The most SUCCESSFUL batsman of this decade (2000's) discussion.

[.Mob]

Don't need that arguement anyway. Murali would barely average under 30 had the majority of his career been played in Australia. The fact that Warne was able to average so little whilst playing in Australian conditions is a testerment to how good he actually was.

I LOL'd, so hard.

At the double standards, btw, not Warne vs Murali. Let's count minnows for Ponting, but definitely not for Murali in an argument.

 

[King Pietersen]

The thing I like is just the way Ben can remove those stats when he fancies it, but as soon as it benefits his argument, it's fine to include the said statistics. Typical Ben tbh.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Ooh, I'd like to add that the same could be said about Warne and playing in the subcontinent, but that's a topic for another time...

Anyways, I guess Shiv should be considered the best batsman of the last decade as he has the most runs scored against the top 6 test playing nations, as well as an impressive average a lot of tons? Also, Viru has been massively underused, 12 tons in 14 matches against the top 6. Legendary.

 

[.Mob]

Sehwag isn't an Aussie, so that argument isn't valid.

 

[King Pietersen]

I made a point about Hayden earlier in the thread, and thought I'd look up some statistics just to see how well he's actually been playing away from home throughout his career. The stats are incredibly interesting. First lets look at his career summary in Tests away from home:

42 matches, 3062 runs at an average of 41.94 with 8 Hundreds.

Still a pretty decent record you may be saying, but of his 30 Test match hundreds, he's only got 8 away from home (excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh). His average is also 11 runs lower than his overall career average, which is quite considerable. Then I think you should look at his record against individual nations. Again providing interesting stats:

England: 10 Matches, 552 runs at an average of 34.50
India: 11 Matches, 1027 runs at an average of 51.35
New Zealand: 4 matches, 197 runs at an average of 28.14
South Africa: 10 Matches, 624 runs at an average of 34.66
Sri Lanka: 3 Matches, 283 runs at an average of 47.16
West Indies: 4 Matches, 379 runs at an average of 63.16

Again, pretty interesting stats. Hayden really seems to struggle in conditions that are said to favour the bowlers. In the 2 countries which seem most swing and seam movement hayden averages 34 and 28 respectively. He also seems to struggle in South Africa for some strange reason. It's not a country that is famed for being a bowlers paradise, maybe he just doesn't like facing Donald or Pollock? Hayden does have a fantastic record in the Sub-Continent and the West Indies however. His record in India is certainly impressive, apart from his most recent journey there of course. Apart from that he's been very impressive in the subcontinent.

The stats that appeared to be most significant for me were the year by year statistics. These showed his record throughout his career away from home, and they're certainly worth taking a look at:

year 1994: 1 match, 20 runs at an average of 10.00
year 1997: 3 matches, 64 runs at an average of 12.80
year 2000: 1 match, 39 runs at an average of 19.50
year 2001: 8 matches, 783 runs at 65.25
year 2002: 3 matches, 309 runs at 61.80
year 2003: 4 matches, 379 runs at 63.16
year 2004: 7 matches, 527 runs at 37.64
year 2005: 8 matches, 476 runs at 34.00
year 2006: 3 matches, 231 runs at 38.50
year 2008: 4 matches, 234 runs at 33.42

There are his year by year stats, and they clearly show that he's struggled in his last 4 years of Away tours, when compared with the 3 years before that anyway. Just shows that he's not been anywhere near as dominatant as before, and his average has really been saved by his fantastic performances in Australia.

Just to make it clear, I'm not saying Hayden's not class. He's easily the best opening batsman of the modern era, but just highlighting the fact that he's nowhere near as dominant when not playing on familiar surfaces in Australia. The hundred count is proof of this, only 8 hundreds away from home against top Test nations. I just don't think Hayden matches up to the likes of Tendulkar, Kallis, Lara, and even Chanderpaul and Yousuf, especially in the past 4-5 years. He's been consistently the best opening batsman though.

Just thought that'd make for good reading

 

[Amiya]

Sehwag isn't an Aussie, so that argument isn't valid.

lol. Good post.

 

[.Mob]

Yeah, it certainly was a good read, thank you Dan. I'm just looking forward to Ben's counter argument and his bending of facts, just the way he can.

