The Cricket Thread

[Rod]

Can't argue with that, Rod. I like that he has his own style and is running with it. Total respect.

Did you follow the India v. Australia series?

I definitely did! Enjoyed Smith's batting, the way he batted in Pune was amazing. It was like watching a warrior leading from the front. IMO that series showed why he is the best batsman in the world. Unlike Williamson, Root and Kohli he can adapt his game ANYWHERE, whether it be sub-continent pitches, english pitches or at the Caribbean. Thought the result was good in Australia's perspective considering they were predicting a 4-0 win India's way. I still think Australia and South Africa are the two best Test nations, I really don't get how you can rank a team that only plays and wins home first.

How about you?!

[Joseph41]

I definitely did! Enjoyed Smith's batting, the way he batted in Pune was amazing. It was like watching a warrior leading from the front. IMO that series showed why he is the best batsman in the world. Unlike Williamson, Root and Kohli he can adapt his game ANYWHERE, whether it be sub-continent pitches, english pitches or at the Caribbean. Thought the result was good in Australia's perspective considering they were predicting a 4-0 win India's way. I still think Australia and South Africa are the two best Test nations, I really don't get how you can rank a team that only plays and wins home first.

How about you?!

Yeah, I watched a lot of it. Really great series. I was expecting 4-0 or 3-0, so I reckon Australia did pretty bloody well in the end.

Smith truly is amazing. If this were the schoolyard and I had to pick those four players one-by-one (specifically for Tests), I'd probably go Smith >> Williamson > Root >> Kohli.

Williamson/Root was the toughest call, and would probably change on a day-by-day basis haha. Smith is some next level shit.

EDIT: Just checked - surprised Williamson only ("only") averages 51.

[pixonman]

Yeah, I watched a lot of it. Really great series. I was expecting 4-0 or 3-0, so I reckon Australia did pretty bloody well in the end.

Smith truly is amazing. If this were the schoolyard and I had to pick those four players one-by-one (specifically for Tests), I'd probably go Smith >> Williamson > Root >> Kohli.

Williamson/Root was the toughest call, and would probably change on a day-by-day basis haha. Smith is some next level shit.

EDIT: Just checked - surprised Williamson only ("only") averages 51.

Did India play well in this match?

[Sine]

Yeah, I watched a lot of it. Really great series. I was expecting 4-0 or 3-0, so I reckon Australia did pretty bloody well in the end.

Smith truly is amazing. If this were the schoolyard and I had to pick those four players one-by-one (specifically for Tests), I'd probably go Smith >> Williamson > Root >> Kohli.

Williamson/Root was the toughest call, and would probably change on a day-by-day basis haha. Smith is some next level shit.

EDIT: Just checked - surprised Williamson only ("only") averages 51.

You know cricket isn't doing too well when those 4 names are in the conversation for the best test batsmen smh

smith averages 43 in england so doesn't do too well when the pitch isn't dead flat and averages 160 against the west indies LOL. So basically a stat sheet stuffer.

also he averages like 33 in the 4th innings so unable to close any games

[Joseph41]

^Gee, that's a big call on Smith. Where do you rate him in relation to Williamson, Root and Kohli?

[pixonman]

^Gee, that's a big call on Smith. Where do you rate him in relation to Williamson, Root and Kohli?

Smith is the best!

[Joseph41]

You know cricket isn't doing too well when those 4 names are in the conversation for the best test batsmen smh

smith averages 43 in england so doesn't do too well when the pitch isn't dead flat and averages 160 against the west indies LOL. So basically a stat sheet stuffer.

also he averages like 33 in the 4th innings so unable to close any games

Smith averages 41+ against all seven Test opponents he's faced (England, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies). Of those, his lowest are against England (43.19) and Sri Lanka (41.17). His last Test against England was ~18 months ago (and in that series, he averaged 56.44); he's played a total of three Tests against Sri Lanka. Against all other nations, he averages 53+.

