Are tons really that impressive in this era?

[Cabinet96]

High pressure tonnes? He batted 5 behind Warner and Clarke having great seasons.

Neither made big runs at Perth or Sydney. Clarke certainly didn't at Centurion, don't think Warner did either. I mean, that's kind of the point. It's not just that his average was good, he made really important runs often coming in reasonably early.

 

[Spark]

Neither made big runs at Perth or Sydney. Clarke certainly didn't at Centurion, don't think Warner did either. I mean, that's kind of the point. It's not just that his average was good, he made really important runs often coming in reasonably early.

the only and i mean literally the only case it could apply to was cape town, and even then it was a first innings ton against steyn + morkel + philander in a series decider. it counts.

this is not mentioning the fact he looked genuinely secure against swing in england (something none of us thought we'd ever say) and was very solid in india on actual turning decks when everyone else looked clueless (save for clarke, who at that stage was falling apart anyway).

 

[cnerd123]

Rather than death by a thousand out of context paper cuts, like you guys seem to be focusing on at the moment by taking small pieces of my argument out of context, then asking me to answer points on them, then asking relevance to the overall point, let's go back to the overall point

1. Steven Smith has been made to look awesome due to how bad the Indian bowling attack is.
2. The Australian team has been setting batting records this series due to how bad the Indian bowling attack is
3. The Australian bowlers aren't that much better, as seen by their time in UAE and other results, they're just fortunate India is so bad
4. The pitches in Australia have been so easy to bat on, that every time a side batting first bats, they're scoring over 500 for the first time in a series, ever.
5. We'll confirm for sure the next time either Kohli or Smith play a series against a half decent bowling attack whether this was flat track minnow bashing or something else.

Right
Right
Wrong
50/50
Wrong

Australia have bowled well this series. Smith and Kohli have already scored runs against good bowlers in the very recent past. Kohli's performance this series is nowhere close to minnow bashing. You keep saying your main argument isn't Kohli but keep bringing his name up.

Time to retire mate.

 

[OverratedSanity]

the only and i mean literally the only case it could apply to was cape town, and even then it was a first innings ton against steyn + morkel + philander in a series decider. it counts.

That's my favourite ton of his tbh. No way does that apply. 1st innings tons ftw.

 

[Blocky]

the only reason you can say this is because we can't catch. if we could, the statistics would reflect the reality i.e. a very solid bowling performances on pitches offering ****-all.

as for the last point. no one has argued against this. ever. at all. no one is saying that smith's tons in this series are what makes him quality. no one is saying smith's tons in this series are more significant than the scores he made in the previous year. but the ****ing point is that he made those scores, so there's no basis to suggest that he wouldn't do well against good attacks when he's spent 18 months doing little but do well against good attacks.

The entire thread is about whether or not tonnes in the current era mean as much as they used to... which mostly has been a debate about this particular series due to how many tonnes Kohli and Smith have scored, in amongst how many runs their team have scored.

"Smith doing well against good attacks" - he was great in South Africa, absolutely. He prospered by being 5 against England and coming in when the job was done and in the UAE, the team that followed (New Zealand) showed a lot more with the bat than Smith and co did. Warner was the exception. Again, bringing that back to the actual argument, the runs in this series seem to be more about the opposition than Smith himself. Neither of us will know for sure until Smith plays his next series.

 

[Spark]

That's my favourite ton of his tbh. No way does that apply. 1st innings tons ftw.

it wasn't a ton mind you

significant for the greatest shots ever aka whacking morkel and philander over their heads for six, though

edit: i just realised i got it wrong too. oh well, 90 = 100 to first order

 

[OverratedSanity]

I don't know why we need to "wait for the next time" Kohli and Smith play a decent attack. That's all they did in 2014. They toured almost every country with a good attack, and apart from Kohli in England, they were first class everywhere.

 

[Blocky]

Neither made big runs at Perth or Sydney. Clarke certainly didn't at Centurion, don't think Warner did either. I mean, that's kind of the point. It's not just that his average was good, he made really important runs often coming in reasonably early.

Yeah, but that goes back to my statement about Smith - he was a batsman capable of occasional brilliance but lacked consistency until this series, even the South African series that you're giving him credit for - three failures out of five innings.