 

[age of the fall]

I had nothing to do so i figured I'd see how many Ducks the people in Bens List have in 2000s

Ricky Ponting	        5 Ducks   92 tests		
Matthew Hayden		8 Ducks   93 Tests	
Jacques Kallis		8 Ducks   93 Tests	
Rahul Dravid		6 Ducks   96  Tests
Mahela Jayawardena	9 Ducks   83 Tests	
Sachin Tendulkar		7 Ducks   82 Tests
Brian Lara			13 Ducks  66Tests
Kumar Sangakkara	4  Ducks  76 Tests	
Justin Langer		7 Ducks   76 Tests	
Graeme Smith		8 Ducks   72 Tests	
Mohammad Yousuf	5 Ducks   64 Tests		
Marcus Trescothick	12 Ducks 76 Tests	
Shivnarine Chanderpaul	7 Ducks   76 Tests	
VVS Laxman	        7 Ducks   85 Tests		
Michael Vaughan	        9 Ducks   80 Tests		
Virender Sehwag	        9 Ducks   64 Tests		
Herschelle Gibbs	        9 Ducks   73 Tests	
Adam Gilchrist	        13 Ducks 91 Tests
Inzamam-ul-Haq	        7 Ducks  62 Tests

Tests per Duck

Sangakarra 19
Ponting 18.4
Dravid 16
Yousef 12.8
Laxman 12.14
Tendulker 11.71
Hayden 11.62
Kallis  11.62
Chanderpaul 10.85
Langer 10.85
Jayawardene 9.22
Smith 9
Vaughan 8.88
Haq 8.85
Gibbs 8.11
Sehwag 7.11
Gilchrist 7
Trescothick 6.33
Lara 5.07

Just some Random Info

 

[mattfb]

Lara and Tendulkar were dominant for 10 year before ponting even started making his big scores.

Ponting made 96 or 97 on debut against Murali and the Sri Lankans. That Indian tour where he averaged really low, dont remember what it was exactly but that was his only really bad tour.

 

[mattfb]

Dan, that was a good read actually. Yes he struggles in England and New Zealand, but most batsmen do struggle somewhere to be fair. His record in India is amazing though isn't it, I guess his ability to play the sweepshot and use his feet makes him hard to bowl to for spinners.

On the year by year, they are interesting statistics but I dont think you can claim to much that his inconsistent. 3 years in a row he averages over 60 away from home. I think it would be hard to find a batsmen with that sort of consistency over 3 years away from home. In the first 3 years you have given judging by the matches played he only played 1 or 2, so it makes it hard to get into a rhythm. Whilst Hayden is still a great batter, I think those stats show that he is long past his prime. He's dangerous, but just not spectacular anymore.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I made a point about Hayden earlier in the thread, and thought I'd look up some statistics just to see how well he's actually been playing away from home throughout his career. The stats are incredibly interesting. First lets look at his career summary in Tests away from home:

42 matches, 3062 runs at an average of 41.94 with 8 Hundreds.

Still a pretty decent record you may be saying, but of his 30 Test match hundreds, he's only got 8 away from home (excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh). His average is also 11 runs lower than his overall career average, which is quite considerable. Then I think you should look at his record against individual nations. Again providing interesting stats:

England: 10 Matches, 552 runs at an average of 34.50
India: 11 Matches, 1027 runs at an average of 51.35
New Zealand: 4 matches, 197 runs at an average of 28.14
South Africa: 10 Matches, 624 runs at an average of 34.66
Sri Lanka: 3 Matches, 283 runs at an average of 47.16
West Indies: 4 Matches, 379 runs at an average of 63.16

Again, pretty interesting stats. Hayden really seems to struggle in conditions that are said to favour the bowlers. In the 2 countries which seem most swing and seam movement hayden averages 34 and 28 respectively. He also seems to struggle in South Africa for some strange reason. It's not a country that is famed for being a bowlers paradise, maybe he just doesn't like facing Donald or Pollock? Hayden does have a fantastic record in the Sub-Continent and the West Indies however. His record in India is certainly impressive, apart from his most recent journey there of course. Apart from that he's been very impressive in the subcontinent.

Are you kidding? Have you actually seen Hayden bat to Donald or Pollock? Hayden destroyed Donald and Pollock in the 2002 series of South Africa and he subsquently ended Donald's career and after that series, Hayden was named in the number 1 batsman in the world.

