23 December 2007

The Unfortunate Mr.Hussey

He scored piles of runs in the first class level, waiting for his test call up for Australia. It was only after he got his 15,513th run that he finally got to play a test match. Michael Hussey is one of the most consistent batsmen in the Australian side. He exploits every opportunity to score a few. Yet, he does not receive the recognition due to him.

He scored 1 run in his first test innings. Since then, he has made only two other single digit scores in the other 28 innings he took active part in. In these 29 innings, he’s scored 7 tons and 8 scores between 50 and hundred. Considering any score of above 50 to be a useful contribution, out of the 29 innings Hussey has taken part in, he’s contributed usefully in 15 innings. Also, in four innings where he scored under 50, he remained not out. And the final point, his test match average – 86.18.

Why is it that a batsman of such credentials does not get as much recognition as the Ponting, Lara or Tendulkar?

When Michael Hussey comes in to bat at the usual number four or number five position, there is no doubt about the fact that the crowd is not as interested as when the skipper enters the field. One can argue that over the period of twelve years of Ponting’s international career, he has proved himself to be amongst the top batsmen of the generation.

This may be true. But, Hussey’s credentials certainly deserve more recognition. The most plausible cause for Hussey not receiving this recognition is his style of play. He will bat all day, all test if needed, go about his job, doing all that he can within his jurisdiction to achieve a favourable result for his team, all the while scoring at a good rate. He will not be the subject of an eye-catching batting display that the Tendulkars or Laras are accustomed to giving us.

The aesthetic pleasure one gains by watching that full circle cover drive of Lara and those incomplete drives of Tendulkar is not something you get watching Hussey. Hussey is a batsman. He is in the team to make runs. He will do that unconditionally and without any sparkle. He will consistently make runs for the team and help contribute to the team’s performance.

When Hussey walks in to bat, there is a sense of security that he will score, at a decent rate, keep the scoreboard ticking, regardless of whether he does it with style or show. He is described aptly by many as a “matter-of-fact batsman.”

Other than his style, the fact that the Aussie administrators drafted him into the style so late in his first class career itself is a factor for his lack of popularity. The point here is that, the Aussie selectors find it hard to adjust to the fact that a player picked so late has performed to such a great extent. They are recognising how much they have missed Hussey’s talent all these years when he was waiting for selection.

We will never know how much Australian cricket lost by picking one of the greatest Aussie batsmen of this generation so late in his career.-BS

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear BS,
I wish to mention that Rahul Dravid is one such batsman too.
However why one is more inclined to the master stroke of Sachin's and Lara's as opposed to Dravid's and Hussey's is highly debatable. I feel the world has a predilection towards the genius of an individual who is different in comparison to the percentage player.[Another Ex:Fed-Ex and Andy Roddick]
This is a fundamental problem in decision making. SA had a team with each player contributing 30 runs and reaching scores of 300 which amazed teams playing 1992 and 1996 WC's. However there needs to be a balance. Time would certainly suggest the genius of Hussey.

Good post.

Regards

Abishek

December 23, 2007 at 3:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. Sports