Virender Sehwag- Overrated? Underrated?

Virender Sehwag is

  • just a slogger, nothing else.

    Votes: 9 18.0%
  • an excellent batsman.

    Votes: 16 32.0%
  • one of the best guys in the business right now.

    Votes: 21 42.0%
  • actually aussie_ben91

    Votes: 4 8.0%

  • Total voters
    50
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Load of crap. Hayden "smashed" Steyn around? :laugh, If that is the case, why did he have to retire at the end of that series??:rolleyes:

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.

Lolwut? Sharjah? Flat decks of MCG every fricking Boxing Day?

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

Crap. Australia had atleast 6-7 bowlers averaging from low 20s to mid 20s alone. India had absolutely NONE. Makes a huge difference.

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.

No, Taylor mentored Waugh, murtured McGrath, Ponting and Warne, not to mention Steve Waugh himself. Waugh did not "create" or "nurture" any World Class talent except perhaps Brett Lee.

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.

:laugh So Antarctica has a role in determining pitches of Australia? LMAO.

Even in that case, Sehwag does better than Hayden in 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.

Yes, MCG is flattest Aussie wicket, where Hayden made most 100s.

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.

No. of 100s in wins, losses and draws do not count. By that pathetic logic, next thing you'd be saying is that Hayden > Lara because Lara has so many 100s in vain?

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

No, Sehwag will definitely improve as only getting to his peak, like Hayden did.

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

Does not mean anything. Sehwag was still maturing, whereas Hayden was at his peak during the same period. WE'll see from now on, as their respective ages are more comparable.

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

Atleast Sehwag was learning during the period, unlike Hayden who was a sitting duck till he turned 30, :laugh

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.

Crap. Sehwag averages 50, an 58 in Australia. And considering Australia does not have a spinner to show for life, it does mean something.
 
Anyone have an issue with me closing this thread and discussion shifting to the Hayden Vs Sehwag thread?
 
Load of crap. Hayden "smashed" Steyn around? :laugh, If that is the case, why did he have to retire at the end of that series??:rolleyes:
In perth, Steyn got Hayden out caught and bowled after the ball cannoned into his pads and his bat got nowhere near the ball. The other two times Hayden got out playing overaggressive shots, but apart from that Hayden hit Steyn for a countless amount of boundaries.

Lolwut? Sharjah? Flat decks of MCG every fricking Boxing Day?
The only hundreds that Hayden hasn't made where the ball has seamed off the pitch or swung in the air have been in the subcontient. His innings in Sharjah, he generally only faced Saqlain & Kaneria.

Crap. Australia had atleast 6-7 bowlers averaging from low 20s to mid 20s alone. India had absolutely NONE. Makes a huge difference.
Wrong - One bowler averaging under 25 and 2 averaging 25 & 26.

No, Taylor mentored Waugh, murtured McGrath, Ponting and Warne, not to mention Steve Waugh himself. Waugh did not "create" or "nurture" any World Class talent except perhaps Brett Lee.
Lmao! Wrong again! All of these great players came into their own under Steve Waugh - Not Mark Taylor.

:laugh So Antarctica has a role in determining pitches of Australia? LMAO.

Even in that case, Sehwag does better than Hayden in Australia.
LMAO! You have no earthly idea what you are talking about, kid. You've obviously never watched a Test Match in Tasmania or you've never seen the climate in Tasmania. It's exactly like New Zealand/England conditions, so is the MCG.

Sehwag does better then Hayden in Australia? Wrong again. 22 hundreds > 2 hundreds.

Yes, MCG is flattest Aussie wicket, where Hayden made most 100s.
Wrong. MCG is as difficult to bat on (when overcast) as anywhere in the world. Hayden has made 3-4 centuries when it has been overcast on Boxing Day. Andrew McDonald averages under 30 with the ball at the MCG in firstclass cricket, surely that says something?

No. of 100s in wins, losses and draws do not count. By that pathetic logic, next thing you'd be saying is that Hayden > Lara because Lara has so many 100s in vain?
Well, TBH - It's better then anything that you've come up with. No of 100s in wins, losses and draws are relevant. Don't quite see how you come to that conclusion. All it proves is that Hayden makes his Team win test matches and that Sehwag only cashes in on flatwickets. Bowling attack or not, Sehwag has played in 25 Test wins and only 3 of his overall hundreds have influenced an Indian victory.

No, Sehwag will definitely improve as only getting to his peak, like Hayden did.
Wrong again - Sehwag's hand-eye coordination will falter and so will his statistics. :laugh

Does not mean anything. Sehwag was still maturing, whereas Hayden was at his peak during the same period. WE'll see from now on, as their respective ages are more comparable.
Yes, we will see. Although it's fairly obvious that a batsman that relys on flattracks, lack of foot movement and hand-eye coordination will only get worse after hitting 30 years of age.

Atleast Sehwag was learning during the period, unlike Hayden who was a sitting duck till he turned 30, :laugh
Hayden would've averaged 60 if he batted on lifeless Indian tracks. He is so much more better then Sehwag, statistically and from a viewing standpoint. Hayden's as equally as good at attacking as Sehwag, which is Sehwag's only asset. Hayden can play any type of innings, Sehwag can't.
 
Oi, everybody. This has turned into Hayden Vs Sehwag and so this is being closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top