Hayden Vs Sehwag
- Thread starter Precambrian
- Start date
Sehwag is'nt the only one who has been inconsistent in test matches. Remeber Hayden's initial 6 years? He was in and out of the side a lot and it was only after he was around 30 years old did he get consistent. Sehwag turned 30 in 2008 and was also so consistent in 2008 that he ended up as the 2nd top run scorer in test cricket in 2008 after Smith. Sehwag has played Test cricket for just 7 years and he has scored over 5600 runs @ an avg of 51 compared to Hayden's long test career which extends over 14 years in which Hayden could not even reach 10,000 test runs. This proves another point, Hayden could'nt play great bowlers well and bowlers like Donald, Ambrose, Pollock etc., dismissing him cheaply were the main reasons for his lack of consistency. So, points like Sehwag is a flat track bully and Hayden is a great batter does'nt stand here because Hayden himself struggled against good bowling and was able to make runs only when the bowling standard all around the world declined. If Sehwag plays till his age is 37, he might make over 11,000 runs compared to Hayden's 8600 runs @ an avg of 50 if he keeps going at his current average. Sehwag has the potential to be an all time great opener when he finishes his career since he is more than likely to cross the 10,00 run mark in his career. I say the chances are high because he has a good 7 years of cricket left in him.
Sehwag could be a better opener than Hayden at the end of his career and he has a better average than Hayden already in test cricket @ 51. Hayden's highest test innings and his only 300 has come against minnows Zimbabwe whereas Sehwag has 2 300s against well established test playing nations Pak and RSA. My opinion is not that Hayden is over-rated but that Sehwag is shockingly under-rated as a batsman.
Sehwag could be a better opener than Hayden at the end of his career and he has a better average than Hayden already in test cricket @ 51. Hayden's highest test innings and his only 300 has come against minnows Zimbabwe whereas Sehwag has 2 300s against well established test playing nations Pak and RSA. My opinion is not that Hayden is over-rated but that Sehwag is shockingly under-rated as a batsman.
mukund_nadkarni
Club Cricketer
Same here. And when Sehwag fires, you have to look at the faces in the opposition camp. They have no idea what hit them!
sohum
Executive member
You're right that Sehwag appears a lot more unstable than Hayden. When Sehwag is at the crease, I feel like he may get out any ball, whereas with Hayden at the crease, I feel like he's going to smack each ball for a boundary.
It is a tough decision, which is why I don't want to call it, for now. Sehwag may well enter another slump in his career which sees him out of Tests prematurely, because he's capable of that. Having said that, he's a lot tighter now and doesn't go flaying after wide balls as much. He's also matured as he is one of the more experienced in the line-up now, and I think that responsibility will tone down his game a bit, especially if the team is struggling.
Also, Sehwag has yet to face a real injury problem, IIRC. This inevitably means that there's going to be a point in his career when he will have to make a decision about opting for recovery or quitting.
I bet we get a lot of supervillains voting Christian Bale...I might have to change the poll to public so we can measure non-Indian and non-Australian votes
sohum
Executive member
I suspect these are rhetorical questions, but I will answer them anyway.How many of Sehwags scores over 200 actually resulted in an India win? In games where Sehwag scored 200+, how many of those matches were over 1000 runs scored in the First innings? How many times has a Sehwag hundred resulted in India winning a Test compared with Hayden and Australia? How do their overall records compare after playing 50 Tests apiece? How do their overall ODi records compare?
Just a few questions I'd like answered
Centuries
Matches won
Hayden: 23 centuries at 146.95
Sehwag: 3 centuries at 328.50
Matches lost
Hayden: 2 centuries at 190.00
Sehwag: 3 centuries at 167.00
Matches drawn
Hayden: 5 centuries at 125.20
Sehwag: 9 centuries at 181.33
So as you see, Hayden clearly performs better when it comes to contributing to his teams wins. Clearly there is an argument that Sehwag doesn't contribute to Indian victories, at least when it comes to 100's. However, I would like to remind you that it takes 20 wickets to win a Test match, and even if a batsman scores a century in every game he plays, it is up to the bowlers to get those wickets. This is not to say that the batsman's contribution is not worthwhile, but it is crucial to remember that the only world-class bowler who played alongside Sehwag was Kumble (and very improbably Harbhajan) whereas Hayden has had the likes of McGrath, Warne, Clark, Lee and even MacGill (though his position is somewhat debatable).
