Virender Sehwag- Overrated? Underrated?

[Precambrian]

Ganguly was better than Hayden. So was Saeed Anwar, Gary Kirsten...

DWTA. Ganguly was a minnow basher and was lucky not to be expelled earlier than he was in 2005, because he was batting in the cool shade of Tendulkar. Hayden > Ganguly.

 

[Cricketman]

Nah. He was very consistent, especially in the 90s. He was the world's number one batsman for a long long time in the shorter format. Hayden was an aggressor who peaked later in his career, while Ganguly was on the decline. Dada had a bit of a bad patch during the whole Chappell saga but came back better than ever in the very end of his career.

 

[metallics2006]

Without Hayden, Australia wouldn't of been the dominant force that they have been.

If it was'nt Hayden, Australia would have picked Chris Rogers

Cricinfo - Players and Officials - Chris Rogers

or, Michael Di Venuto

Cricinfo - Players and Officials - Michael Di Venuto

or, a young Phil Jacques or some other opener. Chris Rogers averages 50 in FC games and he could have averaged just as much as Hayden who benefited from playing with Waugh, Gilly, Ponting, Martyn etc. Hayden was just lucky that he got picked ahead of Chris Rogers when he made his comeback on 2000.

 

[aussie_ben91]

A big load of the choicest horse crap. Selective stats at the very best (or worst) there. What you conveniently forget is that for a considerable period of time, Sir Mathew the slayer of All evil in the World Hayden too had such delectable batting records. Proof as below.

Before that, some interesting coincidences, Both Sehwag and Hayden are born in the same month, and just 9 days seperate their dates of birth within the month. Both made debut at roughly the same age, 23. And both have an uncanny playing style (taking it to the opposition), and both are favorite internet x vs y discussion topics.

There ends that. Now to business, From the time he made his debut, ie 23, which was in 1994, till 2001 beginning, ie, when he was about 29, Sir Mathew Hayden averaged a royal looking 26.40 in Test Match Cricket. And his away average was an even more majestic looking Mendisque 13.67 in 5 test matches. Proof? Please refer the image below :

And for Sehwag? His first 7 years in Test cricket, he made the small matter of about 4100 runs @ 50.

Now, Ben was crapping about how poor Sehwag's record is in NZ. Yes, dude it is. But Sir Mathew also had an equally abysmal record in roughly the same no. of matches in NZ during the same period. As to his record in SA, you conveniently forget that Sehwag was a manufactured opener than an actual one, and was a specialist middle order batsman thrust into opening, and hence was not an early success. But his 100 batting at no. 5 should put end to all such stupid allegations of his lack of success in SA. Please refer to the above table for Hayden's howler of performances against NZ and SA, ironically the same opposition Ben unluckily chose.

Your comparing ages now? Maybe you should compare the bowlers that Hayden faced during that period compared to the ones that Sehwag had to face during the earlier stages of his career. The surfaces that Sehwag batted on were incredibly easier aswell. Considering Hayden had a tough time of it, I doubt that Sehwag would've managed to make it to double-figures - Especially if their was movement off the pitch.

Seam movement = Sehwag goes missing

Don't tell me this is happening. Hayden gets credit for what his bowlers did and Gavaskar suffers because his bowlers were ****? What has results of matches got to do with batting stats of players? Ridiculous.

Hayden doesn't need credit off the bowlers. Gavaskar had fine bowlers but only cashed in on draws.

Kapil Dev - 434 wkts @ 29.64
Bishan Bedi - 266 wkts @ 28.71
Bhagwath Chandrasekhar - 242 wkts @ 29.74

:laugh

Lol, What? Mark Taylor "made" the invincible Australians of the early 2000s. He is easily the best captain for Australia since Ian Chappell in the 60s and 70s. Steve Waugh was lucky to reap the fruits of Taylor's and Border's labour, and Ponting enjoyed the leftovers to a good extent.

Nah, that is just wrong - Steve Waugh was a much better captain then Mark Taylor and he actually performed with the bat as a captain aswell. It wasn't until Steve Waugh took over the captaincy that the likes of Hayden, Warne, McGrath, Langer, Gilchrist & Ponting all came into their own and performed to their talent.

