The legacy of Steve Smith

[ankitj]

2018 in SA was an outright failure. Last 2021 BG was a minor underperformance by his lofty standards. My lingering memory of that series is Smith being bowled by Bumrah on leg stump. I was 'dang! finally someone got the shuffler that way!'

He scored something like 0, 1*, 1, 10 in first 2 tests iirc. In next 2 he scored 2 fifties and 1 hundred.

 

[OverratedSanity]

However, did well against SA in this series with a very good attack.

Yeah I dunno, this always annoys me. This SA attack was good only on paper. In reality they bowled absolute trash for the most part and I would not consider big runs against them an amazing accomplishment unlike some other Smith series. Decades from now some muppet will statsguru it and go "wow Smith dominated all time great Rabada" not knowing Rabada bowled complete dross.

 

[ZK$]

Yeah, you have to look at a bowler’s series average to get an idea of how well they bowled.

 

[Slifer]

These occasional "failures" of Smith are so precious. He "failed" in last BG trophy too.

Wait what? He averaged 44.7. OK yeah I just noticed the quotes. By his standards, that was a failure.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

We've done this dance before. Sachin played in a more bowler friendly era in the 90s but he hardly got the better of the great attacks then. He also played significantly into a much weaker bowling era as well.

I'd like to know the subpar attacks Smith has plundered? WI, India, NZ, RSA, Eng? None of these are remotely as bad as Zim/Ban of Sachin's time. And Smith averages 60 outside Australia so he's plundered runs all over the world. Smith has the consistency of Sachin (more so imo) and the series dominance of a Viv or a Lara. Amazing batsman. Smith is as far ahead of his contemporaries as Sachin was of his.

Well the West Indies bowling attacks are nowhere near as good as they were in the 70s or 80s or 90s. Same with South Africa....the bowlers now are nowhere near as good as Donald and Pollock. Steve though was excellent.

 

[Slifer]

Tendulkar has RSA covered. Average of 51 with 5 centuries, most by any visiting batsman in SA and he faced at least one of Donald/Pollock/Steyn on each tour. SA with Donald would be cherrypicking bit too finely.

EDIT: 51 in that 18 year period. 46 overall.

One of ? No. Please do series with both Donald and Pollock. One great bowler does not a great attack make.

 

[Slifer]

Well the West Indies bowling attacks are nowhere near as good as they were in the 70s or 80s or 90s. Same with South Africa....the bowlers now are nowhere near as good as Donald and Pollock. Steve though was excellent.

Roll call:

India now better than ever (atg especially at home)
NZ ditto
England ditto (moreso at home)
RSA awash Steyn/Philander/Morkel =90s
Wi much inferior but are very good at home
SL/Pak much inferior to the 90s
Aus awash with the 90s edging because of Warne

I'd actually like to see Smith face WI in the Caribbean but that's not scheduled to happen until maybe 2025 and who knows how he'll be by then. Still, Smith is likely playing in a slightly weaker bowling era than the 90s but this era is still better than the 2000s where SRT, BCL etc certainly cashed in.

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah I dunno, this always annoys me. This SA attack was good only on paper. In reality they bowled absolute trash for the most part and I would not consider big runs against them an amazing accomplishment unlike some other Smith series. Decades from now some muppet will statsguru it and go "wow Smith dominated all time great Rabada" not knowing Rabada bowled complete dross.

Yeah its a toughie. Sometimes bowlers end up with poor figures because the batsmen dominated them, in this case he was just wayward from the second test on. I think Smith scoring the same runs in SA would be more meaningful.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

No they weren't. Smith's numbers are unprecedented because on top of the average and conversion there are several achievements he had Sachin never did. Two 700 + series, 3 + hundreds in a series four times, a century in each innings of a test etc. How exactly are Sachin's numbers better? Like seriously.

I was talking about Averages ?
Sachin's better.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

Roll call:

India now better than ever (atg especially at home)
NZ ditto
England ditto (moreso at home)
RSA awash Steyn/Philander/Morkel =90s
Wi much inferior but are very good at home
SL/Pak much inferior to the 90s
Aus awash with the 90s edging because of Warne

I'd actually like to see Smith face WI in the Caribbean but that's not scheduled to happen until maybe 2025 and who knows how he'll be by then. Still, Smith is likely playing in a slightly weaker bowling era than the 90s but this era is still better than the 2000s where SRT, BCL etc certainly cashed in.

1990s

Tendulkar - 5626 runs @ 58.00

Lara - 5573 runs @ 51.60

Both cashed in during the 1990s too - a stronger era for pace and spin.

 

[Slifer]

Yeah its a toughie. Sometimes bowlers end up with poor figures because the batsmen dominated them, in this case he was just wayward from the second test on. I think Smith scoring the same runs in SA would be more meaningful.

He already did that in 2014: 269 runs in 5 innings averaging 67 vs Steyn, Morkel and Philander. That other poster trying downplay it, imo, is equivalent to me downplaying Sachin dominating Warne because Warne had some mysterious injury or was bowling trash.