Let's look at the same breakdown for doubles:
Double Centuries
Matches won
Hayden: 1 double at 380.00 (v. Zimbabwe)
Sehwag: 2 doubles at 510.00 (v. Pak, Srl; both away)
Matches lost
Hayden: 1 double at 203.00 (v. India)
Sehwag: 1 double at 201.00 (v. Pak)
Matches drawn
Hayden: 0 doubles
Sehwag: 2 doubles at 286.50 (v. Pak, Rsa)
I think you would have to agree that when it comes to double-centuries, Sehwag far out-trumps Hayden. Not only have his doubles come against quality opposition (Pakistan, Sri Lanka featuring M&M, and South Africa), he's also already scored 3 more doubles than Hayden, as well as one more triple. He's hit three of his 5 doubles in a "positive" (non-draw) result game, which suggests that it is not just the pitch which is aiding Sehwag.
Now let's have a look at your first innings question.
Matthew Hayden
203 v. India - Aus 391, Ind 501; TOTAL: 892
380 v. Zimbabwe - Aus 735, Zim 239; TOTAL: 974
Virender Sehwag
309 v. Pakistan - Ind 675, Pak 407; TOTAL: 1082
201 v. Pakistan - Pak 570, Ind 449; TOTAL: 1019
254 v. Pakistan - Pak 679, Ind 410; TOTAL: 1089
319 v. South Africa - Rsa 540, Ind 627; TOTAL: 1167
201* v. Sri Lanka - Ind 329, Srl 292; TOTAL: 621
As you can see here, you are clearly correct in surmising that Sehwag's doubles come on slightly easier pitches, given that the average total in the first innings is 996 compared to Hayden's 933. There is really nothing to counter that except the fact that more than half of Sehwag's doubles have still come in "positive" result games, and that you cannot hold a man responsible for scoring double centuries, even on flat decks. After all, in those Pakistan games, I believe the only other batsman to score a double was Younis Khan.
That's all I have time for now, but I will answer your career summary questions once I am in at work, while also bringing in a few of my own stats.
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
You're right that Sehwag appears a lot more unstable than Hayden. When Sehwag is at the crease, I feel like he may get out any ball, whereas with Hayden at the crease, I feel like he's going to smack each ball for a boundary.
It is a tough decision, which is why I don't want to call it, for now. Sehwag may well enter another slump in his career which sees him out of Tests prematurely, because he's capable of that. Having said that, he's a lot tighter now and doesn't go flaying after wide balls as much. He's also matured as he is one of the more experienced in the line-up now, and I think that responsibility will tone down his game a bit, especially if the team is struggling.
Also, Sehwag has yet to face a real injury problem, IIRC. This inevitably means that there's going to be a point in his career when he will have to make a decision about opting for recovery or quitting.
Nice post Sohum
While I think Hayden is better than Sehwag, Sehwag is still a class act. The thing though, as you pointed out, is that Hayden didn't normally throw away his innings. Take Sehwag's knock where he scored that quickfire 80 against England. If he had carried on, and made it a big hundred, there would have been no doubt of an Indian victory. Instead it fell to the Indian middle order, which has been known to collapse quite a few times. If he can mature his game, so that he can reguarly make big scores (like Hayden did) he will become one of the best openers in the world
.Mob
International Coach
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2007
- Online Cricket Games Owned
But that's the way Sehwag plays, if he had batted cautiously after that, it would have not been his real game, and who knows, could have easily gotten out anyway.
I don't know about you, but I believe a player should just play his best game, his natural one. You could argue that he should have played according to situation, but if he did that from the start then, we would have had absolutely no chance of a victory.
I don't know about you, but I believe a player should just play his best game, his natural one. You could argue that he should have played according to situation, but if he did that from the start then, we would have had absolutely no chance of a victory.
mukund_nadkarni
Club Cricketer
Agreed. I just don't see how Sehwag can mature more than he already is and still bat like the way he does at the moment.
sohum
Executive member
As promised, here is the second part of the statistics Dan asked for... that is, a comparison of their Test careers. I am not going to go through the task of comparing their ODI careers because I personally believe Hayden is a far better ODI player than Sehwag. This is somewhat ironic because it appears that Sehwag's game is tailored towards ODI's, but I believe Sehwag is far too aggressive in ODI's and is unable to find a middle ground. That said, he has become a lot more consistent in ODI's of late, so maybe it is valuable to look at him again, in a couple of years.