And as regards to your inane argument of "how Hayden's hunger was filled". Hayden made his comeback at the age of around 30+ which is considered to be the peak of batsmanship. He also benefitted from flat Australian surfaces as evidenced by his strong Home average. Had Sehwag been an Australian, he would be averaging in the mid to late 50s now, considering how he played in Australia.

Flat surfaces? Perth and Brisbane featured the most livily tracks in world cricket during Hayden's career and both venues Hayden excelled at. He also scored heavily at the MCG & Hobart, amasing 6-7 hundreds, in swinging conditions.

Unlike Indian pitches, Australian pitches offers just as much for the pacemen as much as the batsman. The first session of play, seams and swings around and it is difficult for the openers. Opening the batting in Australia is arguably the hardest but also the most rewarding because after the greenest of the first-session, the pitches in Australia tend to flatten out.

Sehwag has never scored a 100 in a match where under 1000 runs have been scored in the entire match by both sides. Hayden has scored several. This clearly demonstrates that Hayden is allot more capable of playing in bowler-friendly conditions then what Sehwag is.

Considering that Sehwag is only 30 now, and that Hayden made 80% of his runs only after 30, it can be safely assumed that by the time Sehwag is finished, Hayden would have been pushed into the deep realms of cricketing obscurity by the Delhi dasher.

Not even, Sehwag relys on hand-eye coordination and he is coming up to the same age where it faded for Sir Viv & Gilly. I'm afraid that it's all down hill from here for Virender Sehwag because Sehwag doesn't hold a candle to those two.

 

[Precambrian]

Nah. He was very consistent, especially in the 90s. He was the world's number one batsman for a long long time in the shorter format. Hayden was an aggressor who peaked later in his career, while Ganguly was on the decline. Dada had a bit of a bad patch during the whole Chappell saga but came back better than ever in the very end of his career.

Agree that Ganguly was consistent when he was good (ie from debut to about 2003) and after his comeback (post WC 2007), but in between for 5 years, he was both inconsistent and slow scoring, and cost India a lot of matches, more than he won for them. Hayden never had such a long streak of poor form in his ODI career, was more consistent, and at his best thrashed the living daylights of the opposition.

 

[aussie_ben91]

If it was'nt Hayden, Australia would have picked Chris Rogers

Cricinfo - Players and Officials - Chris Rogers

or, Michael Di Venuto

Cricinfo - Players and Officials - Michael Di Venuto

or, a young Phil Jacques or some other opener. Chris Rogers averages 50 in FC games and he could have averaged just as much as Hayden who benefited from playing with Waugh, Gilly, Ponting, Martyn etc. Hayden was just lucky that he got picked ahead of Chris Rogers when he made his comeback on 2000.

Hayden benefitted from the Waughs, Gilly, Ponting, Martyn, etc? How on earth can an Opening Batsman benefite from a middle-order batsman!? Tell me, I'm intrigued as to how you can come to this conclusion. Not even Sehwag benefits from Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman or Ganguly...

Australia benefitted from Hayden, not the other way round. Hence why our dominance didn't stop after the retirements or McGrath & Warne but further down the track when Hayden declined, is when we started losing Test series.

Hayden averaged in the mid 55's in Australia domestic cricket all the way through his career whilst Rogers didn't start averaging 50 in first-class cricket til last year, after one or two seasons of good form. Rogers & Di Venuto weren't even close to Hayden. Hell, they aren't even close to Sehwag either.

 

[Precambrian]

Your comparing ages now? Maybe you should compare the bowlers that Hayden faced during that period compared to the ones that Sehwag had to face during the earlier stages of his career. The surfaces that Sehwag batted on were incredibly easier aswell. Considering Hayden had a tough time of it, I doubt that Sehwag would've managed to make it to double-figures - Especially if their was movement off the pitch.

You started stupid comparisons. My age comparisons atleast make sense.

