Matthew Hayden breaks another Australian record

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Oliver

I'd be interested to see how long Hayden continues now.

If Hayden manages a triple hundred at Karachi or Gillespie a double ton at the Kennington Oval, in the next few years, then they will indeed be great players.

With regard to inflated averages; in days gone by, cricket matches used to involve the use of the entire playing surface.

Test matches in my memory haven’t bothered to use the entire playing surface.

It is interesting (and rather revealing) to note that England supporters in particular tend to pick out Matthew Hayden to think of all sorts of excuses to give him the unfair label of lucky mediocrity. Yet, the fact remains that in the last 45 years, no English batsman has come close to his Test batting average. Unless Hayden has somehow been playing on different surfaces and conditions specifically to suit him, this line of arguement speaks volumes about the so-called British fairplay. I know - I have been through it myself.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

At the end of the day, all that matters is how a player performs under existing conditions

Yes... but in existing conditions, Hayden's 1373 Test runs in New Zealand, England and South Africa have come at an average of just 33.49. By contrast, Ponting's 1888 runs in those same countries have come at 53.94.

Ponting's average in conditions that aren't graveyards for seamers is 91% of his Test average... meaning the Test average is not unrepresentative. Hayden's comparable figure is a pathetic 63% of his Test average!

ps. Langer has partnered Hayden in most of those matches and has racked up 1351 runs at 45.03: when the going gets tough.. Langer averages WAY higher than big bully Hayden...

[Oliver]

I wasn't actually solely referring to Hayden there. Actually, all current Test cricketers play on reduced ovals, which just goes to show exactly how poor English batsmen are as they tend to average mid-forties and under.

What I did say is that it will be the Australian innings' of the future, when their much vaunted attack is reduced in effectiveness, which will truly show the worth of their current crop of batsmen.

I AM English. And I DO speak for fair play.

So I think I'm perfectly entitled to an apology there.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Rachael

ps. Langer has partnered Hayden in most of those matches and has racked up 1351 runs at 45.03: when the going gets tough.. Langer averages WAY higher than big bully Hayden...

I know what you are saying, but if you go for that sort of hair splitting, all sorts of hidden worms might come into the open. An example would be the careers of Everton Weekes & Clyde Walcott, two of the three great 'W's of the 1950s West Indian cricket. On paper, they have very similar career aggegates, Weekes marginally better in Tests while Walcott has the edge in overall First Class. But if you break it down by country for Test perfomances, you'll find that a lot of Weekes' big innings were against then weak teams like New Zealand (which Walcott missed) and India; Weekes did have a great run against England, but his perfomance against Australia's Lindwall & Miller is little above mediocre. Walcott on the other hand, has much better averages against stronger teams, including 4 consecutive centuries against the Aussies. This may or may not tell us anything about either player in the end, but I was just making a point.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

Everton Weekes & Clyde Walcott, two of the three great 'W's of the 1950s West Indian cricket.

Ahhhh Everton Weekes... a great man of pithy incisiveness and wonderful word-play.

I remember his contribution to the BBC television commentary box during the 1980 (or perhaps '76) West Indian tour of England.

It seemed to me that every time England struck a boundary, they lost a wicket - though I'm sure that's not entirely true; but I can remember Richie Benaud passing over with the greatest reverance to Everton Weekes for a little expert commentary after England had lost a wicket.

Everton, talking over the slow-motion replay, obliged thus: "He comes in; he bowls the ball; de batsman misses; and - it hits de stumps."

A clearly baffled Benaud replied: "Errr thankyou Everton" and I'm fairly sure he wasn't asked back the following day. Though I suppose it is possible England lost inside three sessions!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Nostromo

This may or may not tell us anything about either player in the end, but I was just making a point.

Unless someone has some serious additional information that is relevent... I think you've just made a pretty strong case for regarding Walcott as considerably superior to Weekes.

I really do think this sort of analysis matters: no one expects even the best players to bat well EVERY time they face tough opposition... and I trust we all recognise that you can anomalies screwing up meaningful analysis in ANY situation where aggregates are used... but every effort should be made to distinguish the bully whose aggregate is inflated by easy runs against lesser opposition from the classy player who was/is more likely to stand up and be counted when the going got tough.

[Nostromo]

Originally Posted by Rachael

I think you've just made a pretty strong case for regarding Walcott as considerably superior to Weekes.

I hasten to add...No. As I said, I was merely making a statement of statistical fact, no more. But to some extent, it was also in Walcott's defence. I understand that the great Freddie Trueman had bit of a run-in with Clyde Walcott at some stage of their careers (I do not know the details) and since then took every opportunity to subtely point out that Walcott's deeds were just that bit inferior to Weekes & Worrell. In the book "Arlott & Trueman on Cricket", Freddie claims that "Walcott's tally of big innings was not as high as that of Weekes or Worrell"; in fact, that statement is manifestly incorrect. Walcott's 'tally' at both test and first class levels was very close to that of Weekes (and against tougher opposition), and considerably superior to that of Worrell.

So, the only point that I want to make is that Walcott was at least as good as, if not better than, Weekes.

[Quagmire]

Ok lets look at it this way. The current opening batsman in the world, the question im proposing would Hayden be in the top two in the world. I am also going to rate there careers out of 10, this is purely my opinion please if anyone wants to rate in there own opinion it would be good to see.

Here are the top averages opening the batting in the world

1. Matthew Hayden - 53.01 (Career 53.01)
2. Virender Sehwag - 51.03 (Career 49.46)
3. Graeme Smith - 48.26 (Career 47.10)
4. Marcus Trescothick - 43.79 (Career 43.80)
5. Hershelle Gibbs - 49.68 (Career 43.38)
6. Andrew Strauss - 43.09 - (Career 43.09)
7. Sanath Jayasuriya - 41.71 (Career 40.42)
8. Marvan Atapattu - 43.24 (Career 38.91)
9. Chris Gayle - 40.06 (Career 38.72)

[Rachael]

That's a pretty awful group of players, isn't it: none are fit to be mentioned in the same breath as the world's top 10 middle order players. You have missed out the most promising pair of the lot though: Cook and Hussey are exemplary openers... and are surely destined to be the foremost openers in Test cricket within the next 12 months.

If I had to pick TWO World XIs right now, the initial short-list as openers would be Hussey, Dravid, Younis Khan and Cook / Chanderpaul... and if that crew were not available I'd start thinking of promoting Tendulkar or Bell or of resorting to Fleming (because of his captaincy)... though Gayle might later figure (as a second spinner).

Edit: two World XI batting line-ups... first thoughts.

1. Dravid
2. Hussey
3. Ponting
4. Lara
5. Yousuf
6. Kallis

1. Younis Khan
2. Cook / Chanderpaul / Tendulkar
3. Jayawardene
4. Inzi
5. Pietersen
6. Clarke

That's without considering Sangakkara...

[Quagmire]

Obviously you have something against Hayden, because he is a better opening batsman and im assuming that you have seen a lot of Younis Khan opening the batting for Pakistan. Cook has only played like 15 test and averages just over 40 and has not yet proven himself. I wouldnt be getting too excited, Hussey is now a middle order batsman because that is where he is most effective, trust me I have seen more of Hussey.

Averages when opening the batting
Cook - 35.31
Younis Khan - 0 because he has never opened the batting in his career
Dravid - 33.55
Fleming 35.11
Hussey 57.83 - But concidering he averages 137.50 at 4 and 83.36 at 5.

Hayden is the number 1 opening batsman in the world. 53 opening the batting is good by any standard in any era against any opposition.