Matthew Hayden breaks another Australian record

[Quagmire]

With his record of 380 in test cricket which is the highest ever score by an Australian in test cricket history and also the second highest score ever, he has now just beaten Mark Waugh's Australian highest score in a one day international. 181* off 166 balls with 11 fours and 10 sixes.

Highest ODI scores by an Australian

1. Matthew Hayden 181*
2. Mark Waugh 173
3. Adam Gilchrist 172
4. Ricky Ponting 164
5. Andrew Symonds 156
6. Adam Gilchrist 154
7. Andrew Symonds 151
8. Matthew Hayden 146
9. Dean Jones 145
10. Ricky Ponting 145
11. Damien Martyn 144*
12. Andrew Symonds 143*
13. Ricky Ponting 141*
14. Ricky Ponting 140*

Highest Test scores by an Australian

1. Matthew Hayden 380
2. Mark Taylor 334*
3. Sir Donald Bradman 334
4. Bob Simpson 311
5. Bob Cowper 307
6. Sir Donald Bradman 304
7. Sir Donald Bradman 299*
8. Sir Donald Bradman 270
9. Graeme Yallop 268
10. William Ponsford 266
11. Ricky Ponting 257
12. Sir Donald Bradman 254
13. Doug Walters 250
14. Justin Langer 250

This is a great accomplishment and Congradulations to Matthew Hayden

[Andy Mellon]

What struck me about this innings from Hayden was how well judged it was. Often, he's been seen in the past coming out all guns blazing from the off. In this innings, as in many innings of his since the Oval 2005, he really has learned to pace an innings with maturity.

He started off watchful, aware that with the humidity in Hamilton the ball could swing. He saw out decent opening spells from Tuffey and Franklin before speeding up a little after Watson departed. Once he'd reached 100 with only two or three wickets down, he really opened up - as he knew he had a licence to with the batting still to come and launched some pretty ordinary bowling into the stands.

I'd still put many of those test innings you've listed ahead of Hayden's though - the opposition that Hayden scored his 380 against was poor compared to those faced by Mark Taylor and Don Bradman. Taylor's innings to my mind was exceptional. It is said that he chose to declare so as not to eclipse the Don's previous record - and in fact he lost the opportunity to bat Pakistan out of the game in that match. Hayden only faced one international class bowler - Heath Streak (the others being Ervine, Blignaut, Price and Gripper!). The Pakistan attack included Shoiab Akhtar and Mushtaq Ahmed as its international class bowlers (the others being Zahid, Azhar Mahmood, Sohail and Saleem Malik) - also, Taylor's innings was scored away from the comforts of Australia.

Nothing against Hayden's 380; but I'll always prefer Taylor's knock and in fact, think that the skills of Mark Taylor were and still are, seriously underrated.

However, this ODI innings today was simply glorious.

[Quagmire]

Oh I agree im not saying the his 380 was the best knock, just looking at the scores on the list it shows how far ahead Bradman was of any other batsman. The bowlers that Taylor had to face were not the greatest either, Shoaib Akthar, Mohammad Zahid, Mushtaq Ahmed, Azhar Mahmood, Aamer Sohail and Saleem Malik.

[Ninjaman]

But Andy!!!

Hayden is a bully and he scored 181 not out, so it must be the pitch!

[Quagmire]

Im not sure why he his considered a bully there are not many bullies who can be one of the greatest opening batsman ever to play the game. There are not many bullies who can face the new ball with great success, people call him a bully because he is so big and powerful. His also has very good hands which allows him to work the ball in the gaps thats why he is so good when in form. When Hayden is not in form he tries to use brute force which can get him into trouble.

[Andy Mellon]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman

But Andy!!!

Hayden is a bully and he scored 181 not out, so it must be the pitch!

I think Ninjaman had his tongue truly in cheek with this post, Quagmire. I think he posted it in anticipation of Rachael posting something very similar (but actually meaning it!!)

