aussie
Hall of Fame Member
with comments like that its fair to say he didn't...Neil Pickup said:Did you watch the game?
with comments like that its fair to say he didn't...Neil Pickup said:Did you watch the game?
Thats debatableMister Wright said:Pietersen - he's a better batsman.
Just use your own eyes & judgement, it isn't that hard to see (unless you've got sunnies on and you're inside).aussie said:Thats debatable
well firstly both are fairly inexperienced in international cricket, but Hussey has a better FC record than KP, Hussey also is better technically than KP. I would give Hussey the edge but the gap isn't huge.Mister Wright said:Just use your own eyes & judgement, it isn't that hard to see (unless you've got sunnies on and you're inside).
I think Hussey is a better conventional sort of batsman, and has more potential at test level. In ODIs though, Pietersen is much more devastating.Mister Wright said:Just use your own eyes & judgement, it isn't that hard to see (unless you've got sunnies on and you're inside).
aussie said:well firstly both are fairly inexperienced in international cricket, but Hussey has a better FC record than KP, Hussey also is better technically than KP. I would give Hussey the edge but the gap isn't huge.
For sure, if Hussey were to have a continual spot in tests and ODIs I'm sure he'd be your Mark Taylor, David Boon sought of batsman, but IMO he lacks that special spark or the thing that can never be described about the best of the best, like Waugh, Lara, Tendulkar, etal, whereas I think Pietersen has shown that spark when he has played at international level.FaaipDeOiad said:I think Hussey is a better conventional sort of batsman, and has more potential at test level. In ODIs though, Pietersen is much more devastating.
Interesting i haven't really observed that, but i still maintain that Hussey is a more sound batsman than KP, in test cricket i would think Hussey might be less exposed than KP would especially againts the moving ball.Mister Wright said:I wouldn't say that Hussey is more technically correct than Pietersen. Pietersen gets in behind the ball and is very quick with his feet to always meet the ball, whereas Hussey sometimes tends to not get his front foot out far enough, especially to wider deliveries that he tries to drive and gets an edge, also although Hussey is good with backfoot shots, sometimes he doesn't get on top of the pull shot, in the times I've seen Pietersen plays the pull shot he's always on top of it or under it, which is what the best pullers do.
aussie said:Interesting i haven't really observed that, but i still maintain that Hussey is a more sound batsman than KP, in test cricket i would think Hussey might be less exposed than KP would especially againts the moving ball.
i dont agree that KP has a better technique than KP mate, i have seen enough of them in the last 5 months to come to that conclusion. I know that when Hussey goes to drive outside off-stump he sometimes just waves the wand and edges but that only sometimes, other than that every other aspect of his technique is quite solid.Mister Wright said:All this stuff about batsmen getting exposed to the moving ball is a bit ridiculous, considering how little of it we see at international level these days. All batsman, especially opening batsman are going to be considered suspect to the moving ball, because it is just that - a moving ball, if you are really that bad, you will get found out, not score many runs and that's it - career over. But, if you are good enough than the odd poor innings against the moving ball is going to happen, nobody is perfect and therefore no-one will ever not get out to the moving ball. So if you compare Pietersen, who has superior footwork to that of Hussey over a long period of time Pietersen should come out on top.
aussie said:i dont agree that KP has a better technique than KP mate, i have seen enough of them in the last 5 months to come to that conclusion. I know that when Hussey goes to drive outside off-stump he sometimes just waves the wand and edges but that only sometimes, other than that every other aspect of his technique is quite solid.
KP on the other hand initial moves across his stumps and exposes to off-stump exposing the part of the middle stump and the whole leg stump. He strides foward but not that much and based on what i have seen i think KP technique is more faulty than Hussey's thus could have some problems in test cricket.
Scaly piscine said:On that pitch there's no such thing as unplayable for 6 overs. McGrath bowled rubbish in his first over and got away with it. There were virtually no singles taken at all, in fact England were pretty poor at that all game (Australia only hit one more boundary than England did).
As for Solanki and Flintoff, Solanki was pretty poor really - even slower than Vaughan. Flintoff was decent but threw it away as usual, the blind six or out stuff is just not going to succeed.
I thought KP & Hussey bat around the same spot - 5,6,7.Sylvester said:I would say Hussey is the better batsmen but i havent seen much of KP. KP is more like Cairns and Gilchrist very explosive. KP has had the better start to ODI with 3 100s and a number of 50s but Hussey doesn't bat as high.
That's fine, were talking about technique, and IMO KP has a better technique than Hussey, I'm not denying Hussey's class, nor his ability, but he does have those two glaring deficincies I noted earlier, and the little that I have seen of KP, he seems to be solid in all areas - outside off stump, off his legs, on the front foot and on the back foot. Hussey does have that problem on his pull shot and to the widish ball angling accross him.age_master said:do remember though that Hussey usually opens the batting in 4/5 day cricket where he has proved time and time again that he can bat for a very very very very long time.
Mister Wright said:Pietersen - he's a better batsman.