Matthew Hayden

Top Contributors
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300156 said:
He's not finished. The selectors can give it a try.
Click to expand...

He is finished. @|

Matthew Hayden Test Runs 8532 @ 51.08 avg with a HS of 380, your career has ended my friend.

Thanks for the memories.

schwab2clarkson;300156 said:
It worked with Kumble who used to bat much higher in his early days playing with India. He did finish his career down the bottom of the list.
Click to expand...

Oh no you didnt....tell me she didnt...oh my god, yes she did....deary, deary me. :eek:
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300220 said:
:rolleyes:
Kumble used to be an opener in his early days.....
Click to expand...

Perhaps back in under 13's he opened the batting, but then Matthew Hayden probably opened the bowling back in under 13's. Kumble never ever played first-class cricket as a batsman, or even an all-rounder. To use Kumble as an example to justify moving Hayden down the order is ridiculous. He is an opening batsmen and will always be one for as long as he is in the Australian team
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300220 said:
:rolleyes:
Kumble used to be an opener in his early days.....
Click to expand...

So did Krejza. So did I. That doesn't make him a batsman at the highest level. There is a big, big, BIG difference in batting ability, and batting role, between Kumble and Hayden. Seriously, the comparison is absolutely ridiculous.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300156 said:
He's not finished. The selectors can give it a try.
It worked with Kumble who used to bat much higher in his early days playing with India. He did finish his career down the bottom of the list.
Click to expand...

yeah but Kumble is one of the best leg spinners of all time. Unless Hayden can start working on his medium fasts over night Then no.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

mas cambios;299909 said:
Tom Cooper is an interesting call, I had to look that one up. Too early for him I feel but who knows.

Hughes is an intriguing one, the guy looks good and I reckon he's got to be firmly in the thoughts of the selectors. Think maybe this year (2009) is a little too soon for him, but he may get taken with the Ashes squad or stationed in the UK as back up.
Click to expand...

Yeah because on the cricket show in the lunch break today there was a segment on Phillip Hughes. I think they still are both developing and can not be brought in to the side this early beacuse if they fail then I am afraid we weill not see them in sheffield shield as there techniques will be ruined.
Jaques should be top priority i think.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300124 said:
I think that it is a bit harsh to say to Matthew Hayden that his playing days are over all because he is out of form with the bat. He can still catch the ball. Maybe just move him down near the bottom of the batting list and have somebody like Watson or Hughes to open up with Katich.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Why move him down the order ? It is not like a swinging new ball has been his continous downfall. If he batted down the order it would just make the lower order more fragile. He would still be getting out because he is just in bad form it has nothing to do with his position in the batting order. If anything Moving him down the order would be worse as it would be an unfamiliar position he would have to adapt to. When Herschelle Gibbs was out of form for south Africa they moved him to 4 and 6 and it was worse it was a waiste of three years worth of test cricket. :mad:
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

Biggie;300273 said:
If Jaques wasn't injured, Hayden wouldn't be playing.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly but I am just a tad worried the selectors have forgotten about him. All the talk has been about Hughes.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300220 said:
:rolleyes:
Kumble used to be an opener in his early days.....
Click to expand...

In the 173 test innings that Kumble has batted in he has never once opened the innings. Of those 173 innings, 87.86% have seen him bat at number eight or lower.

Other than those innings batting at eight or lower, Kumble has 21 other innings,

  • Anil has batted at number three a total of five times. Each time he was sent in as the nightwatchman.
  • Only once has Kumble batted at number four. Once again he was sent in as nightwatchman only to be dismissed for a first ball duck.
  • Kumble never batted at number five once in 173 innings he batted in.
  • Kumble batted once at number six, ahead of Rahul Dravid and Nayan Mongia who were both unable to bat in the second innings.
  • Anil batted a total of 14 times at number seven. Ten of those he was legitimately sent in at seven due to the Indians playing five bowlers and with Kumble being a capable batsman, he was the first of the bowlers sent in. The other four occasions he was sent in as nightwatchman or due to top order players being absent or sent in at 11 due to injury.



Kumble has never once opened an innings, at least in test cricket anyway. He has never once batted legitimately above number seven and spent most of his test career batting at eight or lower.

S2C, in future do some research before making wild accusations or statements about a player's career. Backing up your posts with stats is a much better way to put an argument across rather than saying things without having any evidence to suggest it even happened.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300220 said:
:rolleyes:
Kumble used to be an opener in his early days.....
Click to expand...
Oh ****. Don't tell me you're fouling up this forum now Suzi?

Can't you just either go away, or stop posting drivel and/or unsubstantiated rubbish? They've already banned you numerous times from BigFooty and BigSoccer... I suppose this is the only place that will still have you.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

schwab2clarkson;300220 said:
:rolleyes:
Kumble used to be an opener in his early days.....
Click to expand...

Why does that have to do with it? Haurtiz used to be an all rounder, but he sure isn't one now.

They're both in the team for their bowling.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

grapedo;300276 said:
Yes exactly but I am just a tad worried the selectors have forgotten about him. All the talk has been about Hughes.
Click to expand...

I think it'd be silly to fast-track Hughes. Jaques is the obvious choice, he has shown he's got what it takes to make runs at the top level.

It won't make any difference if Hughes has to wait another couple of years, I think it will probably help him. Will actually show him he has to work HARD to play for Australia(Like Hussey), not just be a promising youngster with a few runs under his belt.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

You know who i'd love to see in the test arena.
Dave Warner.:)
I know its never gonna happen but
he adds sumthin different.lol
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

If Jacques is fit I think he is first picked after Hayden gets dropped. If Jacques is unavailable then the selectors surely have to look at who is currently performing in the Sheffield Shield at the moment.
Surely Klinger (906 runs @ 90.60) is the man next in line.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

namdarb;301157 said:
If Jacques is fit I think he is first picked after Hayden gets dropped. If Jacques is unavailable then the selectors surely have to look at who is currently performing in the Sheffield Shield at the moment.
Surely Klinger (906 runs @ 90.60) is the man next in line.
Click to expand...

If they're looking to play the absolute best team right now, then Klinger is probably the go. If they want to look to the future a bit more, the Hughes may get the call up. If we somehow manage to win this Test (barring rain, a draw would have to be impossible), then Klinger/Voges/Rogers will definitely play. If we lose, Sydney will be a dead-rubber, and Hughes may get a look in.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

I rekckon they should drop Hayden and bing hughs in the see if he ahs what it takes.

if he makes some serious runs he should stay there i know he's young but he's in great form so he deserves to play plus jaques might be a bit outta form coming from injury.
 
Re: Matthew Hayden

Edge;301166 said:
I rekckon they should drop Hayden and bing hughs in the see if he ahs what it takes.

if he makes some serious runs he should stay there i know he's young but he's in great form so he deserves to play plus jaques might be a bit outta form coming from injury.
Click to expand...

Another NSW centric view towards the AUSTRALIAN cricket team. Klinger is far and away the in form player. Why should Hughes be picked first? Because he plays for NSW?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top