Cricket - best ever, trivia etc
-
Pace bowling has been going ok
Why this is the greatest age for fast bowling in 60 years
In the last 100 Tests, pace attacks worldwide have averaged 26.26 runs per wicket, which is among the best in any 100-match period in Test history
-
@Chris-B said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Is Steve Smith the second best batsman ever now ?
Serious question, his record continues to baffle me but the numbers just don’t lie.
Of course millions of semi literate Indians will argue Tendulkar or Kohli online aye @NTA.....
But Smith really is a freak.
Kohli's pretty freaky as well.
Smith probably shades him in test cricket, but Kohli is phenomenal across all three formats.
Kohli has played 250 ODIs, he's averaging 59 and has been past 50 on more than 100 occasions.
I think test record > odi record will always be the yardstick.
That’s why Steve will always get first choice when they slice the Turkey at the Waugh family Xmas get togethers. I say that as a massive fan of ‘junior’ as well....
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
There’s a reason openers like Gooch, Greenidge and Haynes are regarded as legends despite ‘only’ averaging 42-44. The fast bowlers of that era were exceptional.
Average isn't a great metric by which to judge a career IMO.
One thing that tends to be overlooked is the tail-off in the last few years of a batsman's career, and how the decision on when to retire impacts their end numbers.
I'd put Ricky Ponting right up there in terms of the best I've seen. He ended on an average of about 52, but he would have been well within his rights to retire two years earlier than he did, with an average of about 55 or 56. Instead he hung around for the good of the team even though he was well past his prime.
The same will happen to Smith. He won't sustain his current numbers, unless he decides to retire tomorrow in which case he'll be an all time great.
-
@barbarian Not in my books he won't be. Anyone with a ball tampering suspension cannot be accorded "greatness" in what is supposed to be a gentlemen's game.
-
@akan004 said in Australia v India:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Is Steve Smith the second best batsman ever now ?
Serious question, his record continues to baffle me but the numbers just don’t lie.
Of course millions of semi literate Indians will argue Tendulkar or Kohli online aye @NTA.....
But Smith really is a freak.
Hard to say. He plays on roads compared to batsmen in previous eras and the bowling now is nowhere near as good as it was in the 90s and early 00s imo. As a fan, I would pay good money to see Lara, Tendulkar, Crowe, Mark Waugh and Kohli bat, not so much Steve Smith.
Good points, especially about the more conducive conditions batsmen get these days. I marvel at Smith and his mental ability, that patience against Wags was something else. I reckon he's honing his "answer" to every line and length, and where to score and the risk from there. All that's evident on modern dry, brown roads. I hate his off side shots but the sheer amount of runs so consistently makes my head spin.
But always a niggling doubt that the previous era's bowlers would work him out and exploit all his movements and shuffling. Different pitches too.
Maybe not but if his batting style is copied by learners, I reckon they won't last a season 🙂 -
@antipodean said in Modern batting averages:
@nzzp said in Australia v India:
@mariner4life said in Australia v India:
but it's fucking shit being a bowler. video reviews on every delivery in case you over step. hard ball for 50 overs, but no shining. flat, lifeless pitches. rapid outfields. Going for a run a ball is now seen as a good day out.
shortened boundaries, and the insane bats the batters get. honestly, we should have bowlers getting to choose the ball they use, with higher seams and the ability to shine/deface. It's one sided, and that doens't make for consistently good entertainment.
I enjoyed cricket when it took considerable talent to protect one's wicket, let alone make runs. IMO it's far too slanted in the batsman's favour because run rate is what keeps the crowd entertained these days.
I'm not convinced Smith would get away with his technique 20+ years ago.
-
i want to think that, but then...
what makes him hard to bowl to is his patience. He will sit there and leave and leave and leave until you try something else, bowl too straight, and he hits you through midwicket. his eye is incredible, and surely that brings him undone first. He doesn't have rock solid technique to fall back on when his eye starts to go.
he's scored against pace, he's scored against swing, he's scored against spin. He just scores runs. A bit more variation in the pitch might do it. maybe. i just have to accept the guy is a freak.
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@Chris-B said in Modern batting averages:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Is Steve Smith the second best batsman ever now ?
Serious question, his record continues to baffle me but the numbers just don’t lie.
Of course millions of semi literate Indians will argue Tendulkar or Kohli online aye @NTA.....
But Smith really is a freak.
Kohli's pretty freaky as well.
Smith probably shades him in test cricket, but Kohli is phenomenal across all three formats.
Kohli has played 250 ODIs, he's averaging 59 and has been past 50 on more than 100 occasions.
I think test record > odi record will always be the yardstick.
That’s why Steve will always get first choice when they slice the Turkey at the Waugh family Xmas get togethers. I say that as a massive fan of ‘junior’ as well....
Can't disagree on that - though Kohli is only a gnat's dick behind Smith.
But, Kohli's dominance of ODI stats - well, it's not quite Bradmanesque, but it's fucking impressive.
