Virender Sehwag- Overrated? Underrated?

[metallics2006]

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.

Openers dont face spinners or medium pacers? So, does that mean Hayden choked when he played Harbhajan in the 2001 series? Did he make 100% of his runs against India's pace bowlers?

 

[aussie_ben91]

At the start of their innings. Sehwag never moves his feet against pace bowlers. Fact.

 

[metallics2006]

At the start of their innings. Sehwag never moves his feet against pace bowlers. Fact.

Has worked for him.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Has worked for him.

Yeah, but his average outside the subcontient gives a better indication of how good he actually is.

 

[metallics2006]

Yeah, but his average outside the subcontient gives a better indication of how good he actually is.

Like his average in Australia? Then he is better than Hayden.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Like his average in Australia? Then he is better than Hayden.

He averages 41 outside the subcontient. Subcontient tracks are cabon copies of eachother whilst Australian pitches offer a variety of pace, bounce, swing, nip, seam and spin from venue to venue.

 

[King Cricket]

^Yup. They are carbon copies. That is why the Australian team was able to win just 3 test matches out of the ten tests (3+3+4) they played here (in India) from 2000 to 2009. Funny how people shout Indian pitches are a batsman's paradise, even when most of the teams are miserably failing here. FACT.

 

[aussie_ben91]

^Yup. They are carbon copies. That is why the Australian team was able to win just 3 test matches out of the ten tests (3+3+4) they played here (in India) from 2000 to 2009. Funny how people shout Indian pitches are a batsman's paradise, even when most of the teams are miserably failing here. FACT.

If anything, what you just said furthermore proves that Indian pitches are batting paradises. The fact that our great bowling attack could only muster 3 victories in 10 matches demonstrates how flat the pitches were.

You Indians complain about Bucknor & Sydney but India wouldn't of win in Kolkata 2001 if it wasn't for some poor umpiring decisions. For example, Ponting had Dravid plumb LBW, when India were just 102 ahead in the match and Hayden copped a shocking LBW decision, which basically cost us the match. Your victory against us in 2004 was in a deadrubber and your victories against us just recently were us just trying to smash our way to victory to level the series.

 

[metallics2006]

He averages 41 outside the subcontient. Subcontient tracks are cabon copies of eachother whilst Australian pitches offer a variety of pace, bounce, swing, nip, seam and spin from venue to venue.

The stats disagree. Australian pitches have been proved to be the pitches where runs are scored as much as in India:

Here's a breakdown of the overall average for each country over the past 20 years:

South Africa- 28.88
West Indies- 29.94
New Zealand- 30.39
Sri Lanka- 30.77
Pakistan- 31.79
Australia- 31.84
England- 31.95
India- 32.29

So much for the 'India is the most batsman friendly of all places' arguement. Australia is the second most batsman friendly country.

 

[aussie_ben91]

The stats disagree. Australian pitches have been proved to be the pitches where runs are scored as much as in India:

Here's a breakdown of the overall average for each country over the past 20 years:

South Africa- 28.88
West Indies- 29.94
New Zealand- 30.39
Sri Lanka- 30.77
Pakistan- 31.79
Australia- 31.84
England- 31.95
India- 32.29

So much for saying that India is the most batsman friendly of all places.

Click Here

Batting averages of countries, with the hosts and minnows excluded:

Australia: Avg. 26.86 SR 46.39
England: Avg. 30.97 SR 50.99
India: Avg. 31.87 SR 46.42
New Zealand: Avg. 30.88 SR 49.58
Pakistan: Avg. 34.43 SR 50.55
South Africa: Avg. 26.89 SR 49.56
Sri Lanka: Avg. 26.57 SR 42.58
West Indies: Avg. 35.32 SR 46.52

As you can see, the main majority of the runs scored from your statistics have been from the great Australian batsman like Hayden, Ponting, Waugh & Gilchrist but if you look at my statistics compared to yours then the averages in India barely differ.

With Hosts: Average in Australia is 31
Without Hosts: Average in Australia is 26

With Hosts: Average in India is 32
Without Hosts: Average in India is 31

 

[metallics2006]

You Indians complain about Bucknor & Sydney but India wouldn't of win in Kolkata 2001 if it wasn't for some poor umpiring decisions. For example, Ponting had Dravid plumb LBW, when India were just 102 ahead in the match and Hayden copped a shocking LBW decision, which basically cost us the match. Your victory against us in 2004 was in a deadrubber and your victories against us just recently were us just trying to smash our way to victory to level the series.

What has this got to do with the topic at hand? And most of us accepted that poor umpiring has been a part of the game and moved on. We did'nt exactly have a rematch or the decision overturned in India's favour. Its the Aussies who know that India is better that keep bringing this up a year after it happened. Talk about sore losers. :

metallics2006 added 2 Minutes and 25 Seconds later...

Click Here

Batting averages of countries, with the hosts and minnows excluded:

Australia: Avg. 26.86 SR 46.39
England: Avg. 30.97 SR 50.99
India: Avg. 31.87 SR 46.42
New Zealand: Avg. 30.88 SR 49.58
Pakistan: Avg. 34.43 SR 50.55
South Africa: Avg. 26.89 SR 49.56
Sri Lanka: Avg. 26.57 SR 42.58
West Indies: Avg. 35.32 SR 46.52

As you can see, the main majority of the runs scored from your statistics have been from the great Australian batsman like Hayden, Ponting, Waugh & Gilchrist but if you look at my statistics compared to yours then the averages in India barely differ.

