Is Hussey better than KP?

"I fail to see how a players skill is diminshed if he happens to play in a team that includes alleged 'greats'."

Who should that argument apply to in bygone days? Who carried who? Bradman, Ponsford or McCabe? Sobers, Kanhai or Lloyd? It's ludicrous.

Zim, PDY - It's not that anyone is trying to downplay Hussey's achievements - the stats speak for themselves. But surely it must be easier for Hussey to play his own game safe in the knowledge that he has players of the calibre of Ponting in the same side, than KP who is often bracketed between Bell and Collingwood?

When Hussey first came into the side he opened with a bloke who one Test before had been one innings from being out on his ear, and then he went to the middle order (out of position for him) which dropped three players in three matches. Worth mentioning because he hasn't always had the magic carpet ride.

But how can ponting be rated as that good?

After all he plays for australia and if you play for the aussies things are easier thus you arent as good as your numbers say.

Fred Nerk wrote:When Hussey first came into the side he opened with a bloke who one Test before had been one innings from being out on his ear, and then he went to the middle order (out of position for him) which dropped three players in three matches. Worth mentioning because he hasn't always had the magic carpet ride.

Yep, I would say that it is Hussey who is making Clarke, Roy and the whole middle order look good. Without Huss, it could well be 3 out all out for the Aussies.

Oops now im getting dizzy again.

I wish somebody could make a list of the aussie players who benefit from playing with the really good aussie players and the really good aussie players.

please don't yell wrote:Oops now im getting dizzy again.

I wish somebody could make a list of the aussie players who benefit from playing with the really good aussie players and the really good aussie players.

It's called synergy.

Besides that, he has copped a lot of carping based on stereotypes of transplanted openers (can't play spin, hopeless batting with the tail, etc etc) which he quickly made to look laughable. Esp his ability batting with the bowlers - better than SW, and maybe even better than Gilly.

Clarke and Symonds were two of the blokes in the revolving door around Hussey in 05-06. They have both improved out of sight under their own steam.

I'd actually think that playing for a shit side would be easier. Paris has often thrown away his wicket making quick runs for the team...has KP ever done done anything that might harm his own career average?

Basil wrote:

It's called synergy.

Synergy is a odd explanation for such a sport like cricket which tests and exposes an individuals skills(or lack there of) more than other team sports.

please don't yell wrote:

Basil wrote:

It's called synergy.

Synergy is a odd explanation for such a sport like cricket which tests and exposes an individuals skills(or lack there of) more than other team sports.

It's not that odd - 11 individuals without a well-honed sense of the need to play for each other would achieve nothing no matter how talented they were.

Apply Baz's argument to bowlers and the best bowler ever can't be Warne or McGrath, or Lillee or Thomson, or any of the Marshall-Ambrose-Holding-Garner club, because all of those guys had each other, but Richard Hadlee who was forever lumbered with hacks at the other end.

But I've never heard even a Kiwi argue for Sir Dick, not on that basis anyway.

I mean were not talking a solid team making a cinderella run through the playoffs in basketball or something.

We are talking about a team sport with a heavy focus on 1 on 1 combat and a team which has dominated for over a decade.

A group of solid players lifting each other to status of greats simply through synergy?

Illogical and unlikely it's also for some reason never been used to describe the 1980's west indies.

I think I'll sum things up by saying it's a sporting truism that it's easier to come into strong, dominant winning harmonious team than one that isn't. Take that where you will...

Eric Air Emu wrote:I think I'll sum things up by saying it's a sporting truism that it's easier to come into strong, dominant winning harmonious team than one that isn't. Take that where you will...

But remember, Hussey came into a team that was ready to fall apart (if you belive the press) following the Ashes loss of 2005.

True in fact surely hussey's batting and clark's bowling are major reason's why a team which just lost the ashes and was in crisis has gone undefeated since.

please don't yell wrote:And of course the aussie bats never had to face warne and mcgrath who of course are over rated because they never had to bowl to the aussie batsman.

All this circular reasoning makes me more dizzy than riding the tea cups at disneyland.

Yeah and Ponting only played the 'in their pomp' Walsh&Ambrose, Wasim&Waqar, Donald&Pollock etc....

I don't think Hussey is better than KP. Given their age differences which is about 5-6 years the best for KP is yet to come and Hussey I reckon has reached his peak.

tac wrote:

Zat wrote:You sure you're not gabba Dan?

Of course he's GD, he even sent me a PM admitting it.

Liar he knows I'm from NSW.

Here is an unedited PM from him.

paste

I'm also an ex-Dubber. Parents from Moree and went to King's College, Cambridge.

Jack

Hussey
18 tests
1896 @ 86.18

Jimmy Adams after 18 tests
1456 @ 72.80

I'm not saying that Hussey will suffer the same decline as Adams, but I estimate he will finish his career with an average around 60-62.

Paul Keating wrote:Hussey
18 tests
1896 @ 86.18

Jimmy Adams after 18 tests
1456 @ 72.80

I'm not saying that Hussey will suffer the same decline as Adams, but I estimate he will finish his career with an average around 60-62.

Jimmy was pretty unlucky in that half of his last 30 tests were against Australia (against whom he averaged 25 overall). Don't think that will happen to Huss.

Hussey v Sangakkara would be a good comparison at the moment.

Henry wrote:Hussey v Sangakkara would be a good comparison at the moment.

Sanga's already played 60+ tests . . . how can you compare?

tac wrote:

Paul Keating wrote:Hussey
18 tests
1896 @ 86.18

Jimmy Adams after 18 tests
1456 @ 72.80

I'm not saying that Hussey will suffer the same decline as Adams, but I estimate he will finish his career with an average around 60-62.

Jimmy was pretty unlucky in that half of his last 30 tests were against Australia (against whom he averaged 25 overall). Don't think that will happen to Huss.

Particularly as he is an Aussie.

taipan wrote:

tac wrote:

Paul Keating wrote:Hussey
18 tests
1896 @ 86.18

Jimmy Adams after 18 tests
1456 @ 72.80

I'm not saying that Hussey will suffer the same decline as Adams, but I estimate he will finish his career with an average around 60-62.

Jimmy was pretty unlucky in that half of his last 30 tests were against Australia (against whom he averaged 25 overall). Don't think that will happen to Huss.

Particularly as he is an Aussie.

That was the point! FFS, taips, you've been forumming with Chandan way too long!