Hauritz vs. Warne - A Comparison

[Damon_3388]

Hauritz vs. Warne - A Comparison

I realise there's already another thread on our spinning woes, but I wanted to point out this comparison in particular, as well as revive the debate.

This may seem like an odd comparison to make (Warne is obviously one of the greatest bowlers in cricket history, and by no means am I saying that Hauritz is even in his stratosphere), but looking at the numbers from an equivalent amount of tests, they make for interesting reading:

Nathan Hauritz (17 tests in total, aged 28 years, 360 days)
Balls bowled - 4,200
Overs bowled - 700
Maiden overs - 143
Runs conceded - 2,204
Economy rate - 3.14 runs per over
Wickets - 63
Average - 34.98 runs per wicket taken
Strike rate - 66.6 balls per wicket taken
Best innings figures - 5/53
Best match figures - 6/126
5 wickets in an innings - 2
10 wickets in a match - 0

Shane Warne (after 17 tests, aged 23 years, 344 days)
Balls bowled - 4,880
Overs bowled - 813.2
Maiden overs - 291
Runs conceded - 1,832
Economy rate - 2.25 runs per over
Wickets - 65
Average - 28.18 runs per wicket taken
Strike rate - 75.0 balls per wicket taken
Best innings figures - 7/52
Best match figures - 8/117
5 wickets in an innings - 2
10 wickets in a match - 0

Those numbers for Warne come after his big 1993 Ashes series, where he took 34 wickets at an average of 25.79, and was subsequently the talk of the town. Yet Hauritz, who is yet to have a breakout series of Warne-in-England magnitude, does not suffer greatly in comparison (less economical, but has a better strike rate, and almost as many wickets).

Does Hauritz deserve more time to develop at Test level (he'll be 29 years old in 5 days), or should the Australian selectors invest time in and have faith in a younger spinner (Steve Smith possesses better figures than Warne did after his first two tests, and is still younger than Warne was when he made his test debut in January 1992) as they did with Shane Warne in the early '90s?

 

[Cooldude]

Do away with these useless finger tweakers and blood a wrist spinner

Great Australian sides have often been characterised by great leg spinners, our offies suck, our pitches don't suit them. We can't find our next great leggie unless the selectors are willing to gamble and throw one into the mix for a while IE Smith

The amount of patience and time afforded for Hauritz was incredible. Sure, he improved since he was given the chance, but anyone SHOULD improve if they were given as many games as he did. Those games should've been given to a younger spinner who'd be a long term prospect instead of being wasted on a momentary stop gap like Hauritz

The way our spinners have been treated by the selectors have been nothing short of baffling

 

[placebo]

Haritz is 29.
Warne was 23.

Hauritz isn't all that flash as an attacking bowler.
Warne showed plenty of potential as an attacking bowler.

In fact, Warne showed more potential full stop.


The chances of haurtiz suddenly developing a real dangerous side to his bowling after 10+ years in the system is unlikely.

 

[Ill Chicken]

Yeah, I like that idea, never give an off spinner ago again, because the last thing we need to do is get better at playing them, as you know, our batsmen are all over the ones in the rest of the world.

 

[saint_larry]

Yeah, I like that idea, never give an off spinner ago again, because the last thing we need to do is get better at playing them, as you know, our batsmen are all over the ones in the rest of the world.

i hardly think that our ability against off spin is a pressing issue at the moment. Harbhajan averaged about 35 in this latest series. Couldnt even get ricky out.

 

[Dr Awkward]

I've got to admit I am a huge Hauritz hater. He has terrible figures but not only that his figures completely flatter him. Many of his wickets are tailender wickets and he puts the batsman under no pressure whatsoever.

He seems like a decent bloke but unfortunately just has no ability. I would rather play 4 pacemen and bowl part time spinners if we have to.
As I posted somewhere else those figures are also heavily affected by the Pakistan series where he took 30% of his career wickets in matches that Pakistan was deliberately losing lol.

He is a poor fielder as well and doesn't have any level of intimidation or confidence that a spinner needs.

This comparison is also flawed based on two facts:
- The age difference
- Regardless of what the figures showed Warne had showed anyone that was watching the game that he had something special. That's why he was the talk of the town despite not having amazing figures in 93.

 

[royboy2]

Hauritz has 2 deliveries; 1 that goes straight and 1 that turns a little bit how many did Warne have?

 

[Tom12]

Don't mind him, and it doesn't seem like we have any other spinner who is ready to compete at Test level. (Smith gets whacked and needs a bit more time)

He's good enough to play a role in our side, but Ponting an't do much with him as he's not an attacking bowler. More of a restricting bowler who relies and flight and batsmens mistakes rather than spin.
It's not a question of whether he plays, it's a question of who we could play instead? No real suitable replacement. He gets the job done majority of the time without being spectacular.

Not even going to compare those figures due to the demographics and the fact that your comparing a leg spinner to an off spinner. (Possibly the greatest spinner of all time)

 

[King Elvis]

Haritz is 29.
Warne was 23.

Hauritz isn't all that flash as an attacking bowler.
Warne showed plenty of potential as an attacking bowler.

In fact, Warne showed more potential full stop.


The chances of haurtiz suddenly developing a real dangerous side to his bowling after 10+ years in the system is unlikely.

Exactly.

You'd accept these performances from Smith, because they're an investment in the future.

 

[Belnakor]

Hauritz has 2 deliveries; 1 that goes straight and 1 that turns a little bit how many did Warne have?

Hauritz also has the one that shoots on, the one that doesn't budge and the one that goes straight on.

 

[Belnakor]

Exactly.

You'd accept these performances from Smith, because they're an investment in the future.

Plus Smith ensures our batting order isn't so brittle.

 

[gbatman]

Hauriz can't bowl two balls in the one spot at the moment, and what he is bowling is half volleys outside off, trash. He needs to get his accuracy back.

 

[Alpha1]

No shame in getting spanked by that Indian batting lineup, even Warne at his peak never did much against India in India or here in Australia. Tendulkar was just toying with Hauritz, must like the way Tendulkar toyed with Warne, Hauritz should get a decent go in the ashes.

 

[Ill Chicken]

i hardly think that our ability against off spin is a pressing issue at the moment. Harbhajan averaged about 35 in this latest series. Couldnt even get ricky out.

Singh & Ojha took 20 wickets between them. While their average & s/r wasn't great, their economy was. Singh averaged 33.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/bowling/most_wickets_career.html?id=5935;type=series

If you think we played them well, I don't know what to say really.

 

[sudzz]

Hauritz issue to me is much like the Indian treatment of Mohammed Kaif the middle order batsman of limited ability.

People knew about his ability or the lack of it right from the beginning then you played around with him right from number 3 to number 7 and finally dumped from one format when he came good in another and vice-versa.

Similarly Hauritz is being treated like a piece of crap with fields that are weird, not much of talking up as Warne used to get and generally not a great show of confidence. I don't he has ever claimed to be a spinner like Warne or Murali etc but the blokes a honest trier and can be persisted with unless there are much better alternatives available.

This discussion is very similar to the Kumble discussion when he started off and Henry Blofield called him a dour school master.

 

[King Elvis]

Don't agree with any of that.