View Full Version : Haddin's future
Johnson#26
6 Oct 2009, 13:08
Huge fan of Paine, reckon he should be our first choice ODI keeper/batsman now. Have never fallen for the Haddin love that many seem to have. Sure, has all the shots, but is unreliable IMO, see his dismissal at the Oval for example.
I'm sure he'll be guaranteed both gigs for another two years, but how do you see the situation?
I'm torn. I really like Paine, but it would be pretty harsh to drop Haddin from the ODI team - he really hasn't done anything to merit it.
It's tough. Haddin is probably still the better option for ODIs - he'd probably merit a place as a specialist batsman even if Paine was in the side, which means it'd be a bit of a waste of a slot to bring TP in.
On the other hand, I'm pretty confident that Paine is our next Test keeper, and ODI experience would mean he'll be ready for that job sooner rather than later. I'm pretty confident that with some top-level cricket under his belt and more experience he'll quickly become a superior Test option to Haddin.
Do you select your best ODI side, or (pardon the pun) suffer short-term Paine for long-term gain?
Belnakor
6 Oct 2009, 14:02
Gilchrist's legacy will be that we will always pick the batsman who can keep over the genuine keeper who can bat. Paine won't get a gig until Haddin is shown to be terribly out of form.
TorresIsGod
6 Oct 2009, 14:07
I could see the selectors opting for Paine in the home Test series coming up, give him some experience at Test level, off the back of 15-odd good ODI performances.
Haddin is probably a better option for ODI cricket, but we really need a top class keeper for Test Cricket and Paine is that man.
The problem is given the nature of the game, it's getting harder and harder to justify a genuine keeper in ODI teams. The 50 over game is all about which sides have the longest tail and the highest average strike rate.
Unfortunately due to the fact that List A/ODI selection generally precedes FC/Test selection it's really damaging the development of quality custodians.
WattsGoodForYou
6 Oct 2009, 16:54
Why not play both? Paine has been doing ok at opening, while Haddins batting speaks for itself. Both are capable fielders when not keeping aswell.
Paine won't get a gig until Haddin is shown to be terribly out of form.
Haddin's keeping can actually get worse?
Blue Dimension
6 Oct 2009, 17:07
Haddin will come straight back into the side.
Paine, although impressive, is not in the class with Haddin with the bat. Paine will develop his craft for a few more years, and then when Haddin's time is up, he'll be next in line and ready to go.
Paine should be playing ahead of Haddin in both Tests and ODI's. Haddin's keeping let us down enormously during the Ashes. Paine is good enough to replace him right now and it is important to build for the future.
Cousin Jed
6 Oct 2009, 19:22
Haddin will come straight back into the side.
Paine, although impressive, is not in the class with Haddin with the bat. Paine will develop his craft for a few more years, and then when Haddin's time is up, he'll be next in line and ready to go.
Bingo.
TorresIsGod
6 Oct 2009, 19:31
Bingo.
Damn.
I was one number away :(
Haddin's batting is terrible at times. The amount of times I've seen him throw away his wicket stupidly over the years makes me strongly doubt his ability to cope under pressure. His keeping isn't that good, either. I'll give him time but my patience is wearing thin.
Jordan...
7 Oct 2009, 09:32
Haddin is better then Paine, but I have found a soft spot for the young T Paine and I hope he gets a test cap once Haddin departs.
TorresIsGod
7 Oct 2009, 12:44
Haddin is better then Paine, but I have found a soft spot for the young T Paine and I hope he gets a test cap once Haddin departs.
Better at what exactly?
Keeping, no.
The technical side of batting, no.
Slogging, yes.
Better strike rate, yes.
...
Not much else.
notting18
7 Oct 2009, 13:47
Haddin will and probably should come back in to ODI and Test team when fit.
However I have enjoyed watching Australia have a keeper and not a backstop in the recent games.
Better at what exactly?
Keeping, no.
The technical side of batting, no.
Slogging, yes.
Better strike rate, yes.
...
