I’ll admit it, I’ve been one of Brad Haddin’s biggest critics in recent years and when Matthew Wade debuted in the West Indies in 2012, I thought Haddin had played his last Test.
The young left-hander (25 at the time) had the ability to fill the role of wicketkeeper for Australia for the next ten years.
In 12 Test matches, Wade scored 623 runs at 34.61 and scored two centuries: one home and one abroad.
But after a lean series in India, where he scored 113 runs at 18.83, the selectors decided a more seasoned campaigner was needed for the upcoming Ashes series in England.
Brad Haddin, who had pulled out of the tour of the West Indies in which Wade debuted for family reasons, returned to the Test team as vice-captain.
Although he broke the record for most catches in a Test series, Haddin only passed 50 twice. In 10 innings, he scored 206 runs at a modest 22.88, with a strike rate of 49.40.
The 2013/14 Ashes series, as we all know, was a different story.
Many people are of the opinion that, aside from Mitchell Johnson, the stocky right-hander was the player of the series. That sentiment is hard to argue with; not only did Haddin score almost 500 runs at 61.62, but his runs also came when Australia really needed them.
His only failure of the series, five in the second innings at Perth, came when Australia were in control of the match.
Scores of 94, 53, 118, 55, five, 65, 75 and 28 show us he had the best series of his career. He doubled his run tally from the previous Ashes series, and scored 163 runs more than he had in any other series.
But one good series with the bat doesn’t make up for three poor years with the bat.
Before this successful Ashes campaign, Haddin’s last century was back in November 2010 – in his last successful series with the bat.
He scored 360 runs in that series at an average of 45.00, but the next five series yielded averages of 18.00, 19.00, 33.33, 28.66 and 25.50.
His career batting average is 36.67, repaired somewhat by the last Ashes series, but this number does not match his talent.
To put things into perspective, here’s a stat: on average, Brad Haddin scores a century once every 22.75 innings. Matthew Wade scores one every 11.
Their first-class records are remarkably similar, with Haddin averaging 39.88 and Wade averaging an even 39, but Wade is 10 years in Haddin’s junior.
If Haddin wants to remain Australia’s first choice keeper, his performances have to become much more consistent, especially seeing as Australia’s top order is so fragile.
In the end, that may be the only think keeping him in the team – that and the fact Wade’s glove-work needs to improve.
As long as he is consistent, Brad Haddin is Australia’s first choice wicketkeeper. But he has a much younger man breathing down his neck – a man who was recently named as the captain of his state.
Maybe that has been the catalyst in his revival, and maybe seeing Wade in his place made him train harder.
If that is the case, then I have some advice for Hadds: keep looking behind you.
Track Wade’s progress. If he improves, you need to improve more. If he takes four catches, take five. If he makes a half-century, make a century.
If you are complacent, it will be your downfall.
Keep working. Keep improving. Keep looking behind you.
dave
Guest
shane warne bowling matty wade keeping.
Darren
Guest
So right near the end of your article you come to the startling conclusion that maybe Haddin is in the team ahead of Wade - as wicketkeeper - because he is a better wicketkeeper than Wade. Fair to say that sentence wiped out the rest of the article.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
He seems to have improved a heap. He's still shocking, but he has improved greatly. He should just give up the gloves and try for a bating spot though.
Sportnut
Guest
And I would have known what it was about.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Considering he said you know nothing, I think a Sgt Schutlz reference would have been more apt.
Sportnut
Guest
I have to admit I had to google the Game of Thrones reference. Still don't know if it's an insult or a compliment. I am disappointed that he is not the dwarf.
Sportnut
Guest
No, I am Sportnut. Here to have fun, take the odd pot shot and exercise my god given right to be right about everything. ;-) I no longer will quibble With the boy called Dibble Who argues like Sybil And occasionally dribbles I would like to engage you in a battle of wits, but alas you appear to be hopelessly unarmed.
AlanKC
Guest
In which case: "Mark Boucher would be the best wicketkeeper-batsman of all time — but we all know that that’s not true." How can you say that?
Tom Dibble
Roar Rookie
There's no way to compare them. I said in another comment that there is no statistic, such as % of chances taken, that allows us to do this.
Tom Dibble
Roar Rookie
Are you Jon Snow? Because you know nothing.
AlanKC
Guest
As an opinion, that appears to have gone through to the keeper.
AlanKC
Guest
I don't think it's impossible at all to say one keeper is better than another. Eg. Rod Marsh was a much better keeper than John McLean (going back a bit); Ian Healey was a much better keeper than Wayne Phillips; Chris Hartley (insert preferred name here) is a much much better keeper than Matthew Wade (and Hartley is now coming under some pressure from James Peirson).