Sehwag faced almost exactly the same kind of bowlers Hayden too faced at the start of his career. Both were poor in NZ and SA. And both teams consisted of more or less the same quality of bowlers. In fact in NZ, Sehwag had to face a beefed up Bond at his best, on absoutely ridiculously bowler friendly tracks. In case of Hayden, only he failed, but in case of Sehwag, everyone failed.

Seam movement = Sehwag goes missing

Lol, same with Hayden.

Hayden doesn't need credit off the bowlers. Gavaskar had fine bowlers but only cashed in on draws.

Kapil Dev - 434 wkts @ 29.64
Bishan Bedi - 266 wkts @ 28.71
Bhagwath Chandrasekhar - 242 wkts @ 29.74

Whoa, and Hayden had?

McGrath - 563 wickets @ 21.6
Warne - 709 wickets @ 25.1
Gillespie - 259 wickets @ 26
MacGill - 208 wickets @ 29
McDermott
Riefell
Fleming

The list goes on and on....

:laugh

Nah, that is just wrong - Steve Waugh was a much better captain then Mark Taylor and he actually performed with the bat as a captain aswell. It wasn't until Steve Waugh took over the captaincy that the likes of Hayden, Warne, McGrath, Langer, Gilchrist & Ponting all came into their own and performed to their talent.

Wrong. The players were nurtured by Taylor to become the all conquering team that Aussies became under Steve Waugh. Waugh captained and not mentored.

Flat surfaces? Perth and Brisbane featured the most livily tracks in world cricket during Hayden's career and both venues Hayden excelled at. He also scored heavily at the MCG & Hobart, amasing 6-7 hundreds, in swinging conditions.

:laugh Perth used to be. Brisbane used to be. However since 2000, invariably all Australian surfaces have become flat tracks. If you want I can supply data. MCG is hardly swinger's paradise and Hobart too.

Unlike Indian pitches, Australian pitches offers just as much for the pacemen as much as the batsman. The first session of play, seams and swings around and it is difficult for the openers. Opening the batting in Australia is arguably the hardest but also the most rewarding because after the greenest of the first-session, the pitches in Australia tend to flatten out.

Well, if you think Aussie surfaces are hard to bat as compared to Indian ones, then my friend, Sehwag averages 59.5 in Australia as compared to Hayden's average. Case closed and sealed.

Sehwag has never scored a 100 in a match where under 1000 runs have been scored in the entire match by both sides. Hayden has scored several. This clearly demonstrates that Hayden is allot more capable of playing in bowler-friendly conditions then what Sehwag is.

How illogical is that statement? I can understand if you said Sehwag never scored a 100 when India did not score less than 500, but WTF he has got to do with how the opposition bats? Also could you please provide the instances when Hayden scored a 100 and less than 1000 runs were scored in the match?

Also when Sehwag got a 100, he ensured that he converted it into a biggie, unlike Hayden who selfishly threw away his wicket once he got his 100.

Not even, Sehwag relys on hand-eye coordination and he is coming up to the same age where it faded for Sir Viv & Gilly. I'm afraid that it's all down hill from here for Virender Sehwag because Sehwag doesn't hold a candle to those two.

Hayden and footwork ? :laugh Hayden too thrived on exactly the same attributes that Sehwag thrives on. There is nothing in evidence to suggest that Sehwag is all downhill from now on. And BTW, thanks for putting him right up there with Sir Viv. Unfortunately I don't think Sehwag is up there at the moment.

 

[metallics2006]

Hayden benefitted from the Waughs, Gilly, Ponting, Martyn, etc? How on earth can an Opening Batsman benefite from a middle-order batsman!? Tell me, I'm intrigued as to how you can come to this conclusion. Not even Sehwag benefits from Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman or Ganguly...

Australia benefitted from Hayden, not the other way round. Hence why our dominance didn't stop after the retirements or McGrath & Warne but further down the track when Hayden declined, is when we started losing Test series.

Hayden averaged in the mid 55's in Australia domestic cricket all the way through his career whilst Rogers didn't start averaging 50 in first-class cricket til last year, after one or two seasons of good form. Rogers & Di Venuto weren't even close to Hayden. Hell, they aren't even close to Sehwag either.