Not much else.
'Technical side of batting'? What does that even mean? Hughes is a technically awful batsman, if he can sort out his susceptibility to short bowling it won't matter a jot.
Haddin has a better batting average and better strike rate. He's certainly the worse keeper of the two, but not bad enough to offset the advantages in the other areas (particularly in ODI cricket).
Bottom line is that Haddin will keep his spot until he retires, his batting drops off significantly, or he starts dropping catches.
aussie1st
7 Oct 2009, 16:15
If Paine can find ways of rotating the strike he could make a real good ODI opener. He certainly has the aggressiveness which I thought he lacked before his ODI debut. Haddin will regain his places, Paine dipped away after his 50 against India to put serious pressure on Haddin's spot but he definitely is the backup keeper which is good to know we have now.
Jordan...
7 Oct 2009, 16:34
Better at what exactly?
Keeping, no.
The technical side of batting, no.
Slogging, yes.
Better strike rate, yes.
...
Not much else.
You just need to put a spanner in the works?
Of course Haddin is the better 'keeper/batsman, hence his position in both Australia's OD and Test teams.
Kim Hagdorn
7 Oct 2009, 17:25
Haddin deseves to keep his spot on current form, end of story.
Haddin's batting is terrible at times. The amount of times I've seen him throw away his wicket stupidly over the years makes me strongly doubt his ability to cope under pressure. His keeping isn't that good, either. I'll give him time but my patience is wearing thin.
Haddin just gets that "red mist" about him, like alot of attacking batsmen do. It's when they get on a roll, hit two or three consecutive boundaries and then think that every ball should be going for four from then on. Still is a great option at Test and ODI level and should be first choice for a few years with Paine as his understudy. :)
anti dukes
9 Oct 2009, 11:05
Haddin will and probably should come back in to ODI and Test team when fit.
However I have enjoyed watching Australia have a keeper and not a backstop in the recent games.
Haddin isn't even a back stop. He doesn't stop them. He is more like a speed hump, simply slows the ball down so it doesn't hit the rope so quickly.
ChunkyDuckling
9 Oct 2009, 22:33
Bottom line is that Haddin will keep his spot until he retires, his batting drops off significantly, or he starts dropping catches.
Remember how Haddin got out in our two losses in the Ashes. He went the big heave when survival was what was needed. He needed to dig in and failed miserably. You want a keeper who is not going to throw his wicket away when he is desperately needed at number 7, not a bloody slogger.
Not to mention his plethora of byes in the Ashes. How many times did a ball beat him when we were trying to put pressure on the Poms. I know there was some laclustre bowling but that he is supposed to be the best keeper in the best team in the world, he should of sorted his footwork out by now.
Paine is a servicable batsmen but a brilliant keeper. Tell me Haddin would of snagged those high catches v England in the CT. Or those diving catches v the Kiwis in the final. No, we would of just been seeing that familiar look from the Ashes... A shrug back at the bowler with his glove to his chin, down on one knee, as the ball races away yet again to the boundary.
Paine is definetly more reliable than haddin.
He'll get you a start and might occasionally go on, but haddin has that x-factor about him.
I think there's no doubt on who the better keeper is.
djdarren
12 Oct 2009, 00:52
WTF ???? I watched the champions league too and saw Paine fumble and drop balls he was hardly streets ahead as some suggest. I'm not a Haddin lover but he has some form on the board and that counts for now. Paine will improve with time I expect and be next in line.
Haddin in ODIs til the next world cup.
For tests I wouldn't mind seeing them punt on Paine, depends how frustrated they are with Haddin's keeping. Unlikely to happen though.
How much of his shoddy keeping has been due to his dodgy thumb?
outabounds
12 Oct 2009, 13:38
Do not think that Haddin has done too much wrong. Paine can wait.
Haddin has a better batting average and better strike rate. He's certainly the worse keeper of the two, but not bad enough to offset the advantages in the other areas (particularly in ODI cricket).