AlanKC
Guest
First a disclaimer: When Haddin was brought back into the test side I thought it was a mistake given how poorly he'd been playing (as a keeper and as a batsman) in the lead up, the missed chance off Root, for me confirmed my opinion, but he has well and truly recaptured his glory days (plus a bit) and has some credit in the bank. My full respect goes to him for supporting his family and now coming back better than ever! Now, I don't think you can say Haddin was a protected species given he was dropped for Wade and if Wade had actually gone okay, Hadds wouldn't have been reselected. Wade has only himself to blame for that. On Wade's ascension to the captaincy of Victoria a cynic might suggest that the Vic selectors were trying to give him a leg up into the Test team - overlooking his deficiencies with the gloves. Regardless of Wade's selection in the 20/20 team there are a heck of a lot of better keepers around the country than him.
Sportnut
Guest
Tom, the saying above is nothing more than a saying. It doesn't have to be logical. But it is based on sound logic unlike your headphone example. Listening is a skill that requires practice and you don't listen if you want to talk all the time. A formal debate is completed with a rebuttal where you get the chance to show how well you have listened. In any conversation it is often better to remain silent and appear stupid than to open your mouth and prove it. Yes it is an opinion site. Yes you can have any opinion you want. Yes you can defend it, but do it with grace and good humour. You might enjoy it more.
Tom Dibble
Roar Rookie
That is completely illogical. You have two ears, yes, but you don't listen to two different songs through two different sets of headphones at once, do you? No, therefore the ratio should be 1:1. In a conversation, you typically talk just as much as you listen. In a debate, both sides are given an equal opportunity to present their argument. If you actually took the time to read the piece, you'd see that it is about the fact that Brad Haddin is the best wicketkeeper-batsman in the country at the moment and why I believe that he must improve to in order to justify his selection. My opinion may not be right? An opinion can never be wrong. That's why it's called an opinion. An opinion, by definition, is something that is not set in stone. The tagline of this website is 'Your Sporting Opinion'. It's up there at the top of the page. Check it out. Only those who do not operate within the guidelines of the medium through which they voice their opinion should be ejected from such medium.
Sportnut
Guest
Tom, the Roar has spoken. You have expressed your opinion and defended it to the hilt. Opinions are like bums though. Everyone has got one. There is a saying that you have 2 ears and 1 mouth - please use them in that ratio. That is listen twice as much as you speak. In here you have 1 opinion and 2 eyes to read the collective wisdom (ok that may be a stretch) of the group. Good on you for providing an opinion that evoked a response. Open the non Victorian eye and consider the opinions of the others on here. It makes it easier to understand and accept that your opinion may not be right. Finally, when you are down at your local with your mates do you ask the bouncer to chuck out a friend who makes a glib comment in the heat of a disagreement about an opinion. I hope not.
Tom Dibble
Roar Rookie
Gooner, I don't understand you at all. It's impossible to say that one keeper is definitely better than another. If there was a percentage of catches taken statistic, that would be ideal. If keeper A took 95% of the catches that came to him and keeper B only took 93%, you would be incontrovertibly correct in saying that keeper A is the better keeper, but as there is no such statistic, it is impossible to be definitive. You could argue that whoever average the most catches per game is the best keeper, but we all know that keepers can only take catches when bowlers get batsmen to edge the ball. And if you based your answer on catches alone, then Mark Boucher would be the best wicketkeeper-batsman of all time -- but we all know that that's not true. As for Matt's father, I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm from Victoria, and most occurrences in Tasmania don't make the news here (no offence meant).
Nudge
Guest
Great news, the only tour game starting on Wednesday has already been cancelled. (Washout)
Gooner
Guest
No I prefer one of any of these people who can actually call themselves wicket keepers and not be laughed out of town Sam whiteman: young but a great gloves man and a much better bat than wade Peter Handscomb: young as well haven't seen him keep much (because for some reason Victoria persists with wade! Must be those photos!!) but from people who know about keeping ie Healy, they rate him much higher than wade. Hartley: much better than wade at both batting and keeping Paine: same as above, technically better bat than wade, although the stats don't back that up. I know who I'd rather have in the middle with a game on the line. Nevill: fantastic keeper There's more I'm sure but I'm done arguing with people who think the national team should be a place to play some hack that they only like because he plays for, but wasn't born in, their(did I use the right there there Tom?!) home state. By the way how is Matthews fathers reputation in Tasmanian football leagues going?
Tom Dibble
Roar Rookie
This is regarding your latest comment. I con't reply to it for some reason. When I submitted this article last night, I named it 'Don't rest on your laurels, Brad'. The site's admin changed the name. When I sat down to write it, it was meant to be a piece which focused on Brad Haddin's career and the need for him to perform on a regular basis. I compared him to Matty Wade because I believe that he is not far behind Haddin in selection, and tried to write the article as though Wade was hot on his heels. At the end of the day, Wade is the second best wicketkeeper-batsman in the country according to the selectors. That can not be argued.