You’re never too old if you’re good enough
By David Lord, 31 Oct 2012 David Lord is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Brad Haddin, Cricket
Sydney Sixers Brad Haddin hits a six during their Big Bash League match. AAP Image/Mick Tsikas
Related coverage
It’s quite obvious most cricket-loving Roarers believe age is the criteria to selection, instanced by the number who wrote off Brad Haddin at 35 in favour of the 24-year-old Matt Wade for the first Test against South Africa at the Gabba next week.
History denies that belief.
The top six keepers in Test cricket history as of today:
Mark Boucher was forced to retire at 36 with a severe eye injury, prematurely ending ending his career with 555 dismissals – 532 catches, and 23 stumpings.
Adam Gilchrist retired at 37 with 416 dismissals – 379 and 37.
Ian Healy was dropped at 35 with 395 – 366 and 29.
Rod Marsh retired at 37 with 355 – 343 and 12.
Jeffery Dujon retired at 35 with 270 – 265 and 5.
Allan Knott retired at 35 with 269 – 250 and 19.
And Alec Stewart was 40 when he retired with 241 dismissals – 227 and 14.
That takes care of the keepers, now for the top 18 Test batsmen as of today.
I’ve used averages as the benchmark to highlight career consistency, as against aggregates that are dictated to by longevity.
Take particular note of the ages of the first 11, with one exception.
Jacques Kallis – 37 years 15 days – average 56.94 in a Test career of 17 years.
Kumar Sangakkara – 35 and 4 – 56.73 over 12 years.
Sachin Tendulkar – 39 and 190 – 55.88 over 23 years.
Ricky Ponting – 37 and 317 – 52.75 over 17 years.
Younis Khan – 34 and 336 – 51.69 over 12 years.
Thilan Samaraweera – 36 and 39 – 51.29 over 11 years,
Virender Sehwag – 34 and 11 – 50.64 over 11 years.
Jonathon Trott – 31 and 192 – 50.49 over three years,
Mahela Jayawardene – 35 and 157 – 50.43 over 15 years.
Shivnarine Chanderpaul – 38 and 75 – 50.20 over 18 years.
Mike Hussey – 37 and 157 – 50.07 over seven years.
Hashim Amla – 29 and 214 – 49.95 over eight years.
Graeme Smith – 31 and 273 – 49.78 over a decade.
Kevin Pietersen – 32 and 126 – 49.48 over seven years.
AB de Villiers – 28 and 257 – 48.85 over eight years.
Michael Clarke – 31 and 212 – 48.77 over eight years,
Alastair Cook – 27 and 311 – 47.84 over six years.
And Ian Bell – 30 and 203 – 46.83 over eight years.
Just three of the 18 are in their late 20s, the majority are senior citizens and very successful at that.
Let the youngsters the Roarers are roaring for show that consistency at the lower level before they become internationals.
Because you are never too old if you are good enough.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Australian Cricket, Brad Haddin, Cricket

October 31st 2012 @ 4:58am
Chris said | October 31st 2012 @ 4:58am | Report comment
Spot on. I don’t care if a player is 17 or 45, as long as they are in the best 11 cricketers in Australia.
The problem for building a team for “tomorrow” is that tomorrow never comes, and you are permanently left with a sub-par team.
October 31st 2012 @ 5:43am
David Lord said | October 31st 2012 @ 5:43am | Report comment
Spot on yourself Chris.
October 31st 2012 @ 6:26am
Red Kev said | October 31st 2012 @ 6:26am | Report comment
Your headline says it all David, Haddin isn’t “good enough” end of discussion.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:11am
Tanami Mehment said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Your spot on Red Kev
October 31st 2012 @ 12:13pm
Disco said | October 31st 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Precisely.
October 31st 2012 @ 5:17pm
Bludger said | October 31st 2012 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Haddin was part of the “Hilditch Brigade”. For some reason they were favoured over more talented, better performing players. Now Hilditch has been jettisoned Australia can begin building a talented team of performers.
October 31st 2012 @ 5:40am
Cody said | October 31st 2012 @ 5:40am | Report comment
I agree about age not being a factor, but the case of the best wicketkeepers is based on the amount of dismissals, which isn’t exactly the best comparative statistic to use. In terms of batting averages, only Gilchrist had an average higher than 40, while Stewart finished a tick under (at 39.54)
In today’s game, wicketkeepers are required to do more than just keep. Look at MS Dhoni, Kamran Akmal…even Kumar Sangakkara. Not only do they play behind the stumps, but they are critical batters in their sides and some games are even decided by their bat. And in regards to Sangakkara, he’s even been picked as just a batsmen because he is athletic enough to be competent in the field.
And also, for most of those players that are still performing well into their mid to late 30′s, 16 of the 18 batsmen were playing tests before or at age 25. (The two that didn’t get their start – Jonathan Trott and Mike Hussey, were around 28 and 30 respectively)
Brad Haddin didn’t break into the Australian test side until he was 31, and in a way, he hasn’t been seen as the long-term solution (as even the most athletic wicketkeepers barely make past 36 without major injury concerns.