When you have got players like waugh and the others batting below you, you can attack the opposition with lot more confidence knowing that if you fall trying to score quick runs, the batsmen coming to bat later can make up for the loss of the early wicket. That was my point.

 

[aussie_ben91]

You started stupid comparisons. My age comparisons atleast make sense.

Sehwag faced almost exactly the same kind of bowlers Hayden too faced at the start of his career. Both were poor in NZ and SA. And both teams consisted of more or less the same quality of bowlers. In fact in NZ, Sehwag had to face a beefed up Bond at his best, on absoutely ridiculously bowler friendly tracks. In case of Hayden, only he failed, but in case of Sehwag, everyone failed.

Sehwag didn't face Donald, de Villiers, Walsh, Ambrose, Bishop and co?

Lol, same with Hayden.

Atleast Hayden has made centuries when the ball has been seaming. Sehwag is incapable of doing so as an Opening Batsman.

Whoa, and Hayden had?

McGrath - 563 wickets @ 21.6
Warne - 709 wickets @ 25.1
Gillespie - 259 wickets @ 26
MacGill - 208 wickets @ 29
McDermott
Riefell
Fleming

The list goes on and on....

:laugh

You claimed and excused that Gavaskar had absolutely no good bowlers, hence Gavaskar's record in drawn matches - But that was wrong and I pointed you out on that. I wasn't discounting the bowlers that Hayden played along side and belted during his years of domestic cricket, however it wasn't as if Gavaskar didn't play with some quality bowlers

Wrong. The players were nurtured by Taylor to become the all conquering team that Aussies became under Steve Waugh. Waugh captained and not mentored.

Nope, Waugh mentored players moreso then Taylor. Hayden & Martyn in particular, who Waugh wanted in the side that Taylor didn't, which is why Waugh's side was better then Taylor's.

:laugh Perth used to be. Brisbane used to be. However since 2000, invariably all Australian surfaces have become flat tracks. If you want I can supply data. MCG is hardly swinger's paradise and Hobart too.

Hobart's conditions are equal to that of England's at it's worse. Melbourne comes close aswell. You've never spent Christmas in Melbourne, I've done so 14 times and you wouldn't believe that it gets overcast. You probably don't think so because the one time that India played here, it was sunny and hence no swing, which is why Sehwag got 195. Brisbane never lost it's juice but Perth has been well and truly flat for the last 5-6 years.

Well, if you think Aussie surfaces are hard to bat as compared to Indian ones, then my friend, Sehwag averages 59.5 in Australia as compared to Hayden's average. Case closed and sealed.

After Hayden's first two series' in India, he outaveraged Sehwag in India aswell.

How illogical is that statement? I can understand if you said Sehwag never scored a 100 when India did not score less than 500, but WTF he has got to do with how the opposition bats? Also could you please provide the instances when Hayden scored a 100 and less than 1000 runs were scored in the match?

It has plenty relevance. Both Sehwag & Hayden played in strong batting lineups, so it says greater things about them if they score 100's when the rest of the team struggles.

Here are the hundreds that Hayden scored where less then 1000 runs were scored in the match:
Cricinfo - 4th Test: Australia v West Indies at Adelaide, Jan 25-28, 1997
Cricinfo - 1st Test: India v Australia at Mumbai, Feb 27-Mar 1, 2001
Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v South Africa at Melbourne, Dec 26-29, 2001
Cricinfo - 1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002
Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v Pakistan at Sharjah, Oct 11-12, 2002
Cricinfo - Only Test: Australia v ICC World XI at Sydney, Oct 14-17, 2005
Cricinfo - 2nd Test: Australia v West Indies at Hobart, Nov 17-21, 2005
Cricinfo - 4th Test: Australia v England at Melbourne, Dec 26-28, 2006

Hayden and footwork ? :laugh Hayden too thrived on exactly the same attributes that Sehwag thrives on. There is nothing in evidence to suggest that Sehwag is all downhill from now on. And BTW, thanks for putting him right up there with Sir Viv. Unfortunately I don't think Sehwag is up there at the moment.

