couple of years or more. Shoaib's problems are well documented. Even you will have to agree that they are a far cry from the likes of Curtly, Courtney, Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Pollock (at his peak)...

 

[vic_orthdox]

Probably the same thing as that which happens to the English bowlers when they've seen the same thing throughout this series.

It will be interesting to see how these tactics (deep [squarish] cover and deep square leg out very early) will be used in the future, having worked very well for England and not too badly for Australia. It's another way of ODIs influencing Test cricket, really - taking the defensive mindset of the middle overs and implementing them in Test cricket as a form of (mild) attacking.

I think the potential for them to work successfully is at its greatest when your opposition is Australia. With their harder, faster wickets, they're more adept at - and used to being able to - hitting boundaries square of the wicket on the offside, as opposed to other nations where they'd hit the ball more through cover, as opposed to just in front of point.

 

[Choora]

If you don't think that Afridi has improved - especially in his bowling - since that time that T_C made those remarks, then there's something wrong.

I never said that his bowling hasn't improved or that he's rubbish, but atm i don't see him becomming the top bowling allrounder at test level.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I never said that his bowling hasn't improved or that he's rubbish, but atm i don't see him becomming the top bowling allrounder at test level.

He's also the same man who said that Trescothick and Giles would be key factors in the Test series if England were to be successful, and that Shane Bond's back would eventually give way.

To be honest, Afridi doesn't have that much competition. I guess you could probably call Flintoff a "bowling all-rounder", but he's as all-round - for want of a better term - an all-rounder as you could find, at the moment.

 

[Choora]

Taking your own words here, leave out the spinners, and you have mentioned Shoaib and Vaas and Pollock as the bowlers... Vaas is not all that flash in test cricket, esp. away from home. Pollock has been average for a couple of years or more. Shoaib's problems are well documented. Even you will have to agree that they are a far cry from the likes of Curtly, Courtney, Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Pollock (at his peak)...

I think the last time around Shoaib had Hayden out cheaply on multiple occasions till shoaib started suffering from his notorious mood swing and lost interst in his game!!

Interestingly even after getting Hayden out cheaply Shoaib kept saying that Hayden was a great batsman!

 

[honestbharani]

I think the last time around Shoaib had Hayden out cheaply on multiple occasions till shoaib started suffering from his notorious mood swing and lost interst in his game!!

Interestingly even after getting Hayden out cheaply Shoaib kept saying that Hayden was a great batsman!

Maybe he wanted to talk himself up. Say "Haydos is a great batsman" and then everyone will go "see how he has dominated a great batsman. So he must be a great bowler." Maybe that is why he says that.

 

[Choora]

Maybe he wanted to talk himself up. Say "Haydos is a great batsman" and then everyone will go "see how he has dominated a great batsman. So he must be a great bowler." Maybe that is why he says that.

L L

 

[Top_Cat]

hmmm.. i remember your predictions about Lee and Afridi, Lee becomming the top 5 bowlers in the world in two years time, and Afridi becomming the two bowling all rounder in two year time.So far none of them have been convincing though!

Ditto what Vic said re: Afridi.

And that was only a few months ago I made those, Lee has only just made it back in the side and since then, largely he's been threatening. There's still plenty of time for those predictions to come true. A bit early to be gloating over something that hasn't come to fruition, don't you think?

Taking your own words here, leave out the spinners, and you have mentioned Shoaib and Vaas and Pollock as the bowlers... Vaas is not all that flash in test cricket, esp. away from home. Pollock has been average for a couple of years or more. Shoaib's problems are well documented. Even you will have to agree that they are a far cry from the likes of Curtly, Courtney, Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Pollock (at his peak)...

Yes but he can't help that he never got to face them. Who's to say what would have happened? Facing bowlers of that calibre may have made him a better player or a worse one. Who can tell? By the same logic, Tendy is over-rated because he never faced Marshall, Holding, Roberts or Garner at their peaks. If he'd had the opportunity to face them and THEN failed, maybe you'd have a point but you can only score against what you face.

Interestingly even after getting Hayden out cheaply Shoaib kept saying that Hayden was a great batsman!

And after pounding him to all parts in the 1997 home series, Tendy rated Warnie as the best leg-spinner he'd faced. Some days are diamonds, even against the greats.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Hayden did play against SA and WI during the mid to late 90s, and didn't really do all that well - bar a 129 vs WI at Adelaide Oval.

Mind you, I think it's widely accepted that he was a much different (i.e. not as complete) a player then.

 

[honestbharani]

Ditto what Vic said re: Afridi.

And that was only a few months ago I made those, Lee has only just made it back in the side and since then, largely he's been threatening. There's still plenty of time for those predictions to come true. A bit early to be gloating over something that hasn't come to fruition, don't you think?



Yes but he can't help that he never got to face them. Who's to say what would have happened? Facing bowlers of that calibre may have made him a better player or a worse one. Who can tell? By the same logic, Tendy is over-rated because he never faced Marshall, Holding, Roberts or Garner at their peaks. If he'd had the opportunity to face them and THEN failed, maybe you'd have a point but you can only score against what you face.



And after pounding him to all parts in the 1997 home series, Tendy rated Warnie as the best leg-spinner he'd faced. Some days are diamonds, even against the greats.

I think he did fail early on in his career against Ambrose/Walsh and Schultz,Pollock,Donald in a tour to SA where Blewett made that double hundred.


I suppose it is just a matter of opinion then. I just don't think Hayden would have been as successful against the better bowlers and therefore, a bit over rated as a batsman. Trust me, I am not saying he didn't have the talent, but I think his own ego got too big for his own good. I think he can still do well, only if he can eat the humble pie and accept that he cannot dominate good bowling attacks and understand those limitations of his. But if your opinion is that he would have done well against those guys as well, then so be it. We will just have to agree to disagree here, as there is no real way for either of us to prove our point to be right conclusively.

 

[luckyeddie]

The guy is averaging over 33 in this series and probably bowled as well as he can. If he ever makes it to the top 5 in the world then world cricket is poorer atm than even i thought

I'm sorry, but that misses the point as to what Lee's purpose is in the side.

He's there as a strike bowler, and really his principal job is to make life very uncomfortable indeed for a batting side's upper order. I think at times he has fulfilled that role very well indeed, and his figures will never really do him justice because Warne's there to hypnotise the rabbits, hence not many 9-10-Jack freebies.

(incidentally, Michael Vaughan's average against him is 4.75).

 

[luckyeddie]

Probably the same thing as that which happens to the English bowlers when they've seen the same thing throughout this series.

A deep cover to Gilchrist or Hayden is an attacking fieldsman

(actually, the guy watering the hanging baskets to Hayden is an attacking fieldsman)

/sorry

 

[Slow Love™]

lol...yeah. But SL only said "batsmen",

The rest of SL's post referred to Australian opening batsmen though.

Doesn't really matter, guys. My comment "I don't think many batsmen hit their peak two months away from being 34, somehow.", was only supposed to counter an expectation that Hayden would be near his peak at 34. It's rare, but there are always gonna be exceptions, and you can usually count on Lara to be one.

His eventual retirement is probably one of the few (Steve Waugh was another) that is going to have me feeling very emotional, whenever it comes. I hope it's not soon.