-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Smith V Hayden
- Thread starter grapedo
- Start date
no but seriously who is the better left handed opener Graeme Smith Or Matt Hayden ?
BoyBrumby
Englishman
The big douche-off, eh? 
Never much cared for Smith's technique; he's so bottom handed it looks as if he's strangling the bat a lot of the time. Also gives him a clear on-side bias, but he can be effective at times. The innings he played in the third test up here was a gem. Still a prick tho, obviously.
Hayden isn't a technician to get the purists purring either: big stride down the wicket & smacking the ball straight back down the ground is Hayden par excellence. Does occasionally struggle with the swinging ball (Smith too, actually; he was Hoggard's bunny during our victorious 04/05 tour), but this has been exaggerated into him not actually being any good at all in the more disreputable corners of CW.
Have to say, currently I'd take Smith first because Hayden seems to be in a similar trot to his pre-2005 Ashes form just now.
Never much cared for Smith's technique; he's so bottom handed it looks as if he's strangling the bat a lot of the time. Also gives him a clear on-side bias, but he can be effective at times. The innings he played in the third test up here was a gem. Still a prick tho, obviously.
Hayden isn't a technician to get the purists purring either: big stride down the wicket & smacking the ball straight back down the ground is Hayden par excellence. Does occasionally struggle with the swinging ball (Smith too, actually; he was Hoggard's bunny during our victorious 04/05 tour), but this has been exaggerated into him not actually being any good at all in the more disreputable corners of CW.
Have to say, currently I'd take Smith first because Hayden seems to be in a similar trot to his pre-2005 Ashes form just now.
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
This thread will end well.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Agree with this. Scoring bollockloads of runs is more important than struggling occasionally with the swinging ball when determining how good a player is.
Still, would probably have Smith over him. One of the best pressure players in the game.
kingkallis
International Coach
Smith for sure! He keeps his cool when team needs him the most!
Example
His match winning knock against New Zealanad [ Last test of Gary Kirsten ]
Famous ODI against Aussies [ 438 ]
3rd test match against England in 2008 series win
Example
His match winning knock against New Zealanad [ Last test of Gary Kirsten ]
Famous ODI against Aussies [ 438 ]
3rd test match against England in 2008 series win
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Hayden a very average player who'd never have succeeded at most times in Test history, regardless of how well he's done post-2001/02, because his play of seam and swing isn't good enough. As I've said ad nauseum.
Smith one who'd almost certainly have done far less well than he has had he played such same times, but someone who I still think has the potential to be more than a non-seaming-track bully.
Anyway, pointless thread.
Smith one who'd almost certainly have done far less well than he has had he played such same times, but someone who I still think has the potential to be more than a non-seaming-track bully.
Anyway, pointless thread.
Uppercut
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Stuff that may be of interest. As usual, all stats are non-minnow, non-world XI. (For simplicity's sake, Zimbabwe are completely excluded.)
Hayden's career average- 49
v England- 45
v India- 59
v NZ- 37
v Pakistan- 46
v South Africa- 48
v Sri Lanka- 51
v West Indies- 51
Smith's career average- 47
v Australia- 24
v England- 56
v India- 41
v NZ- 39
v Pakistan- 44
v Sri Lanka- 38
v West Indies- 71
Hayden's career average- 49
v England- 45
v India- 59
v NZ- 37
v Pakistan- 46
v South Africa- 48
v Sri Lanka- 51
v West Indies- 51
Smith's career average- 47
v Australia- 24
v England- 56
v India- 41
v NZ- 39
v Pakistan- 44
v Sri Lanka- 38
v West Indies- 71
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
quick4mindia
School Boy/Girl Captain
On a flat track i will go for Hayden because he is more experienced of the two and can be more destructive. On a seaming track Smith is better than Hayden.........
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Right now on form? Graeme Smith.
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
In my all-time list? Hayden in a heartbeat.
For a Test tomorrow? Smith.
For a Test tomorrow? Smith.
Briony
International Debutant
Aren't they both flat track bullies?
I think Hayden's overrated because I still remember him struggling when he first came into test cricket. But both he and Langer prospered in a period when bowling was down and tracks flat even though both had been found out in their first go at the caper.
Any time I see Hayden against a swinging ball he looks all at sea. Had he have played in an era when tracks were consistently more challenging and the bowlers swung it a lot more he would have had an average average. I think his average his higher than 49 btw. Ditto Smith - his is definitely higher than 47. He can't bat against Australia btw. He was a real Mr 30's man when he toured here, got a start than went out. Was gunned a bit by umps, especially in the ODIs but looked in horrible touch. And couldn't shut his mouth.
I think Hayden's overrated because I still remember him struggling when he first came into test cricket. But both he and Langer prospered in a period when bowling was down and tracks flat even though both had been found out in their first go at the caper.
Any time I see Hayden against a swinging ball he looks all at sea. Had he have played in an era when tracks were consistently more challenging and the bowlers swung it a lot more he would have had an average average. I think his average his higher than 49 btw. Ditto Smith - his is definitely higher than 47. He can't bat against Australia btw. He was a real Mr 30's man when he toured here, got a start than went out. Was gunned a bit by umps, especially in the ODIs but looked in horrible touch. And couldn't shut his mouth.