Print

[Gerry SA]

 Rather moronic statements claiming Steven Smith is an 'average player'.

Since his return to the Test side, he's scored 600+ runs at 41. He's 136*, 104*, 92 and 89.

Players do improve over time. Smith looked ropey in his first few Tests, but that was when he was playing as a spinner.

Smith's FC batting average is a shade under 48.

He's only 24 and will get better and better.

He's a fine young batsman. Make no bones about it.

I'll give an example of another player who looked ropey in the infancy of his career, Hashim Amla. And look how great he is now. 

[cricketbadger]

Killing me watching it over here with Channel 9 commentary, give me Nick Knight any day.
They are so biased towards the Aussies, and if you didn't know any better you'd be led to believe Michael Clarke and Dave Warner are the greatest cricketers to ever walk the planet.

Personal favourite yesterday came from Warne as Swann was brought into the attack at which Warne described was the wrong end, 2 balls later he picks up the wicket of 'Captain Courageous' Michael Clarke
They spout utter (No Swearing Please), just like me some of you may think

[joeljonno]

Rather moronic statements claiming Steven Smith is an 'average player'.

Since his return to the Test side, he's scored 600+ runs at 41. He's 136*, 104*, 92 and 89.

Players do improve over time. Smith looked ropey in his first few Tests, but that was when he was playing as a spinner.

Smith's FC batting average is a shade under 48.

He's only 24 and will get better and better.

He's a fine young batsman. Make no bones about it.

I'll give an example of another player who looked ropey in the infancy of his career, Hashim Amla. And look how great he is now.

41 is not world beating, I'd say that is 'average'. You'd expect great players to average 45 -50 these days.

He is a decent player, who plays within his limits, as shown with 47 of his 50 on the leg side. He had one off aide scoring shot in that time.

He is young, and will most likely get better,but to class him in the same breath as Alma is being very presumptuous.

If you said, take any two players in the top 6 to bowl at who is most likely to get out, you'd probably pick Bailey and Smith.

[Gerry SA]

41 is not world beating, I'd say that is 'average'. You'd expect great players to average 45 -50 these days.

He is a decent player, who plays within his limits, as shown with 47 of his 50 on the leg side. He had one off aide scoring shot in that time.

He is young, and will most likely get better,but to class him in the same breath as Alma is being very presumptuous.

If you said, take any two players in the top 6 to bowl at who is most likely to get out, you'd probably pick Bailey and Smith.

An average of 40 is deemed a mark of a Test class batsman.

So no Steven Smith isn't average.

Average would be an average in the 30s.

The comparison to Amla is regarding technical issues in their early career.

Can Smith be as good as Amla? Yeah why not?

[smilley792]

Anyway enough about smith.


Let move onto haddin.

As much as Johnston has steam rolled England tail over and over again. If wade was the aussies keeper and obviously there number 7. Does anyone think the aussies would be 2-0 and on top in test 3?

I think it would be alother closer, haddins batting has saved the aussies every innings!

[Number4]

41 is not world beating, I'd say that is 'average'. You'd expect great players to average 45 -50 these days.

He is a decent player, who plays within his limits, as shown with 47 of his 50 on the leg side. He had one off aide scoring shot in that time.

He is young, and will most likely get better,but to class him in the same breath as Alma is being very presumptuous.

If you said, take any two players in the top 6 to bowl at who is most likely to get out, you'd probably pick Bailey and Smith.

The reason he scored 47 of his 50 runs on the leg side is because England bowled so poorly and so short it was easy pickings.

Did you not see his beautiful cover drives? I clearly remember one off Swann which was sublime

[ProCricketer1982]

All this talk of a averages isn't too good until people retire. I mean is Warner a test batsmen?? Or is he just a player that plays pretty much the same way in tests as ODI's? Same with smith, bailey and Watson (just picking on aus here as you guys were on about smudger).

With cricket changing now, the classic 'test' batsmen are getting fewer and we are left with the smiths, war sons and Warner's (butler, Barstow, bopara etc). Guys who are basically runs ball merchants who happen to play test cricket too. Bowlers are like test bowlers of old anymore as they need all this 'variation' stuff drilled into them before they've mastered bowling top of off or in the corridor time after time after time.

