Farewell Matthew Hayden: who's next?

One of these muppets has just retired. The other one has a few more years of hanging around with Oscar the Grouch, Cookie Monster and Snuffleupagus - and those aren't the new nicknames for Ponting, Symonds and Katich.

So farewell then Matty Hayden. He was No 41 in our Ashes Heroes list and you can read about his feats against England there, but I wanted to add a few more thoughts about the great man.

Ricky Ponting called him "Australia's greatest opener", which is a big claim when you consider the competition from Ponsford, Morris, Brown, Slater and Simpson. Yet Ponting is probably right. Certainly Hayden at his best could strike fear into bowlers not just for his sureness at the crease but for the speed at which he scored his runs. Hayden's 8,620 runs came at almost four an over. He hit 82 sixes - only five fewer than he hit in 58 more ODIs - and could take a Test away from a team before lunch on the first day.

Test innings that stand out for me are his 119 in 172 balls at Mumbai in 2001, which set up victory over India in only three days (he got a double hundred in defeat in the final Test of that series); his fourth-innings 96 against South Africa at Cape Town in 2002 that led to a four-wicket win; his 153 against England at the MCG in 2006, almost passing the entire England first innings on his own; his second-innings 123 against India at Sydney last year; and, of course, his 380 against Zimbabwe, which briefly took away Lara's record. Even though the opposition were weak, it still required great concentration to stay in there and accumulate. He scored 1,000 Test runs every year from 2001-05 and was also a superb slip fielder.

As a one-day player, especially in harness with Adam Gilchrist, he could be just as effective. Three of his ten ODI hundreds came in the 2007 World Cup and made up for a disappointing 2003 tournament when he only passed 50 once, against Namibia. His overall ODI average of nearly 44 is very good for an opener.

So who comes next? Australia have been unable to replace Warne and McGrath in their Test side and if Haddin looks promising he is no Gilchrist just yet. Now they have to find a replacement for another of their giants. Phil Jaques is the obvious choice, having made an impressive start to his Test career when Justin Langer retired. He has scored three hundreds in his 11 Tests and averages almost 50 but his fitness is a worry. He may yet play a big role in the Ashes, but it is hard to see him going to South Africa next month.

Chris Rogers, like Jaques, is an established batsman who has cut his teeth in English conditions, with spells at three different counties. In 2005, he made a double hundred against the Australians when he was with Leicestershire. Alastair Cook also made a double hundred against the 2005 Aussies. Could Cook and Rogers be squaring up this summer? Rogers is a solid, unflamboyant batsman, which is probably what Australia needs right now. He is also short-sighted and colour blind, which could lead to some comical problems. Get the crowd at Cardiff to all wear their red rugby shirts.

Phil Hughes is the coming man, a 20-year-old with sublime talent who is biffing all and sundry in this year's Sheffield Shield. He could be a bold choice for the Aussie selectors. After all, the rest of the top six are the wrong side of 30 (or in the case of Michael Clarke very established). A flash of youthful inspiration could be helpful.

Michael Klinger, the former Australia under-19 captain, leads the Sheffield Shield run-scoring table this season, ahead of Hughes. Like Hayden, he has toiled for many years without getting the nod from the selectors. That could make him tougher when he is summoned. Or it could shatter his confidence. Shaun Marsh and David Warner, the man of the moment, are probably still seen as one-day specialists.

Here's another idea, though. Why not ask Mike Hussey to open? He has done it a couple of times for Australia with success - making 137 against West Indies and 89 against South Africa - but has generally played at 4 or 5. In English conditions, too, he has done well as an opener for Northants and Durham. It may be a shrewd choice for the Ashes, allowing space in the middle order for someone like Marcus North, Brad Hodge or David Hussey. It wouldn't be a long-term option, but as any opener will tell you: sometimes you have to go back before stepping forwards.

Comments

[Patrick Kidd]

Time to draw a line under this argument, I think. Back to your corners

[Vinod]

I just logged back on to see that I seem to have ruffled a few feathers here. Well, well, Peter - I appear to have touched a nerve - now if you go back and read my comments, you will note that my comments were directed at a certain Mr. Ricky Ponting, not you. And as a public figure I'm sure he has had much worse invective thrown at him and I'm sure he understands that it goes with the territory of being a celebrity. And before you accuse me of the ultimate conceit of thinking Ponting is either aware or cares what I think, let me clarify that this was simply a device for voicing my opinion. If you don't like it, you can always click another link, right? So, may I invite you to lighten up mate, and oh, take some English Reading Comprehension classes while you're at it.

[Kap]

Rudd meister, I love to give out advice. I normally dispense it whilst running my fingers through my hair and winking at any passing laydeez.

And do Aussies really pay for pornography? Don’t you have the internet over there?

