Taylor & Slater > Langer & Hayden

[Jimthegreat]

Either way, not saying much about you as a batsmen when you're being compared to...Justin Langer! An indictment on Cricket that he was able to produce a successful international career, as his coaching career has shown. To think it was off-field trouble that opened an opportunity for him to take advantage of as well. Damn Matt Elliot for not getting his s*** together. Slater and Taylor for mine.

Langer was an outstanding Test batsman. No ifs or buts. Only haters would say otherwise

In any sport being a good players doesn't necessarily mean you'd be a good coach. Champions are good because they have a ability, not because they know alot, know how to actually coach or teach, or get a message across.

Let's not mix playing ability with an ability to coach.

As for the topic, both excellent combinations but Hayden and Langer was a great one.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Think youre being a bit ridicolous there buddy.
Quite simply for our 2 dominant opening pairs of the past 2 years, for partnerships that have fairly similar averages, the earlier duo surely played against a tougher attack then that of the latter

Against the Windies and the Pakis they were tougher.

The Indian/NZ/South African line-ups were similar,

The english/Sri Lankan were tougher for hayden/langer

A better argumnet might be the pitches they played on and the bats they held.

A quick look at the shield stats where they got to play the same bowlers tells a story. Whilst I appreciate the difference from first class to test, the gulf from Slater to Hayden is immense

Langer - 52
Hayden - 55
Taylor - 42
Slater - 38

 

[Bombertastic]

Slaters FC record does look a little shabby. Failed at County Cricket by memory and had a lot of problems focusing on his cricket late in his career when the media hounded him after his dropping in '01 and he had all those other problems off field. I wouldn't read too much into it.

Haydos was the true champion of the group and really should have played the 70 odd test matches that Slater played with Tubbs before his retirement. Could you imagine the record Haydos would have had then.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Slaters FC record does look a little shabby. Failed at County Cricket by memory and had a lot of problems focusing on his cricket late in his career when the media hounded him after his dropping in '01 and he had all those other problems off field. I wouldn't read too much into it.

That average above is his Shield average - not his FC average so it ignores County Cricket.

 

[beta_condition]

Hayden: 8625 runs @ 50.73
Langer: 7696 runs @ 45.27
Taylor: 7525 runs @ 43.49
Slater: 5312 runs @ 42.83

What shoul be noted is langers average after he became an opener

 

[The Falcon Strike]

What shoul be noted is langers average after he became an opener

JL averaged 48.22 as opener

 

[TeamThatSavedAFL]

Although averaging less individually, Taylor/Slater are not as far behind Hayden/Langer as suggeted by many; they have:
- a greater average opening partnership
- faced tougher bowling attacks (IMO indisputable)
- not padded their stats against Zimbabwe, etc.

 

[SaintNicksDix]

nope, I simply think you're wrong and I'm just showing you why

all i did was apply some Socratic method to the OP i.e. by taking an argument to it's logical extension, it helps identify the flaws in the argument

for example the flaw in your argument is the term "fairly similar averages"

Slats/Tubs averages are about 6-7 runs behind Langer/Hayden and you're happy to consider them as being 'fairly similar', right?

what about Boon/Marsh? They're about another 6-7 runs behind Tubs/Slats - by your reasoning, it should be also fine to compare those two opening partnerships in the same way, right? and given that Boon/Marsh faced undoubtedly better bowling than Slats/Taylor then, by your logic, they're better than Slater/Taylor?

it sounds like you only want to selectively apply your subjective measure of 'fairly similar'-ness because if you applied it more widely, you'd realise it is flawed

if you are prefer Slater and Taylor because they once signed your bat or you like chewing gum and Fujitsus then fine, just say so, but please don't try rationalise it though with this ridiculous self-serving and poorly thought out cross-era comparison of bowling strength

Think your being a touch of a flog, introducing people that arent even related to my argument.
Is 6 ot 7 runs in the same ballpark for a career of opening the batting? YES
Did the 90s duo face better bowling attacks? for the majority of countries YES
Were the bats and pitches that Langer and Hayden played with far better for batsmen then that of Taylor and Slater? YES
Do Boon Marsh or Victor Trumper have anything to do with the OP? NO

 

[Bombertastic]

That average above is his Shield average - not his FC average so it ignores County Cricket.