After 25 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 1778 @ 43.36
100's/50's/ducks: 5/7/6
HS: 203
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 2157 @ 53.92
100's/50's/ducks: 7/6/4
HS: 309
After 50 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 4488 @ 58.28
100's/50's/ducks: 17/14/7
HS: 380
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 4103 @ 51.28
100's/50's/ducks: 12/12/8
HS: 309
After 66 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 5674 @ 54.03
100's/50's/ducks: 20/20/7
HS: 380
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 5617 @ 51.06
100's/50's/ducks: 15/18/10
HS: 319
As you can see, Sehwag made a better start to his career, whereas Hayden had a better middle of his career. Hayden was completely sublime in the middle of his career, which coincided with his "rebirth" after India 2001. He was unarguably the best opening batsman during that time. However, if you look at the final statistics based on Sehwag's 66 games played, you will notice that runs-wise, they are nearly equivalent. In fact, Hayden has played 115 innings for his 47 extra runs, compared to Sehwag's 114 innings. The difference? Not outs. Hayden has 10, compared to Sehwag's 4. Domination? Let's break it down a little further:
Hayden not outs
28* v. India - Target: 47
6* v. England - Target: 14
3* v. South Africa - Target: 10
21* v. South Africa - Target: 53
100* v. West Indies - Lead: 168
2* v West Indies - Target: 8
101* v. Zimbabwe - Target: 172
53* v. India - Target: 97
56* v. Pakistan - Target: 127
23* v. Pakistan - Target: 62
Sehwag not outs
12* v. Australia - Target: 229 ; Match drawn
14* v. Zimbabwe - Target: 19
76* v. England - Target: 144
201* v. Sri Lanka (first innings) - Carried his bat
Interesting decomposition there, which I think has a lot to do with why Hayden's average is higher. Of his 10 not outs, 6 are while chasing a target of less than 100 while 1 is while setting a target. The other three were potentially tricky targets, but Australia chased them down fairly easily. I would say that most of these innings were pretty good opportunities to boost Hayden's averages, and that the Aussie bowlers could be attributed much of the success in those games. In comparison, one of Sehwag's 4 targets have come chasing a measly target, one in a potentially tricky target (that was eventually easily chased), one in a drawn game that was dead by the time Sehwag came in and one where he carried his bat. I'd say the 26 runs that Sehwag added in the drawn game and Zim game were worthless runs, whereas the 76 and especially the 201 made were crucial.
Of course, this is taking nothing away fro Hayden's achievement of guiding his team to victory many times and staying there right till the end. In that regard, I suppose Sehwag was more like Langer, who seemed to fall cheaply whenever a small target was being chased. However, one can fairly accurately conclude that the Australian bowlers gave Hayden a lot more opportunities to score a few runs here and there and take a not out... in fact, at least a 130-odd runs compared to Sehwag's 26. That's like an unbeaten century!
In my final segment to this discussion, I will take a look at some of the other factors one can use between comparing the two, including how big their centuries tended to be, as well as age/generation-based breakdown. I think I will find that based on age, there is no real comparison possible at the moment!
sohum added 8 Minutes and 28 Seconds later...
That said, there will come a time, maybe around 4-5 years from now when Sehwag, if he's still in the team, will have to change his technique or face the axe. His talent comes from his superb hand-eye coordination and the lack of need to think about footwork (hence keeping his mind pretty clear). Unfortunately, time is going to catch up with him and his hand-eye coordination is going to worsen. He will have to modify his style then, similar to what Tendulkar has done in this millennium, if he wants to continue to play and succeed.