[Kap]

Vinod was “abusive” with one sentence yet your attack which stretched over many paragraphs was just “a bit of humour”? Oops. Forgive me; English isn’t my first language so the subtleties of your wit must have passed me by. Yes, that must be it. Oh and great gag about too many words ruining things. Even I got that one. You really should consider writing for a living. Peace out. West Side. Laters.

[The Hon K Rudd]

Hello all.

If I were giving advice, it would be to refer Mr Kap, to the last sentence of the third paragraph in Peter's comment on January 16. Such actions have certainly worked wonders for me. I won't say which ones.

Alas, I don't give advice unless I'm asked. Or paid.

Graham Wood was Australia's best opener. I'm seriously considering nominating him for an OAM for services to the community, by continually running out the likes of Darling, Dyson and (especially) Hilditch in the early 80s.

Thank you. Oh, and would Australian readers please spend the money I recently gave them and motor cars and enormous TVs rather than on cigarettes and pornography.

Thank you.

[Peter McGuinness]

Someone simply says that they like a particular cricketer. No more, no less. Nothing but a plain opinion about cricket, with no judgement of anyone else attached at all.

For that they're called a 'mealy-mouthed, utterly ignorant hypocrite'.

And I'm abusive/self-important/nasty for responding to that rather excessive personal insult with a bit of humour?

Fair enough. I guess individual perception of the logic train underlines some major differences between us. You're right of course, debate is pointless. No matter, you love your cricket. Good for you. There's something we've got in common. All the best to you, Kap. No doubt you are a good bloke, as most cricket lovers turn out to be.

To give you due credit, you've really nailed it on the ulcer bit. Everyone who knows me, knows what a stress-head I am. Must be the lifestyle. Have you got a hidden camera at my place? Sorry, too many words again. Bloody words. Always interfering with a good blog.

[Kap]

Peter, how about you follow your own advice about being unnecessarily abusive? Typing lots of words doesn’t hide the nastiness. Careful you don’t give yourself an ulcer, this page wouldn’t be the same without your self importance. Thanks buddy.

[Peter McGuinness]

I've no doubt Vinod - and I say this as keen long term observer of your comments - you would have disliked Bradman intensely too, had you been alive to see him play.

As always, it's a pity that the good points you sometimes make are disguised amongst such unnecessarily abusive, hateful language. Are we all not enjoying a fun little cricket exchange here on Line and Length in the spirit of fraternal cricket lovers? What a barrel of laughs you are Vinod. Too bad it's empty.

Surely part of the enjoyment here is to express and read a variety of views. For example, I don't believe Steve is mealy-mouthed, ignorant or hypocritical (?) for not being impressed by Hayden. Rajan makes a good point about Lawry. The Monkey could quite well be spot on about Morris too, truth be told. Why do people with different opinions to your own, deserve abuse? Lighten up amigo. There's plenty to have a heart attack about other than who Australia's best ever opener was. If you drink - stop. If you don't - start. That should relax you.

One of the very few experts who can speak with expert authority and eye-witness credibility on the topic is Richie Benaud. He has seen all Australia's best statistically, with the exception of Trumper. Benaud rates Hayden marginally ahead of Morris. Naturally this doesn't diminish the legend of Trumper, Ponsford, Woodfull or Simpson. Nor should it.

But then again, Benaud has got a reputation for hypocritical, mealy mouthed, utter ignorance I guess...

Personally, my opinions about Hayden are based on actually attending a great many Test Matches in which Australia has participated over many years. Assertions about his inabilities against elite bowling are - I think - illogical. Opening batsmen who play over 100 Test Matches in all countries against all opponents in all conditions and who average over 50, can obviously succeed against the world's best bowlers. And I hold my views with complete regard and respect for the likes of Trumper et al. Pardon my utter ignorance and hypocrisy. Mind you, I'm not sure what part of having an opinion about a cricket player makes me a hypocrite. Maybe I need a new dictionary...

Anyway, cheers for the enlightening lecture about Australian cricket history Vinod. If I'm ever struggling to understand anything about Australia and Australians in future, I'll be sure to drop you a line on Dileep's blog. Thanks mate.

[Steve]

I was never impressed with Hayden and it took him a long time to break into the Australian side, which by that stage was a great one. He scored many runs in the backwater Sheffield Shield which was (and still is) largely denuded of the top Australian players. He did score a lot of runs but I would have liked to see him face up to the Windies at their peak. He would have been made to look ordinary. Bad tempered as well, with none of the grace of a Simpson, Taylor or Slater, not to mention Ponsford, Morris et al. Finally, his 'buddy' stuff with that other over-rated opener Langer was sick-making.

