Hayden calls it a day.

horace wrote:Word from tacmeister

Not at all!

Hayden was just sh*t scared of his nemisis - the straight short very silly mid off, planned and executed to perfection during '05.

And anyway - he was always shit against swing !

PS - ... to be resumed tomorrow ... it's late and I'm knackered fellas!!
Bon soire...

Don't worry, merls, all our dreams might come true and Vawny be picked for the ashes series . . .

...and with bell as Captain

Paul Keating wrote:Oh and by the way, refute my claims made by me in this thread. What is so rubbish to suggest that Ambrose found him out?

Ambrose dismissed him 3 times in tests when he was 24 or so. No such a big deal for an ATG opening bowler against a young opening batsman.

lets face it Ambrose scared the tripe out of everyone...even the heroic Shermanator Bell, who never faced Ambrose, dropped his baby rattle outof the cot at the mention of Curtly's name

Hayden

a great opener ...definitely ...changed and adapted his game to remove the weakness which many here point out as a reason to exclude him from greatness ...time may have helped as some of the bowlers who "troubled" him early aged and/or retired ....but he DID change his game and developed some footwork ( and yes the front foot charge is still footwork) ...also reinvented himself in the JAMODI game to be highly influential at the last Gilly

Perhaps we "blame" him for the '05 Ashes loss because it was a big drop from what we (Ozzie fans) expected from him ...he was definitely beaten in the psychological area by the Poms ....him butchering county attacks on the tour and then other Test attacks immediately after the Ashes was also reason to "blame" him for the loss

Seemingly ....Hayden is a qunt ...He's overtly religious ...yet sledges unmercilessly ...his tour interviews are full of bravado and "rude" statements about his opponents ...it's easy to not like that "personality"

On the other hand those who have actually met him see him in a different light ....a real nice guy etc ....

I have some great memories of Hayden the batsman and also some disappointments ( which you get when you have high expectations of someone) ....and some cringeworthy moments of Hayden the "opinionated"

Congratulations on a great career , Matt

a nice read read from Embee

Good effort mb.

Very good opening batsmen, arguably a great, who would walk into most teams as their opening bat but would struggle to get a place (and IMO would most certainly not get a place) in an ATG world 11.

Can't say fairer than that really.

vilkrang wrote:Very good opening batsmen, arguably a great, who would walk into most teams as their opening bat but would struggle to get a place (and IMO would most certainly not get a place) in an ATG world 11.

Can't say fairer than that really.

fair point Vilkrang...but then again not many players would be automatic selections in an ATG Test xi ...

the only ATGs about whom there would be little disagreement would be

Aus - Bradman and Warne (and maybe Gilchrist)
SA - G Pollock
WI - Sobers, Richards
Poms - Hobbes
banindia - srt

IMO there are only 3 cast iron certainties for an AT World Test XI - Bradman, Hobbs and Sobers.


Hayden isn't in that class but has (stong) claims for an AT Aust XI.

You saying that reminds me of the voting for the top 5 players of the century.

Bradman 100
Sobers 90
Hobbs 30
Warne 27
Richards 25

When I read it, I wondered what 10 of them had been smoking.

Yeah, same here.

Frankly, 70 out of 100 so called cricket "experts" not voting for Hobbs raises similar concerns.

We've discussed this list before, I know, but the other thing that struck me as odd is that there was not a single vote for Herbert Sutcliffe.

So what have we learnt?

Hayden has a decent wife, and he's a Qunt?

We have learnt ... nothing.

We have just been tossing Haydos around, that's what we have done.

I think we should all issue a heartfelt public apology.

tac wrote:Don't worry, merls, all our dreams might come true and Vawny be picked for the ashes series . . .

...and with bell as Captain

I don't remember using too many stats, let alone selective ones in this forum*. Also don't remember posting 'blatant' lies tbh. Just 'unblatant' ones.

*except the Gabhir sig.

Dori,

I think WW is referring to me regarding selective stats and blatant lies.

Ah, so I'm the 'bucketloads of crap' guy. Makes sense.

FWIW, I reckon WW is a sensible forummer with some decent posts to his name, but for some reason, he totally lost it with a few on here yesterday.
One thing's for certain, he's gonna miss Hayden !

I suspect the number of people dancing on the grave of his fellow Queenslander didn't help.

OP Tipping wrote:We've discussed this list before, I know, but the other thing that struck me as odd is that there was not a single vote for Herbert Sutcliffe.

Aye. A farkin disgrace.

I wonder if he hated Hobbs later in life?

skully wrote:

OP Tipping wrote:We've discussed this list before, I know, but the other thing that struck me as odd is that there was not a single vote for Herbert Sutcliffe.

Aye. A farkin disgrace.

I wonder if he hated Hobbs later in life?

Dumped for Calvin . .. would have made him bitter . . .

I was close to posting something similar but thought it might be unappreciated.