After 25 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 1778 @ 43.36
100's/50's/ducks: 5/7/6
HS: 203
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 2157 @ 53.92
100's/50's/ducks: 7/6/4
HS: 309
After 50 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 4488 @ 58.28
100's/50's/ducks: 17/14/7
HS: 380
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 4103 @ 51.28
100's/50's/ducks: 12/12/8
HS: 309
After 66 matches
Matthew Hayden
Runs: 5674 @ 54.03
100's/50's/ducks: 20/20/7
HS: 380
Virender Sehwag
Runs: 5617 @ 51.06
100's/50's/ducks: 15/18/10
HS: 319
As you can see, Sehwag made a better start to his career, whereas Hayden had a better middle of his career. Hayden was completely sublime in the middle of his career, which coincided with his "rebirth" after India 2001. He was unarguably the best opening batsman during that time. However, if you look at the final statistics based on Sehwag's 66 games played, you will notice that runs-wise, they are nearly equivalent. In fact, Hayden has played 115 innings for his 47 extra runs, compared to Sehwag's 114 innings. The difference? Not outs. Hayden has 10, compared to Sehwag's 4. Domination? Let's break it down a little further:
Hayden not outs
28* v. India - Target: 47
6* v. England - Target: 14
3* v. South Africa - Target: 10
21* v. South Africa - Target: 53
100* v. West Indies - Lead: 168
2* v West Indies - Target: 8
101* v. Zimbabwe - Target: 172
53* v. India - Target: 97
56* v. Pakistan - Target: 127
23* v. Pakistan - Target: 62
Sehwag not outs
12* v. Australia - Target: 229 ; Match drawn
14* v. Zimbabwe - Target: 19
76* v. England - Target: 144
201* v. Sri Lanka (first innings) - Carried his bat
Interesting decomposition there, which I think has a lot to do with why Hayden's average is higher. Of his 10 not outs, 6 are while chasing a target of less than 100 while 1 is while setting a target. The other three were potentially tricky targets, but Australia chased them down fairly easily. I would say that most of these innings were pretty good opportunities to boost Hayden's averages, and that the Aussie bowlers could be attributed much of the success in those games. In comparison, one of Sehwag's 4 targets have come chasing a measly target, one in a potentially tricky target (that was eventually easily chased), one in a drawn game that was dead by the time Sehwag came in and one where he carried his bat. I'd say the 26 runs that Sehwag added in the drawn game and Zim game were worthless runs, whereas the 76 and especially the 201 made were crucial.
Of course, this is taking nothing away fro Hayden's achievement of guiding his team to victory many times and staying there right till the end. In that regard, I suppose Sehwag was more like Langer, who seemed to fall cheaply whenever a small target was being chased. However, one can fairly accurately conclude that the Australian bowlers gave Hayden a lot more opportunities to score a few runs here and there and take a not out... in fact, at least a 130-odd runs compared to Sehwag's 26. That's like an unbeaten century!
In my final segment to this discussion, I will take a look at some of the other factors one can use between comparing the two, including how big their centuries tended to be, as well as age/generation-based breakdown. I think I will find that based on age, there is no real comparison possible at the moment!
sohum added 8 Minutes and 28 Seconds later...
In my opinion, there is no need for Sehwag to change his technique in Tests as it is today, as long as his body keeps up with it. 2008 was one of his most successful years in Test cricket, and I think he has definitely made some changes that contributed to that. He still feasts on spinners and he is still susceptible to the in-swinging delivery, but you will notice that he has cut down on a lot of the slashes at wide deliveries. He is also susceptible against the moving ball, and I don't know if he's done anything to change that because he's played mostly in India this year. I guess we will get an idea of that in NZL.
That said, there will come a time, maybe around 4-5 years from now when Sehwag, if he's still in the team, will have to change his technique or face the axe. His talent comes from his superb hand-eye coordination and the lack of need to think about footwork (hence keeping his mind pretty clear). Unfortunately, time is going to catch up with him and his hand-eye coordination is going to worsen. He will have to modify his style then, similar to what Tendulkar has done in this millennium, if he wants to continue to play and succeed.
Last edited:
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
sohum
Executive member
You asked questions pertaining to records... which are a form of statistics. I would think comparing records would involve comparing statistics.Unless I have suddenly got amnesia, I don't remember asking for any stats
Highlander999
ICC President
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Location
- London
You sure you don't mean Dan
mattfb
Chairman of Selectors
Hayden has had a better career apart from the first 25 matches. He has more hundreds then Sehwag, which shows his temperament and with the not outs, he scored a 100 when making a lead - Probably in quick time to set us up - and scored 101 out of 172, 53 out of 97 and 28 out of 47. He may finish not out chasing small targets but he gives himself the opportunity to score as many runs as possible when chasing that target.
Feelin Blue? added 0 Minutes and 49 Seconds later...
I would rather if the poll was public. I hate polls like these.
Feelin Blue? added 0 Minutes and 49 Seconds later...
I might have to change the poll to public so we can measure non-Indian and non-Australian votes
I would rather if the poll was public. I hate polls like these.
Similar threads