[Mahendra Lalas]

Hayden was overrated for sure! He was tall had a habit of standing way outside the crease, probably psychologically pressurising the bowlers, this worked for a while. Just recall his recent performances and his performances against quality bowlers in test matches. Australia gave him more chances than he probably desereved, he is not a quality batsman like Yuvraj Singh. The names you have mentioned are probably as good as Hayden.

[YellowMonkey]

Morris is way better than Hayden

Played on crusty pitches. Simpson was also better when you combine his catching and bowling

http://monkeyatthecricket.blogspot.com/2009/01/harvey-vs-hayden.html

[Vinod]

The eulogies flowing from various quarters for this very good (but NOT great) player have been truly nauseating. As have the wild-eyed mob yelling down anyone who dares to say so, on the grounds that this would be disrespectful under the circumstances (on the BBC and other websites).
For God's sake, the man has merely retired, not died. So allow me to add my voice to the small band who notice that the Emperor has no clothes, or at least fewer than everybody else claim to notice.
That Hayden was a very good player is not in doubt. What is also not in doubt is that, especially for an opener, he was unconvincing in the extreme against genuine quick bowling (e.g. Donald, Akhtar). "Flat-track bully" is probably a bit strong, but not too far off the mark. At any rate, not a true great IMHO. And to claim he is the best Australian opener ever merely betrays either the speaker's (Ponting?) utter ignorance of the noble history of this great game or his wilful mealy-mouthed hypocrisy (or both). Have any of those making these claims in the "irrational exhuberance" of the moment ever heard the names Victor Trumper and Bill Ponsford? If you consider that Don Bradman rated Arthur Morris exceptionally highly, there is a good case that Hayden is not in the Top 3 Australian openers of all time.

[Peter McGuinness]

Good point Rusty.

Although, having seen Marsh in numerous Shield games, I believe he has adapted a sound technical game to the 'demands' (there's a contradiction in terms for you!) of Limited Overs slappo. In fact, he reminds me a bit of Hussey in that he is supremely adaptable, seeming to be a different player completely depending on what colour daks he's wearing.

Personally, I still have concerns about the technique of Jaques. I accept that these may be ill-founded, but he certainly does not get his head in line, which exposes him against the very best elite quality. It's a bit like the inherent 'gap between bat and pad' shortcoming suffered by both Hodge and Blewett in times past. Superb players with freakish eyes, but also with a crucial fundamental chink that may be dreadfully exposed with the precision of a Sharma, Steyn, Wasim (or a McGrath). Interesting indeed.

There's a 'sameness' about Jaques and Katich that spooks me about having them together too. Unfortunately for Jaques, Hughes has the form on the board and many, many more tomorrows than yesterdays in his kitbag.

The Dude may have a point about Hughes. I hope not. Warner may well be off to T-Ball monopoly money and good on him if he goes. Slogging a ball that must be bowled in a certain place, to a certain field is as entertaining in India as it is here. People who like that kind of thing are unlikely to care whether the task is done for Delhi or NSW or Australia or the KFC Allstars.

But Hughes would be losing the crown jewels. He's a national Test Match treasure waiting to happen.

[Rusty]

Peter McG,

Marsh is really not a test player. Not until he redefines his game. He's a big hitter, yes, but in the IPL mode. Which is why they keep putting him to open the Twenty20.

Both Hughes and Jacques should go to South Africa. After all, Katich was actually only in the team to cover Jacques. I know he's usurped his spot now, but the moment Katcih starts to feel the tiniest bit insecure at the crease he'll go all neurotic and batten down the hatches.

Hussey keeps saying he's happy batting in the middle with the tailenders - probably because they're more reliable these days. They can take care of the sticky ones, while Hussey concentrates on his average again.

Poor old Rogers is too late - he's probably go the way of Hodge - and Klinger has missed his chance.

[Dudeface Dude]

Hughes will be off to the IPL before he will get the chance to open... mark my words.

[Peter McGuinness]

By any measure, Hayden is certainly Australia's greatest ever opening batsman, and one of Australia's greatest ever players - full stop.

Hughes is THE man, my Pommy friends. Forget Jaques, he is dreadfully out of luck injury wise. His timing could not have been worse. Marsh is next cab off the rank. Rogers will be unlucky. Warner is a freakshow at T Ball, but hasn't even played a proper first class game in which the fielding team can attack yet.

Wait 'til you get a load of Phil Hughes. If our catatonic selectors go beserk and do the right thing, he will give you quite a shock, to say the very least.

This kid is a once in generation player. And he's ready.

[S. Mahadevan]

Let me add one more name to your list of great Aussie openers: W. M. Lawry. I would rate "Phantom" (Lawry) higher than Morris and Slater. Nonetheless I think Haydos is the best Aussie opener to date.
Rajan