Personally, given the small boundaries, bats, docile pitches and lack of bowling talent around the mark of a good player is higher than it's ever been before. 50 is regarded as 'great', however I reckon that 50 is now just your 'good' batsmen.. Aka test ones. Anything less is not really there. It's shown over time that once 35-40 was good, then 40-45, then 50.. It's just with the ever increasing demand for sloggers and smaller boundaries etc runs we flowing. Whether you think it's a better game for it is open to debate as the loss of the art of one way opens the door to the art of another.

As for smith.. That club cricketer we all love did good!! Hope for us all . Well player sir   (Now get out please so our famed classy batsmen can be out for less than you got ) smith played mostly!! The shots to what crap England bowled at him.. It's not his fault the muppets bowled short and straight to him.. Easy pickings..

Haddin - up most respect for rocking rod Stewart.. 12 months ago he was finished for cricket and personal reasons.. He's come back and is a big a reason for the Aussies winning currently as any other player in that side is.. He's on fire and is showing prior how it's done.

[joeljonno]

An average of 40 is deemed a mark of a Test class batsman.

So no Steven Smith isn't average.

Average would be an average in the 30s.

And he averages 33. According to your rules, he is average.

To pull out stats of certain parts of their career, the need to be averaging 50+ to show quality.

Yes, he is youngish and has potential. I personally cannot see him improving enough to be in the same league as Amla.

[steyn92]

Rather moronic statements claiming Steven Smith is an 'average player'.

Since his return to the Test side, he's scored 600+ runs at 41. He's 136*, 104*, 92 and 89.

Players do improve over time. Smith looked ropey in his first few Tests, but that was when he was playing as a spinner.

Smith's FC batting average is a shade under 48.

He's only 24 and will get better and better.

He's a fine young batsman. Make no bones about it.

I'll give an example of another player who looked ropey in the infancy of his career, Hashim Amla. And look how great he is now.

3 of those 4 scores have been on slabs of concrete. When he scores runs in tough conditions you can call him a fine young bastman

[Alvaro]

Bell didnt always look the player he does these days......... check his record when he was the same age as smith.......theres actually little wrong withcsmiths technique, he looks like hes worked damn hard on improving, what people mostly confuse is his style, which is a little unconditional.

I'm sorry, but that's rubbish. Unconditional?

I'd compare Smith with Collingwood. Bell has always looked good getting out. Now he has the temperament to match the technique, better than the other way round. And you can't argue with 20 Test hundreds.

[Alvaro]

An average of 40 is deemed a mark of a Test class batsman.

So no Steven Smith isn't average.

Average would be an average in the 30s.

The comparison to Amla is regarding technical issues in their early career.

Can Smith be as good as Amla? Yeah why not?

If Smith were a rugby player he'd be Phil de Glanville, serviceable until a better option comes along

[Gerry SA]

If Smith were a rugby player he'd be Phil de Glanville, serviceable until a better option comes along

I'd have Steven Smith over Joe Root everyday of the week. And twice on a Sunday...

[Gerry SA]

3 of those 4 scores have been on slabs of concrete. When he scores runs in tough conditions you can call him a fine young bastman

These so called 'slabs of concrete' Australia premier batsman, Pup, didn't get any when Smith got 92 in Mohali. In fact Pup got a golden duck.

When Smith scored both his hundreds, again Pup didn't.

So he can score runs when Australia's premier batsman fails.

Hallmarks of a class batsman.

[Alvaro]

I'd have Steven Smith over Joe Root everyday of the week. And twice on a Sunday...

Good for you. Why add other variables?

[awp]

The reason he scored 47 of his 50 runs on the leg side is because England bowled so poorly and so short it was easy pickings.

Did you not see his beautiful cover drives? I clearly remember one off Swann which was sublime

That.......and cooks 7 / 2 fields.......! I think theres a number of poms who are commenting on stats without actually watching.