With Hosts: Average in Australia is 31
Without Hosts: Average in Australia is 26

With Hosts: Average in India is 32
Without Hosts: Average in India is 31

Yet, Australia in India averages 35.04. Worse than NZ, RSA and Pak.

India averages 35.25 in Australia. Surprise! Better than their overall home average of 34 odd.
http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...al1=span;team=6;template=results;type=batting

 

[King Cricket]

So Ben, according to your stats, West Indies produces the most batting-friendly pitches, with Pakistan close behind. And pitches in India and England are almost the same, right?

 

[aussie_ben91]

Australia: Avg. 26.86 SR 46.39
England: Avg. 30.97 SR 50.99
India: Avg. 31.87 SR 46.42
New Zealand: Avg. 30.88 SR 49.58
Pakistan: Avg. 34.43 SR 50.55
South Africa: Avg. 26.89 SR 49.56
Sri Lanka: Avg. 26.57 SR 42.58
West Indies: Avg. 35.32 SR 46.52

Judging on those statistics. It would be obvious to compare how Hayden and Sehwag performed in South Africa & Sri Lanka since 2000, seeing as they have been proven as the two most difficult places to bat over the past decade.

Leaving out the stats from Australia, considering that Australia was the home country for Hayden, so the amount of matches he played in Australia would inflate the average comparison between Hayden & Sehwag in this circumstancial comparison. Sehwag never faced McGrath, Gillespie & Warne all in tandom in Australia, so it's not that big of a deal to leave out his statistics in Australia anyway.

Statistics filtered:
- For innings only as an Opening Batsman.
- Opposition is Sri Lanka & South Africa.
- Host countries are Sri Lanka & South Africa.
- Matches played since 2000.

[URL="http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5616.html?class=1;filter=advanced;host=3;host=8;opposition=3;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax1=31+Dec+2009;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting"]Matthew Hayden[/URL]

Opposition			Runs	Avg	100s
South Africa in South Africa	540	49.09	2
Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka		283	47.16	1
[B]Overall  Stats Combined		823	48.41	3[/B]

[URL="http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/35263.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=1;filter=advanced;host=3;host=8;opposition=3;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax1=31+Dec+2009;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting"]Virender Sehwag[/URL]

Opposition			Runs	Avg	100s
South Africa in South Africa	49	9.80	0
Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka		344	68.80	1
[B]Overall  Stats Combined		393	39.30	1[/B]

As you can see, Hayden is clearly the superior batsman to Sehwag. Hayden has performed much better in the tougher conditions of world cricket.

Hayden > Sehwag.

 

[metallics2006]

Australia: Avg. 26.86 SR 46.39
England: Avg. 30.97 SR 50.99
India: Avg. 31.87 SR 46.42
New Zealand: Avg. 30.88 SR 49.58
Pakistan: Avg. 34.43 SR 50.55
South Africa: Avg. 26.89 SR 49.56
Sri Lanka: Avg. 26.57 SR 42.58
West Indies: Avg. 35.32 SR 46.52

Judging on those statistics. It would be obvious to compare how Hayden and Sehwag performed in South Africa & Sri Lanka since 2000, seeing as they have been proven as the two most difficult places to bat over the past decade.

Leaving out the stats from Australia, considering that Australia was the home country for Hayden, so the amount of matches he played in Australia would inflate the average comparison between Hayden & Sehwag in this circumstancial comparison. Sehwag never faced McGrath, Gillespie & Warne all in tandom in Australia, so it's not that big of a deal to leave out his statistics in Australia anyway.

Statistics filtered:
- For innings only as an Opening Batsman.
- Opposition is Sri Lanka & South Africa.
- Host countries are Sri Lanka & South Africa.
- Matches played since 2000.

[URL="http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5616.html?class=1;filter=advanced;host=3;host=8;opposition=3;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax1=31+Dec+2009;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting"]Matthew Hayden[/URL]

Opposition			Runs	Avg	100s
South Africa in South Africa	540	49.09	2
Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka		283	47.16	1
[B]Overall  Stats Combined		823	48.41	3[/B]

[URL="http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/35263.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=1;filter=advanced;host=3;host=8;opposition=3;opposition=8;orderby=default;spanmax1=31+Dec+2009;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting"]Virender Sehwag[/URL]

Opposition			Runs	Avg	100s
South Africa in South Africa	49	9.80	0
Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka		344	68.80	1
[B]Overall  Stats Combined		393	39.30	1[/B]

As you can see, Hayden is clearly the superior batsman to Sehwag. Hayden has performed much better in the tougher conditions of world cricket.

Hayden > Sehwag.

Makes them equal. Hayden has achieved lesser than Sehwag in SL. Sehwag has failed until now in RSA. 1-1.

Shows that they are similar in their styles. Conditions in RSA are similar to those in Australia in regards to movement in the air and off the pitch. Hayden has done well since its just like his home conditions. (Also interesting to note that out of Aus players, Hayden's average has dropped the most in RSA compared to the players that he played with. It has dropped 16 points when playing in RSA. He was clearly uncomfortable playing in RSA.)

Sehwag on the other hand has scored a 100 in RSA too and deserves credit for that knock though he did'nt open. And he achieved the distinction of being the first Indian batsman to bat through the innings when he hit that unbeaten 201 in the last SL series against the likes of Muralitharan(world's leading wicket taker in both ODIs and tests) and Mendis(who averaged around 10 in ODIs at that point in time). Sehwag is better than Hayden in SL already and he is just 30 years old.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Last time I checked, 48 > 39

Hayden didn't fail in Sri Lanka either. 47 is a highly respectable average.