I realized that. I'm surprised his FC record is better then his shield record. Considering he didn't take too well to county cricket where most other batsman from Aus dined out for years.

 

[Bombertastic]

Think your being a touch of a flog, introducing people that arent even related to my argument.
Is 6 ot 7 runs in the same ballpark for a career of opening the batting? YES
Did the 90s duo face better bowling attacks? for the majority of countries YES
Were the bats and pitches that Langer and Hayden played with far better for batsmen then that of Taylor and Slater? YES
Do Boon Marsh or Victor Trumper have anything to do with the OP? NO

The more you think about it the more it makes sense. Even a thing like the kind of bats that the players use now. The shift from the 90s into Hayden/Langer period saw a huge leap forward in bat technology. Also things like bringing in the fields with ropes to prevent injuries.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

34 tests involved both Langer and Slater

Langer Averaged 43, Slater averaged 42. Given they are the same age - I think we can put to bed the "Slater played against better opposition" argument.

15 tests involved Langer and Taylor

Langer averaged 38, Taylor averaged 40 - hardly a huge discrepancy given Taylor would have been a senior player as compared to a young batsman starting out. Also Taylor's record is completely dominated by his 334* (being his only century) in that 15 tests.

With both stats, what is shown is that Langer could hold his record up against both Taylor and Slater in the same era and Langer wasn't as good as Hayden.

 

[Bombertastic]

In these tests where all three were playing where did Langer bat? Probably no higher then 3 while Slats and Taylor opened.

 

[Minotaur]

Slats and tubby played a lot of cricket against totally hopeless English attacks. Phil defraits opening the bowling in the first test of an ashes series here in the mid 90s

 

[mb0y]

JL - luckiest player to play 100 tests. He was a average-good opening batsmen and terrible middle order batsmen, who not only got carried by his partner but by his dominant team. Also always seemed to be on the favourable side of umpiring decisions. Most people here are confusing his grit, courage and patience for his (lack of) absolute talent and skill.

Send him in against the early pace attacks, in a substantially weaker team and with a not-so (arguably AUS greatest!) dominant partner and on pitches that weren't hume highways... I doubt very much he would average above 40.

 

[beatnik]

Think your being a touch of a flog, introducing people that arent even related to my argument.
Is 6 ot 7 runs in the same ballpark for a career of opening the batting? YES
Did the 90s duo face better bowling attacks? for the majority of countries YES
Were the bats and pitches that Langer and Hayden played with far better for batsmen then that of Taylor and Slater? YES
Do Boon Marsh or Victor Trumper have anything to do with the OP? NO

I think this shows you don't even understand the point i made


my point is, who determines what is 'fairly similar' and what is not?

why is it ok to compare two opening partnerships when it suits your argument, but not ok when it doesn't?

the difference between Boon/Marsh and Slats/Taylor is exactly the same and yet you don't want to consider them

you are making a blanket statement and appear to be too dim to understand the counterarguments that show your statement to be wrong/foolish

it's like arguing with a doorknob!

 

[dan warna]

Slater, mark waugh and Tubby - were the luckiest players to play tests. THey were a average-good opening batsmen and terrible middle order batsmen, who not only got carried by their partners but by their dominant team. Also always seemed to be on the favourable side of umpiring decisions. Most people here are confusing his grit, courage and patience for his (lack of) absolute talent and skill.

Send them in against the early pace attacks, in a substantially weaker team and with a not-so (arguably AUS greatest!) dominant partner and on pitches that weren't hume highways... I doubt very much they would average above 40.

corrected for accuracy

 

[Coldacre]

Langer had no clue late in his career. Well for most of it to be honest. His high scoring rate was due to hitting his way out of trouble.

you are aware of the concept of batting right?

* high scoring rate
* hitting your way out of trouble

terrible attributes for a batsman to have!