He averages 68.66 in Australia (from 23 Tests) and 55.84 overseas (from 30 Tests).

You've correctly identified that he averages 33.33 in fourth innings. For context, Sachin Tendulkar averaged 36.93; Brian Lara averaged 35.12; Steve Waugh averaged 25.54.

Probably a stretch to call him a stat sheet stuffer lol.

Source for all of the above: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/home.asp

EDIT: And his calendar years:

2014: 81.86 (England, South Africa, Pakistan, India)
2015: 73.70 (England, South Africa, India, West Indies, New Zealand, Pakistan)
2016: 71.93 (West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Pakistan)
2017 thus far: 64.67 (Pakistan, India)

[Sine]

Smith averages 41+ against all seven Test opponents he's faced (England, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, West Indies). Of those, his lowest are against England (43.19) and Sri Lanka (41.17). His last Test against England was ~18 months ago (and in that series, he averaged 56.44); he's played a total of three Tests against Sri Lanka. Against all other nations, he averages 53+.

He averages 68.66 in Australia (from 23 Tests) and 55.84 overseas (from 30 Tests).

You've correctly identified that he averages 33.33 in fourth innings. For context, Sachin Tendulkar averaged 36.93; Brian Lara averaged 35.12; Steve Waugh averaged 25.54.

Probably a stretch to call him a stat sheet stuffer lol.

Source for all of the above: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/home.asp

EDIT: And his calendar years:

2014: 81.86 (England, South Africa, Pakistan, India)
2015: 73.70 (England, South Africa, India, West Indies, New Zealand, Pakistan)
2016: 71.93 (West Indies, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Pakistan)
2017 thus far: 64.67 (Pakistan, India)

sorry for the delayed response - had an MST 

haven't really given much thought into who out of those 4 to be the best. Most valuable player (not necessarily best) imo would be Williamson.

but for  all the "other" 3 here are there 4th innings averages
Williamson : 66.90 (5th all time)
Kohli : 61.42 (9th all time)
Root : 36.14
Smith : 33.33.
For the record Bradman is 4th all time (73.40) and for another Australian comparison Ponting with 50.41

There have been 225 different 4th innings hundreds in the entire history of Test cricket. Williamson has 3, Kohli 2, Smith/Root 0

I'm not arguing that he hasn't put up the number etc It is way more important to be scoring runs when it's difficult to score runs and your team is struggling.

but averages don't really say much about when the runs were scored etc because Smith and Kohli play most of their matches on flat pitches and it is a completely different story for New Zealand and England.


also thanks for the down-vote for whoever did that 

[Joseph41]

^I mean, I agree with you that you can only read so much into statistics. Otherwise, we'd all be raving about Adam Voges being one of the greatest of all time (now Voges was a bit of a flat-track bully, but IMO not Smith). But where specifically are you contending that Smith hasn't performed?

I don't usually back Australian players in this way and I don't particularly rate our team at the moment, but I think Smith would be very widely acknowledged as one of the best players in the world - if not the best.

[Sine]

ehh it's more the media etc Aus does badly oversease - never gets spoken about in aus etc. I'd rather someone score 90 in a game where no one can really get in than score a hundred when 3+ other players do the same.

ok so take the India vs Aus Test series
the numbers are : (smiths' runs/total aus runs)
1st Test: 1st innings scores 27/260
               2nd innings scores 109/285 (dropped 3 times)
2nd Test 1st innings scores 8/276
               2nd innings scores 28/112 (chasing 188)
3rd Test  1st innings scores 178*/451 (even Maxwell scored a hundred/India's number 8 also scored a hundred/pujara scores a double hundred)
                2nd innings scores 21/204 (with a night watchmen)
4th Test  1st innings scores 111/300
               2nd innings scores 17/137 (its a balanced game after each side plays their first innings - flops - loses series)

You can either say he scored 500 (499) runs in the series or see that he was lucky in the first test - choked in the 2nd test - padded his stats in the 3rd test - loses the series in the 4th.