ODI matches | Batting records | Highest career batting average | ESPNcricinfo
Find records of Highest career batting average in ODI matches only on ESPNcricinfo.
Compare him to Bevan who was sort of a yardstick of ODI excellence.
Mike made 6 hundreds and Kohli has made 43!
I'd say Kohli, de Villiers and Dhoni are top of the ODI pantheon now.
-
Averages in test cricket have actually dropped slightly since their peak. This isn't an especially friendly time for batsmen. Not like it was in 2010 anyway. ODI cricket is different - players seem to be scoring more and more runs. Still
I have always believed that the three forms of the game are distinct. There is no greatest of all time across formats. If there is, I don't ind it that meaningful. In test cricket you could put Smith 2nd. His peak has been insane and no-one will ever take that away from him. I think he will regress though. Tendulkar has the longevity and i think most people would still put him second. Smith's batting in the other formats isn't so good.
This objective list from the ICC puts Smith 2nd. Again though I think those rankings measure someone's peak and not longevity. Regardless, Smith is insane.
-
@hydro11 said in Modern batting averages:
Averages in test cricket have actually dropped slightly since their peak. This isn't an especially friendly time for batsmen. Not like it was in 2010 anyway. ODI cricket is different - players seem to be scoring more and more runs. Still
I have always believed that the three forms of the game are distinct. There is no greatest of all time across formats. If there is, I don't ind it that meaningful. In test cricket you could put Smith 2nd. His peak has been insane and no-one will ever take that away from him. I think he will regress though. Tendulkar has the longevity and i think most people would still put him second. Smith's batting in the other formats isn't so good.
This objective list from the ICC puts Smith 2nd. Again though I think those rankings measure someone's peak and not longevity. Regardless, Smith is insane.
We’re not all Indians
-
@hydro11 Tendulkar not even on that list. There’ll be a meltdown on the subcontinent!
-
@Catogrande said in Modern batting averages:
@hydro11 Tendulkar not even on that list. There’ll be a meltdown on the subcontinent!
Lara isn’t either and some seriously inferior names are. What a loaf of shit.
-
@MN5 said in Modern batting averages:
@Catogrande said in Modern batting averages:
@hydro11 Tendulkar not even on that list. There’ll be a meltdown on the subcontinent!
Lara isn’t either and some seriously inferior names are. What a loaf of shit.
Nor Chris Gayle, someone’s going to have sand in their panties 😂
-
@mariner4life said in Modern batting averages:
i want to think that, but then...
what makes him hard to bowl to is his patience. He will sit there and leave and leave and leave until you try something else, bowl too straight, and he hits you through midwicket. his eye is incredible, and surely that brings him undone first. He doesn't have rock solid technique to fall back on when his eye starts to go.
he's scored against pace, he's scored against swing, he's scored against spin. He just scores runs. A bit more variation in the pitch might do it. maybe. i just have to accept the guy is a freak.
Yeah, I know, the fluffybunny should have been found out by now with that nonsense tailender technique. It doesn't make any sense.
-
Bradman's numbers are so insane that we'll never have any genuine GOAT conversations about modern day players. A few players have managed those numbers for a couple of seasons - I remember Ponting in his prime averaging close to a hundred for a decent period of time, but to just straight up average 95+ across both first class and tests for such a prolonged period is time is absolutely bananas no matter what era it is.
For players playing right now I have Kohli at number one as his numbers across all formats are incredible. He had a pretty slow start to his test career but his average has been climbing for some times now.
-
@No-Quarter said in Modern batting averages:
Bradman's numbers are so insane that we'll never have any genuine GOAT conversations about modern day players. A few players have managed those numbers for a couple of seasons - I remember Ponting in his prime averaging close to a hundred for a decent period of time, but to just straight up average 95+ across both first class and tests for such a prolonged period is time is absolutely bananas no matter what era it is.
Imagine if modern bowlers had to provide batsmen with a sporting opportunity to score runs. How'd Bradman go against bodyline? How do we think he'd go against the WIndies fearsome line up? Not 99.94 I'd wager.
-
@antipodean said in Modern batting averages:
@No-Quarter said in Modern batting averages:
Bradman's numbers are so insane that we'll never have any genuine GOAT conversations about modern day players. A few players have managed those numbers for a couple of seasons - I remember Ponting in his prime averaging close to a hundred for a decent period of time, but to just straight up average 95+ across both first class and tests for such a prolonged period is time is absolutely bananas no matter what era it is.
Imagine if modern bowlers had to provide batsmen with a sporting opportunity to score runs. How'd Bradman go against bodyline? How do we think he'd go against the WIndies fearsome line up? Not 99.94 I'd wager.
Yeah but those arguments are pretty churlish and discredit a genuine great of Bradmans era in Wally Hammond who ‘only’ averaged 58.
I just don’t think you can logically argue that Bradman isn’t the most dominant ( relative to his peers and all time ) sportsman of all time.