 

[Spark]

The entire thread is about whether or not tonnes in the current era mean as much as they used to... which mostly has been a debate about this particular series due to how many tonnes Kohli and Smith have scored, in amongst how many runs their team have scored.

"Smith doing well against good attacks" - he was great in South Africa, absolutely. He prospered by being 5 against England and coming in when the job was done and in the UAE, the team that followed (New Zealand) showed a lot more with the bat than Smith and co did. Warner was the exception. Again, bringing that back to the actual argument, the runs in this series seem to be more about the opposition than Smith himself. Neither of us will know for sure until Smith plays his next series.

you definitely didn't watch the ashes, then. or have you forgotten that we were 5/100 or 5/150 in almost every test?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah, but that goes back to my statement about Smith - he was a batsman capable of occasional brilliance but lacked consistency until this series, even the South African series that you're giving him credit for - three failures out of five innings.

 

[Blocky]

I don't know why we need to "wait for the next time" Kohli and Smith play a decent attack. That's all they did in 2014. They toured almost every country with a good attack, and apart from Kohli in England, they were first class everywhere.

Kohli's tonne in NZ came in a game where the opposition scored 680 in the innings immediately following his, on a pitch that just saw another world record partnership fall.
Put into perspective, Sanga in the same position scored 200.

 

[cnerd123]

Blocky makes his points
Most reasonable but some wrong
We argue the wrong ones
He loses
He accuses us of taking him out of context
He re-iterates his main points, emphasizing the ones no one has any disagreement with, but slyly repeating his wrong points
We pick the wrong points and argue again
The circle goes on and on
Our post counts swell and my finger gets tired from clicking like

Time to call it a day IMO.

 

[Blocky]

you definitely didn't watch the ashes, then. or have you forgotten that we were 5/100 or 5/150 in almost every test?

TBH, All I remember about the Ashes was that the game was over before it started due to how scared the Poms were of Johnson and also how amazingly Haddin played compared to anyone else.

 

[cnerd123]

TBH, All I remember about the Ashes was that the game was over before it started due to how scared the Poms were of Johnson and also how amazingly Haddin played compared to anyone else.

 

[Spark]

TBH, All I remember about the Ashes was that the game was over before it started due to how scared the Poms were of Johnson and also how amazingly Haddin played compared to anyone else.

then i suggest you stop making outlandish statements on cricket you can't remember.

 

[Blocky]

By the way, another stat for you.

Before this series, never had both sides scored 400+ in their first innings in every test.

then i suggest you stop making outlandish statements on cricket you can't remember.

Like you, with 2003/2004 perhaps?

 

[OverratedSanity]

Kohli's tonne in NZ came in a game where the opposition scored 680 in the innings immediately following his, on a pitch that just saw another world record partnership fall.
Put into perspective, Sanga in the same position scored 200.

Sure sure, match done and all but tbh I was afraid Wed collapse in a heap on the final day. Needed someone to do what Kohli didHeHe came in at ****all for two down with plenty of overs to go to save the test.

Regardless, he also scored an awesome 70 odd in that failed run chase in Auckland.

 

[Blocky]

Sure sure, match done and all but tbh I was afraid Wed collapse in a heap on the final day. Needed someone to do what Kohli didHeHe came in at ****all for two down with plenty of overs to go to save the test.

Regardless, he also scored an awesome 70 odd in that failed run chase in Auckland.

Yeah, but I'd again like to reiterate I really rate Kohli and think he's a star in the making, but I don't think he's as good as his numbers in this series are, I think that's more systemic of everything I've been saying - this is about the worst series of all time bowling wise on pitches that suit the batsmen. Smith has profited more than Kohli, Kohli is far more likely to be a 50+ player over a long career.

 

[OverratedSanity]

By the way, another stat for you.

Before this series, never had both sides scored 400+ in their first innings in every test.



Like you, with 2003/2004 perhaps?

He said he watched 03/04 vs India and remembers how bad Australia's attackwwas, so no idea wtf you're saying.

 

[Spark]

By the way, another stat for you.

Before this series, never had both sides scored 400+ in their first innings in every test.



Like you, with 2003/2004 perhaps?

uh, i can. which is why my recollection of the bowling in that series matches the recollection of everyone else.