For the argument that Smith is the best  - maybe? I can see why people think so but not much for comparison in this era

[Rod]

ehh it's more the media etc Aus does badly oversease - never gets spoken about in aus etc. I'd rather someone score 90 in a game where no one can really get in than score a hundred when 3+ other players do the same.

A bunch of statistics in cricket aren't powerful when you have some batsmen who get to play in flat pitches throughout most of their career. For example Indian batsmen, IMO, an Australian/South-African-English average of 40 is equivalent to an Indian average of 50. Unlike in India those teams play in fast, bouncy and greener pitches where it's harder to score runs. Whereas in India its a run fest.

So you just can't use statistics to compare batsmen. In MY opinion Smith is the best because of his ability to adapt to different game styles depending on the pitch. He is like a different batsman depending on where he plays, that's something really, really, really difficult to do. It's something Kohli and Williamson can't do, Root can kind of do but Smith is clearly the best.

Enjoy him while he lasts!

[Sine]

A bunch of statistics in cricket aren't powerful when you have some batsmen who get to play in flat pitches throughout most of their career. For example Indian batsmen, IMO, an Australian/South-African-English average of 40 is equivalent to an Indian average of 50. Unlike in India those teams play in fast, bouncy and greener pitches where it's harder to score runs. Whereas in India its a run fest.

So you just can't use statistics to compare batsmen. In MY opinion Smith is the best because of his ability to adapt to different game styles depending on the pitch. He is like a different batsman depending on where he plays, that's something really, really, really difficult to do. It's something Kohli and Williamson can't do, Root can kind of do but Smith is clearly the best.

Enjoy him while he lasts!

pretty sure i said that I don't rate batsmen by stats and never once said any batsmen was better than the other LOL
smith averages 60+? who cares if you can't come up big when your team needs you to.
Aus/SA pitches + weather are comparable
NZ/ENG pitches + weather are comparable
imo Indian pitches are just shit in general

it's pretty hard to judge initially how good an innings is. e.g scores a hundred  - good job - oh wait two of your team mates and two on the oppositions side go on to do the same thing.

Smith needs to adapt due to his unconventional technique which will fail him in his 30's once his hand-eye coordination goes out the window.
I feel you are isolating players batting and then judging which is fine - I'd rather have a look at the impact of the batting on the team.
I personally value team achievements far beyond individual ones.

He is arguably the most effective batsmen right now. I just feel it is a bit early to be making comparisons to players who have legend status.

XO 

[Rod]

Ahh okay sorry I pretty much skimmed through your big wall of texts lol.

Everyone has their own technique IMO. There is no such thing as a ''conventional'' technique anymore because pitches all around the world are so different. There is no such technique that allows you to play effectively in all Indian, Australian, English, etc. pitches. That's why Smith is so good, he has the ability to change everything up and still be effective. Something other batsmen are unable to do. As someone who has played competitive cricket for the last 12 years batting is sooooo hard. Perfecting technique is something cricketers work on throughout their entire career. And then there is Smith who is able to change up his technique to suit the pitch!

Sure he is no match winner but a game of cricket isn't like soccer/footy to be a dominating team you need several players to perform well. That's why it's one of the greatest games in the world, it's so difficult, it's so tactical and interesting. At the moment he is doing a heck of a lot for the team - almost carrying the batting.

Look I also agree he still has a long way to go but what he has been doing is really exciting for all Australians. I really hope he can keep up this form for 3-4 more years then he can really start gaining legend status.

[Joseph41]

#CT2017 didn't go so well for Australia lol.

[Rod]

I don't think anyone expected Australia, NZ and South Africa to be eliminated before the finals.

For me South Africa were the most disappointing. I expected so much from them. They are on the way down imo, won't see SA at its best for a long time.