[Rachael]

Surely the sound basis for calling Hayden a bully is the way he uses his strength to eradicate the contest between bat and ball: the guy typically takes a stance well outside of the crease, makes use of his giant frame to get further forward still whenever possible, relies on towering height, huge upper body strength and a heavy bat to take even seriously back-of-a-length deliveries with a forward defensive and depends on true bounce to try and swat anything shorter with a front-foot swipe (as he lacks the essential mobility to play a grown-up swivel pull).

I accept, entirely, that Hayden has better hands than guys like Flintoff and Gilchrist... but he's not really fit to be mentioned in the same breath as folk like Michael Slater, Michael Clarke and Damien Martyn, let alone of Ponting... which is the sort of company his admirers seem to think he deserves.

[Quagmire]

Oh I knew that, I just get fed up with that perception that he is no good. There are not too many blokes with a test career like his.

89 Tests - 7739 runs at 53.01, strike rate 60.08, highest score 380, 27x100, 27x50
130 ODIs - 4840 runs at 41.72, strike rate 76.22, highest score 181*, 7x100, 29x50.

Can you ask any more from a batsman.

Haydens Highest Scores in test cricket.

380 vs Zim (W.A.C.A)
203 vs Ind (Chidambaram)
197 vs Eng (Brisbane)
177 vs Win (Antigua Rec)
153 vs Eng (Melbourne)
138 vs Saf (Melbourne)
138 vs Eng (The Oval)
137 vs Saf (Melbourne)
136 vs Nzl (Brisbane)
136 vs Ind (Melbourne)
132 vs Sri (Bundaberg Rum Stadium)
131 vs Saf (Adalaide)
130 vs Sri (Galle Stadium)
125 vs Win (Adalaide)
122 vs Saf (New Wanderers)
119 vs Ind (Wankhede)
119 vs Pak (Sharjah)
118 vs Win (Brisbane)
117 vs Sri (Bundaberg Stadium)
111 vs ICC World (Sydney)
110 vs Win (Bellerive)
105 vs Saf (Sydney)
103 vs Eng (Brisbane)
102 vs Eng (Melbourne)
102 vs Saf (Kingsmead)
101* vs Zim (Sydney)
100* Win (Queens Park)

Most Centuries List

1. Tendulkar 35 (Ind)
2. Lara 34 (Win)
3. Gavaskar 34 (Ind)
4. Ponting 33 (Aus)
5. Steve Waugh 32 (Aus)
6. Bradman 29 (Aus)
7. Border 27 (Aus)
8. Hayden 27 (Aus)
9. Sobers 26 (Win)
10. ul-Haq 25 (Pak)

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I accept, entirely, that Hayden has better hands than guys like Flintoff and Gilchrist... but he's not really fit to be mentioned in the same breath as folk like Michael Slater, Michael Clarke and Damien Martyn, let alone of Ponting... which is the sort of company his admirers seem to think he deserves.

He may not look as classy as other batsman who are a lot smaller, but he is more in the mould of a batsman like Ul-Haq. It does not always come down to how a batsman looks at the crease. Pietersen is Englands best batsman but he looks horrible when he bats, he has a shocking technique, Panesar has a better technique but he uses his attibutes like his strength, size and his eye to hit the ball. Does that make him a worse batsman than Bell who looks a million dollars but ends out being worth about 25 cents.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I accept, entirely, that Hayden has better hands than guys like Flintoff and Gilchrist... but he's not really fit to be mentioned in the same breath as folk like Michael Slater, Michael Clarke and Damien Martyn,

Forgive me, but I think that this statement is unfair and plain ridiculous. Hayden has to date performed better than all these three in both tests and ODIs fair and square. In my book, that would make him a better batman than all those (and Mark Waugh, who was supposed to have a sublime technique). His stance, batting style etc are completely irrelevant as long as he is not breaking any rules in performing well. Several batsman of the past that are now considered as 'great' had unsusual techniques; Len Hutton for example, often stood outside the crease shifting his weight to the front foot and used very little bottom (right) hand with his strokes. Yet, he is unquestionably one of the all-time greats. So where do you draw the line?