The experts from what I've heard believe that Australian pitches aren't much different to the pitches that are produced in South Africa. I thought I'd point this out because this because you seem to hold their opinion in the highest regard and believe whatever they say.

Why do you persistantly point out Hayden's stats against England and New Zealand anyway? New Zealand have one class bowler and his a spinner, not a pace bowler. Seeing as Hayden has never faced Shane Bond in a Test Match that has been played in New Zealand and the bowlers that his facing have averages of 40+ then this statistic is really irrelevant. Hayden has a poor record against Bangladesh aswell. Why don't you hold that against him? Hayden averages like over 70 in New Zealand in ODI cricket and has a highest score of 181 n/o in New Zealand so there is no obvious flaw there. Following that series, he said the pitches in New Zealand are similar to the ones in the West Indies and that he loves batting on surfaces like that. He followed that up by being the best player in the World Cup 2007 that was played in the West Indies.

Why don't you take his record against Murali into consideration either? The leading wickettaker in the history of Test Cricket and Hayden has made 100's against him in Sri Lanka? Kallis, Chanderpaul and Mohammad Yousuf all have never scored 100's against Sri Lanka. For a non-subcontient player to have success in the subcontient is a great testerment to that player. Much like it is a subcontient player to have success outside the subcontient.

The stats that appeared to be most significant for me were the year by year statistics. These showed his record throughout his career away from home, and they're certainly worth taking a look at:

year 1994: 1 match, 20 runs at an average of 10.00
year 1997: 3 matches, 64 runs at an average of 12.80
year 2000: 1 match, 39 runs at an average of 19.50
year 2001: 8 matches, 783 runs at 65.25
year 2002: 3 matches, 309 runs at 61.80
year 2003: 4 matches, 379 runs at 63.16
year 2004: 7 matches, 527 runs at 37.64
year 2005: 8 matches, 476 runs at 34.00
year 2006: 3 matches, 231 runs at 38.50
year 2008: 4 matches, 234 runs at 33.42

There are his year by year stats, and they clearly show that he's struggled in his last 4 years of Away tours, when compared with the 3 years before that anyway. Just shows that he's not been anywhere near as dominatant as before, and his average has really been saved by his fantastic performances in Australia.

Just to make it clear, I'm not saying Hayden's not class. He's easily the best opening batsman of the modern era, but just highlighting the fact that he's nowhere near as dominant when not playing on familiar surfaces in Australia. The hundred count is proof of this, only 8 hundreds away from home against top Test nations. I just don't think Hayden matches up to the likes of Tendulkar, Kallis, Lara, and even Chanderpaul and Yousuf, especially in the past 4-5 years. He's been consistently the best opening batsman though.

Just thought that'd make for good reading

You obviously don't realise how much difficult it is to open the batting compared to any other position. You face the bowlers when their fresh, when the ball is swinging and more often then not, you're batting in the most awkard situations that a batsman can endure.

Everyone in the team obviously isn't going to play aswell as they would on home soil. Of course against the stronger nations overseas, Hayden's probably spent days in the field overseas then has had about 10 minutes to whack the pads on and then his facing bowlers bowling 140kph when their fresh. Of course a middle-order batsman is going to perform better overseas then what an opener would. Why do you think their have only been 2 great opening batsman over the past 60 years (Hayden and Gavaskar) who have managed to average over 50 in Test Cricket for such a long period of time?

Yeah, it certainly was a good read, thank you Dan. I'm just looking forward to Ben's counter argument and his bending of facts, just the way he can.

It's funny how insignificant posters like you have nothing better to contribute but to take a bit've crack at me. Probably because I've constantly outargued on every single occasion that has presented itself. Sore grapes?

 

[ZoraxDoom]

The experts from what I've heard believe that Australian pitches aren't much different to the pitches that are produced in South Africa. I thought I'd point this out because this because you seem to hold their opinion in the highest regard and believe whatever they say.

So Hayden gets homesick then?

Why do you persistantly point out Hayden's stats against England and New Zealand anyway? New Zealand have one class bowler and his a spinner, not a pace bowler. Seeing as Hayden has never faced Shane Bond in a Test Match that has been played in New Zealand and the bowlers that his facing have averages of 40+ then this statistic is really irrelevant.