Hayden moved his feet. He always took a giant step forward and drove the ball and pulled the ball of the front-foot. Sehwag keep his feet planted on the ground and reached.

 

[metallics2006]

Hayden moved his feet. He always took a giant step forward and drove the ball and pulled the ball of the front-foot. Sehwag keep his feet planted on the ground and reached.

Looks like you have never seen Sehwag play spin bowling or medium pace bowling with the keeper close to the stumps. He is very quick to get to the pitch of the ball when he goes big straight over the bowlers head.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Looks like you have never seen Sehwag play spin bowling or medium pace bowling with the keeper close to the stumps. He is very quick to get to the pitch of the ball when he goes big straight over the bowlers head.

So you think it's as easy to move your feet to a spinner or a medium pacer as it is to facing a bowler bowling 90mph?

 

[metallics2006]

So you think it's as easy to move your feet to a spinner or a medium pacer as it is to facing a bowler bowling 90mph?

You claimed all these months that Sehwag has no foot movement whatsoever. Now you break it down to fast bowlers? How many batsmen move their feet to 90 mph balls anyway? Not many. He more than makes up for that by playing the spinners so well with exceptional foot movement.

 

[Precambrian]

Sehwag didn't face Donald, de Villiers, Walsh, Ambrose, Bishop and co?

Hayden didn't face Mendis, Warne, McGrath, Clark, Steyn etc?? (Oh, he indeed faced Steyn, but it only hastened his retirement :laugh)

Atleast Hayden has made centuries when the ball has been seaming. Sehwag is incapable of doing so as an Opening Batsman.

Sehwag too has made 100s in swinging and seaming conditions.

You claimed and excused that Gavaskar had absolutely no good bowlers, hence Gavaskar's record in drawn matches - But that was wrong and I pointed you out on that. I wasn't discounting the bowlers that Hayden played along side and belted during his years of domestic cricket, however it wasn't as if Gavaskar didn't play with some quality bowlers

With that kind of near 30 averages, the best you can expect are draws and not wins mate.

Nope, Waugh mentored players moreso then Taylor. Hayden & Martyn in particular, who Waugh wanted in the side that Taylor didn't, which is why Waugh's side was better then Taylor's.

And who mentored Waugh? :laugh

Hobart's conditions are equal to that of England's at it's worse. Melbourne comes close aswell. You've never spent Christmas in Melbourne, I've done so 14 times and you wouldn't believe that it gets overcast. You probably don't think so because the one time that India played here, it was sunny and hence no swing, which is why Sehwag got 195. Brisbane never lost it's juice but Perth has been well and truly flat for the last 5-6 years.

A load of crap. Hobart - England at worst? Then why Hayden's record is so piss poor in England? And Sehwag made a sterling 194 in a Melbourne test only. :laugh Oh, if he got it in sunny conditions, so did Hayden.

After Hayden's first two series' in India, he outaveraged Sehwag in India aswell.

Does not mean anything. Hayden's flat track bullyness is only emphasised then. You say India = Batsman paradise. So Hayden's records in India are outweighed by Sehwag's superior records in "deadly" Australia.

It has plenty relevance. Both Sehwag & Hayden played in strong batting lineups, so it says greater things about them if they score 100's when the rest of the team struggles.

Exactly. Read once again your own post. One should compare the performance of own team and not across teams. Hayden's 195 in Melbourne, his 300 at Chennai and his recent 201* in SL, is ample proof of how he outshone his own teammates.

Less than 1000 runs scored happen when your bowlers are so good that they restrict the opponents even on batting conditions to below par scores. Hayden's Australia had such bowlers. Sehwag's India does not. It means nothing as regards to their batsmanship.

Hayden moved his feet. He always took a giant step forward and drove the ball and pulled the ball of the front-foot. Sehwag keep his feet planted on the ground and reached.

Crap, a big front foot movement is as predictable as no footwork at all. No wonder he was a deer caught in headlights when it required sideways movement as well in England, SA and NZ. :laugh

Precambrian added 1 Minutes and 54 Seconds later...