To have Matthew Wade instead of Brad Haddin could be seen as a passing of the guard, and the selectors finally sticking to a long-term option. (Well, that’s how I would see it)
October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am
matt h said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
“And also, for most of those players that are still performing well into their mid to late 30′s, 16 of the 18 batsmen were playing tests before or at age 25. (The two that didn’t get their start – Jonathan Trott and Mike Hussey, were around 28 and 30 respectively)”
That is the crux of it. Just showing that the great batrsmen and keepers either retired or are still going in mid thirties ignores the fact that:
1. All the great keepers retired at around the age that Haddin is now – and Haddin was never in that class, and
2. With a few exceptions (Gilchrest being one), all of the players started in their early to mid 20′s.
These statistics from David Lord are actually the perfect argument for picking a player in their early to mid twenties, getting 10-12 out of them and then replacing them in their mid to late thirties with a new younger player – exactly what has happened to Haddin (and Katich before him, and Hayden before him, and MArk Waugh before him etc, etc)
October 31st 2012 @ 6:08am
Jack said | October 31st 2012 @ 6:08am | Report comment
David. I think that most people realise this, and that it’s the press who continually bring up the age issue. Add to that the parochialism and you’ve got your story. There are always those who will say “give the young blokes a go” regardless of results. And it’s not only cricket that this applies to. Union, League, Football etc. Wade was given his chance and he took it, and has not done too much wrong since. Unfortunate circumstances, but Haddins form had slipped. I agree with Chris, age doesn’t matter. Just get sick and tired of this boring age debate.
October 31st 2012 @ 6:24am
Christo the Daddyo said | October 31st 2012 @ 6:24am | Report comment
I think the problem with the Haddin/Wade issue has been exacerbated by the fact that the selectors haven’t been entirely clear about the reasons for choosing Wade above Haddin.
Most Roarers seem to think Wade is in much better form than Haddin. If the selectors share this view, they should be up front about it.
Equally, if its an age thing, they should be honest about that too. Politically that becomes tricky though, because there will need to be some fancy footwork done as to why players such as Haddin and Katich were dropped, and Ponting and Hussey have been retained.
October 31st 2012 @ 7:16am
ADSA said | October 31st 2012 @ 7:16am | Report comment
David
With a test average of 35.82 after 43 tests perhaps the selectors decided he was too old and not good enough and that Wade could offer alot more if given time to settle into the job. Wade first series produced a ton in the Windies, so that is something to work with and we give him exposure to the best pace attack in the world this summer as part of his development. I can see what the selectors are thinking and the only people who really object to this overdue axing are Blues supporters.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:03am
David Lord said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:03am | Report comment
ADSA, I couldn’t care less which state Haddin comes from, I stick to my belief he is the better gloveman right now, and at least the equal of Wade with the bat.
October 31st 2012 @ 7:58am
MadMonk said | October 31st 2012 @ 7:58am | Report comment
David
Having read your posts these last 3 days I make this observation. You are quick to reply to those that agree with you, quick to jump on those who say foolish things opposing your view, but decidely timid with those well reasoned posts that disagree (like Cody or ADSA).
For my 2 bobs worth, Haddin had a hard act to follow Gilchrist. He was good but on some of those occasions when we needed him to be great he came up a bit short. He was a good servant who was always vulnerable if a credible alternative came along which has now happened. I hope Wade does well.
Ian Healy was a great keeper but remember the controversy when he got marooned on 99 tests because the selectors picked Adam Gilchrist. A year later I wish they had marooned Healy on 89 tests.
Wade is no Gilchrist but he will give it a good shake.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:17am
Bobo said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Ceteris paribus, the younger man gets the nod. And that’s the problem- both Haddin’s keeping and batting has fallen away to the extent that Wade is equal or better than he is. Moreover, Wade will improve; Haddin will only decline.
I’d still pick Hartley or Nevill.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:18am
jameswm said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Or Paine, who did very well in his 2-3 tests, in India, with impeccable glovework and gutsy batting when we needed it. Still, that was a while ago, so he needs to come back and prove himself.
Agree though – everything else being equal, you go with the guy 11 years younger.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:35am
Brett McKay said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:35am | Report comment
It’s worth considering that all five selectors also “wrote off Brad Haddin at 35 in favour of the 24-year-old Matt Wade”, to use your words, David. Clearly they believe Wade will provide a better level of consistency going forward..
October 31st 2012 @ 8:42am
David Lord said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
Morning Brett, you are obviously quite correct in your reasoning, it’s just that I disagree with it. Haddin, in my book, is the far better proposition overall, irrespective of age.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:02am
Brett McKay said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
I’m sure it won’t be the last time we disagree this summer, David! I do understand the sentiment in Haddin being recalled, and I get that he wasn’t technically dropped. I get all that. I happen to think that there is very little between the top handful of ‘keepers around the country currently, and that Wade has gone better than expected on national duty, and thus, deserves to hold his spot. But behind him, there’s a bit of a queue forming, including Paine, Nevill, even Chris Hartley and young Tom Triffitt. And that’s also why they had to make the tough call on Haddin now.
To his great credit, Haddin has taken his omission very well this week, and I hope he does keep playing for NSW for a few more seasons yet.
But I do think this is actually the start of a new era for the selectors – I think that as soon as some batsmen around the country really start piling up the runs, then the likes of Ponting and Hussey, and even Warner and Cowan will be under even more pressure to perform. Ponting and Hussey, especially, could find themselves in a similar boat to Haddin if a younger alternative really starts smashing down the door. Realistically, Ponting and Hussey are series-by-series propositions now..
October 31st 2012 @ 8:42am
Ryan O'Connell said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
I was sad to see Haddin go, but I freely admit it’s because I like the guy. It’s now Wade’s time.
Just on your piece, David. It lists the top 6 keepers in history, how old they were when they retired, and how great their numbers were, as a way of saying age shouldn’t matter. But those great numbers were almost entirely built from earlier in their career, not whilst they were at the age listed? That’s not really saying age shouldn’t matter, it’s just saying they had great careers, isn’t it?
It’s commonly accepted that age will eventually catch up with you – Father Time is undefeated – so it was interesting to note that 3 of those top 6 finished their careers at age 35. That’s Haddin’s age.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:55am
Matt F said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Like most of the others so far I agree with your general point David. I disagree that it has any relevance to Haddin though as I believe that Wade is the best option, not just for the future, but right now as well.