Indeed, how irrelevant it is that Hayden fails against a crap bowling lineup. It's a useless fact really...

Hayden has a poor record against Bangladesh aswell. Why don't you hold that against him?

Okay, we will. Hayden has failed against Bangladesh.

Why don't you take his record against Murali into consideration either? The leading wickettaker in the history of Test Cricket and Hayden has made 100's against him in Sri Lanka? Kallis, Chanderpaul and Mohammad Yousuf all have never scored 100's against Sri Lanka. For a non-subcontient player to have success in the subcontient is a great testerment to that player. Much like it is a subcontient player to have success outside the subcontient.

Shiv has two fifties and averages 47. Yousuf has failed though.
He's non-subcontinent, and has performed in the subcontinent, but has failed outside of it. Really, he hasn't done well in RSA, NZ or Eng, and as done well in Aus and WI. So he's a subcontinent player only, unless at home or bashing the Windies.

You obviously don't realise how much difficult it is to open the batting compared to any other position. You face the bowlers when their fresh, when the ball is swinging and more often then not, you're batting in the most awkard situations that a batsman can endure.

Everyone in the team obviously isn't going to play aswell as they would on home soil. Of course against the stronger nations overseas, Hayden's probably spent days in the field overseas then has had about 10 minutes to whack the pads on and then his facing bowlers bowling 140kph when their fresh. Of course a middle-order batsman is going to perform better overseas then what an opener would. Why do you think their have only been 2 great opening batsman over the past 60 years (Hayden and Gavaskar) who have managed to average over 50 in Test Cricket for such a long period of time?

Excuses excuses. Sehwag has averaged over 50. Gambhir has been brilliant this year. Smith averages 49.95. It's lovely how you try to use logic to try and defend Hayden when his stats are poor, and use stats to incriminate others when your logic is poor. Stick to one argument mate, logic or stats.


Oh, and I think the stats show he averaged over fifty for only 3 years in his career. Not exactly a very long time.

 

[aussie_ben91]

So Hayden gets homesick then?

Averaged over 60 in a tour of South Africa which featured the bowling lineup of Pollock, Donald and Ntini.

Indeed, how irrelevant it is that Hayden fails against a crap bowling lineup. It's a useless fact really...

Considering so much emphasis is put on how well you do in England and New Zealand and against good bowlers then failing against minnows seems to be considered irrelevant.

Shiv has two fifties and averages 47. Yousuf has failed though.
He's non-subcontinent, and has performed in the subcontinent, but has failed outside of it. Really, he hasn't done well in RSA, NZ or Eng, and as done well in Aus and WI. So he's a subcontinent player only, unless at home or bashing the Windies.

Fifties don't make a player great, hundreds do and Hayden has a better hundred per match average then anyone that's currently playing world cricket over a long period of time. No player makes runs in every single country they play in. Ponting has struggled in India, Tendulkar has struggled in South Africa, Lara against India and so on. You really are fighting a losing arguement if you think a player is going to perform exceptionally well in every single country they play in.

Excuses excuses. Sehwag has averaged over 50. Gambhir has been brilliant this year. Smith averages 49.95. It's lovely how you try to use logic to try and defend Hayden when his stats are poor, and use stats to incriminate others when your logic is poor. Stick to one argument mate, logic or stats.

Hayden averaged 56 after playing similar games to Sehwag. History shows that openers' career averages usually peak around the 40-70 game mark and then their average begins to deteriorate. Haydens and Gavaskars averages were close to touching 60 in their prime but as time went on their averages collasped. It's funny how you and others accuse me of swaying statistics and logic when people like you are the ones originally did it. We'll see if Smith or Sehwag average over 50 if they manage to play as many games as Hayden.

Oh, and I think the stats show he averaged over fifty for only 3 years in his career. Not exactly a very long time.

Congratulations. You have totally made a fool out of yourself. Hayden has averaged over 50 in Test Cricket since 2002. That's almost 7 years.

Keep posting if you want to continue being humilated.

 

[mattfb]

Oh, and I think the stats show he averaged over fifty for only 3 years in his career. Not exactly a very long time.

Thats away from home.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Oh, so it is. My bad.

Sehwag actually has 12 hundreds in 14 games in the last decade against the top 6 test playing nations. Using your logic of excluding poor bowling attacks, Viru has the best hundreds per match ration then, right?