So you think it's as easy to move your feet to a spinner or a medium pacer as it is to facing a bowler bowling 90mph?

Yes, Hayden's footwork was visible when he came upto a genuine quckie like Steyn. :laugh Or DeVilliers, Or Walsh, Or Ambrose...

 

[metallics2006]

Sehwag's 195 in Melbourne, his 300 at Chennai and his recent 201* in SL, is ample proof of how he outshone his own teammates.

Fixed.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Hayden didn't face Mendis, Warne, McGrath, Clark, Steyn etc?? (Oh, he indeed faced Steyn, but it only hastened his retirement :laugh)

Hayden faced them all in domestic competition and hammered them all. He hammered Steyn numerous times around the ground before getting caught at short cover.

Sehwag too has made 100s in swinging and seaming conditions.

Four of them. The only hundreds that Hayden hasn't made where the ball hasn't been swinging or seaming have been in the subcontient.

With that kind of near 30 averages, the best you can expect are draws and not wins mate.

Rubbish. If the bowlers were averaging around 40 then your arguement would be valid, but they aren't.

And who mentored Waugh? :laugh

Oh, and who mentored Taylor? So Border is now response accorinding to all of this? No. Taylor's part in Australia's dominance over Steve Waugh was very little.

A load of crap. Hobart - England at worst? Then why Hayden's record is so piss poor in England? And Sehwag made a sterling 194 in a Melbourne test only. :laugh Oh, if he got it in sunny conditions, so did Hayden.

Tasmania isn't even connected to the rest of Australia, it's basically a smaller verison of New Zealand. Hobart is equally as worse as England. Hobart is one of the closest thing to Antartica - Wake up, son.

Does not mean anything. Hayden's flat track bullyness is only emphasised then. You say India = Batsman paradise. So Hayden's records in India are outweighed by Sehwag's superior records in "deadly" Australia.

Yeah, he made one good hundred in Australia and cashed in on the flattest Australian wicket of the past 7 years. When Sehwag last toured Australia, he wasn't even good enough to be in the starting XI for the start of the series. It speaks volumes about Virender Sehwag's record in Australia as he probably would've failed.

Exactly. Read once again your own post. One should compare the performance of own team and not across teams. Hayden's 195 in Melbourne, his 300 at Chennai and his recent 201* in SL, is ample proof of how he outshone his own teammates.

Less than 1000 runs scored happen when your bowlers are so good that they restrict the opponents even on batting conditions to below par scores. Hayden's Australia had such bowlers. Sehwag's India does not. It means nothing as regards to their batsmanship.

LOL, Sehwag has made 3 hundreds in Indian victories out of 25 wins and has made 9 hundreds out of 27 draws. If the 1000 run arguement doesn't mean anything in regards to batsmanship then this surely does. Hayden on the otherhand scored 23 hundreds out of 71 victories and 5 hundreds in 14 drawn matches. Hayden scores hundreds in every 3rd match Australia wins whilst Sehwag scores a hundred every 8th match that India win.

Crap, a big front foot movement is as predictable as no footwork at all. No wonder he was a deer caught in headlights when it required sideways movement as well in England, SA and NZ. :laugh

Hayden actually made runs, unlike Sehwag who hasn't been able to register more then a half-century in South Africa & New Zealand as an opener. :laugh

Since 2002, in the duration of Sehwag's career, Hayden has comprehensively outperformed Sehwag in those conditions.

Yes, Hayden's footwork was visible when he came upto a genuine quckie like Steyn. :laugh Or DeVilliers, Or Walsh, Or Ambrose...

Not as bad as Sehwag in South Africa 2006. He was a sitting duck against lesser bowlers and averaged under 10.

aussie_ben91 added 1 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

You claimed all these months that Sehwag has no foot movement whatsoever. Now you break it down to fast bowlers? How many batsmen move their feet to 90 mph balls anyway? Not many. He more than makes up for that by playing the spinners so well with exceptional foot movement.

Opening batsman face pace bowlers, not mediums or spinners. Most batsman in world cricket move their feet to pace bowlers but Sehwag doesn't. Watch him bat.