Stats aren't actually that different, in ODIs at least. Batting averages are 32.41 (Paine) and 32.39 (Haddin), while Haddin's strike rate isn't massively better - 83.10 vs 72.84.
Stats aren't actually that different, in ODIs at least. Batting averages are 32.41 (Paine) and 32.39 (Haddin), while Haddin's strike rate isn't massively better - 83.10 vs 72.84.
I was comparing First Class stats since I figured we were ultimately talking about which was the better cricketer overall. But you make a good point.
Toshowyouwhy
12 Oct 2009, 18:13
Haddin is not any where near yhe bst gloveman in Australia, and although I think he's better, Paine has looked iffy as well at times. Haddin mentally is poor and posesses a couple of very fatal flaws in his keeping technique, the result of which is a lot of dropped catches and fecked up dives.
The problem is the want a Gilchrist clone. Not going to happen. For years he was the best keeper and the best keeper/batsman in Australia, and the world. Our number one priority should be to pick the best keeper. If he can bat, great. Keeping in mind Mitchell Johnson could happily fill a number 7 role, we could comfoprtably bat our test keeper at 8. Not sure if Paines the man yet, but he, in theory, should be ahead of Haddin
Haddin is not any where near yhe bst gloveman in Australia, and although I think he's better, Paine has looked iffy as well at times. Haddin mentally is poor and posesses a couple of very fatal flaws in his keeping technique, the result of which is a lot of dropped catches and fecked up dives.
The problem is the want a Gilchrist clone. Not going to happen. For years he was the best keeper and the best keeper/batsman in Australia, and the world. Our number one priority should be to pick the best keeper. If he can bat, great. Keeping in mind Mitchell Johnson could happily fill a number 7 role, we could comfoprtably bat our test keeper at 8. Not sure if Paines the man yet, but he, in theory, should be ahead of Haddin
Australia selectors have shown that they prefer batters that can keep, over keepers that can bat.
And i disagree while johnson is a good batter hes inconsistent.
For memory i think he only made one fifty in the ashes, which would not be a good enough for a no.7.
Toshowyouwhy
12 Oct 2009, 18:46
Australia selectors have shown that they prefer batters that can keep, over keepers that can bat.
And i disagree while johnson is a good batter hes inconsistent.
For memory i think he only made one fifty in the ashes, which would not be a good enough for a no.7.
granted that they wont make that decision, I thik its a real shame that that has happened, and although Gilchrist has done great things for the country with his batting and keeping, he really has screwed the up and coming wicket keeper. Doesnt matter how good a keeper he is, if hes not scoring tons at a run a ball hes toast.
I disagree Haddin drops a lot of catches. If he did, he wouldn't be in the team. He does let through a lot of byes (although if you look at the stats, he wasn't really any worse than Prior during the Ashes). The argument could be made that he doesn't have the ability to turn the odd slim chance into one of those spectacular dismissals that Gilly and Heals got every once in a while. I'm not sure how valid this argument is, but it's certainly worth considering - how often does a chance go begging that someone like Manou could reasonably be expected to take? I'm not sure they're that frequent, to be honest.
You have to select a keeper who can convert half-chances and won't spill catches. After that point, it's really about balancing the ability to prevent byes against the ability to score runs. Gilchrist and Healy probably weren't the best wicketkeepers in the country, but they were very good - and more importantly, good enough. Zohrer and Seccombe may have let through a couple less byes each match, but their averages were far inferior.
Pick a wicketkeeper/batsman - not a batsman/wicketkeeper, or a pure wicketkeeper.
PalaceGun
14 Oct 2009, 01:12
I disagree Haddin drops a lot of catches. If he did, he wouldn't be in the team. He does let through a lot of byes (although if you look at the stats, he wasn't really any worse than Prior during the Ashes).
That's saying very little, Prior is a poor keeper as well.
Haddin's footwork has been poor for years and doesn't seem to improve.
Time for the selectors to be brave and go with Paine in test cricket, a much better keeper. Do what they want in other forms of cricket, doesn't really matter.