 

[Slifer]

1990s

Tendulkar - 5626 runs @ 58.00

Lara - 5573 runs @ 51.60

Both cashed in during the 1990s too - a stronger era for pace and spin.

Sachin and Lara owe those averages in the 90s to scoring big vs the lesser attacks. Fact. The better attacks in that era would be Aus, WI, Pak and Rsa. But you can't just leave it there. Rsa with any two of Donald/Pollock/DeVilliers, Pak:the Ws, WI: Curtly and Walsh, Australia : McWarne. Those were the truly great attacks.

As an example people would look at Sachin's record in the 90s vs Australia and conclude yeah he dominated their great attacks. False, he faced McWarne in 3 series and did ok and well in 2 and failed in the other. He made runs in the '97 series with McGrath absent and again in 2004 (I believe) when again McGrath was a no show.

 

[subshakerz]

He already did that in 2014: 269 runs in 5 innings averaging 67 vs Steyn, Morkel and Philander. That other poster trying downplay it, imo, is equivalent to those me downplaying Sachin dominating Warne because Warne had some mysterious injury or was bowling trash.

Yup he scored those runs so he gets credit, but if you remember that series, a lot of damage was done by other bats up the order and he was doing quite a bit of downhill skiing. Certainly not a standout series the way he dominated in India in 2017 or even Tendulkar dominating Steyn in 2010.

 

[subshakerz]

Sachin and Lara owe those averages in the 90s to scoring big vs the lesser attacks. Fact. The better attacks in that era would be Aus, WI, Pak and Rsa. But you can't just leave it there. Rsa with any two of Donald/Pollock/DeVilliers, Pak:the Ws, WI: Curtly and Walsh, Australia : McWarne. Those were the truly great attacks.

As an example people would look at Sachin's record in the 90s vs Australia and conclude yeah he dominated their great attacks. False, he faced McWarne in 3 series and did ok and well in 2 and failed in the other. He made runs in the '97 series with McGrath absent and again in 2004 (I believe) when again McGrath was a no show.

Yes. Lara/Tendulkar were good/medium vs great attacks and dominating of lesser attacks.

Smith by comparison, faced a much lesser percentage of great attacks and was much more dominant of lesser attacks, and on more helpful pitches.

 

[Slifer]

Yes. Lara/Tendulkar were good/medium vs great attacks and dominating of lesser attacks.

Smith by comparison, faced a much lesser percentage of great attacks and was much more dominant of lesser attacks, and on more helpful pitches.

Like you, it'll be interesting to see how he goes in India this time around. That's as much a test as any from the 90s in terms of quality of attack. This is of course assuming at least two of Jadeja/ Bumrah/ Shami/Ashwin play.

 

[centurymaker]

This is Tendulkar’s 18 year peak.

View attachment 34164

Thats crazy.

From age 20 to 38, I didn't know that Tendulkar averaged 60 in 157 Tests with 47 100s.

Such an unbelievable away record too (avg 61.5) spanning over 2 decades.

But also shows how he screwed up his stats by playing on in the last 2 years from 2011-13. Similar to Ponting. But both have Smith's career covered inside their careers.

 

[Slifer]

Thats crazy.

From age 20 to 38, I didn't know that Tendulkar averaged 60 in 157 Tests with 47 100s.

Such an unbelievable away record too (avg 61.5) spanning over 2 decades.

But also shows how he screwed up his stats by playing on in the last 2 years from 2011-13. Similar to Ponting. But both have Smith's career covered inside their careers.

Inside their peaks not careers.

 

[The_CricketUmpire]

Sachin and Lara owe those averages in the 90s to scoring big vs the lesser attacks. Fact. The better attacks in that era would be Aus, WI, Pak and Rsa. But you can't just leave it there. Rsa with any two of Donald/Pollock/DeVilliers, Pak:the Ws, WI: Curtly and Walsh, Australia : McWarne. Those were the truly great attacks.

As an example people would look at Sachin's record in the 90s vs Australia and conclude yeah he dominated their great attacks. False, he faced McWarne in 3 series and did ok and well in 2 and failed in the other. He made runs in the '97 series with McGrath absent and again in 2004 (I believe) when again McGrath was a no show.

Tendulkar: 1990s vs AUS, WI, PAK & SA
Vs AUS
1991/92 in Australia: 9 innings, 1 not out, 368 runs @ 46.00
1996 in India: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 10 runs @ 5.00
1998 in India: 5 innings, 1 not out: 446 runs @111.50
1999 in Australia: 4 innings, 0 not outs: 229 runs @ 57.25
Total: 20 innings, 2 not outs: 1053 runs @ 58.50

Vs WI
1994 in India: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 402 runs @ 67.00
1997 in West Indies: 6 innings, 1 not out: 289 runs @ 57.80
Total: 12 innings, 1 not out: 691 runs @ 62.81

Vs PAK
1999 in India (Asian Championship): 2 innings, 0 not outs: 9 runs @ 4.50
1999 in India: 4 innings, 0 not outs: 171 runs @ 42.75
Total: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 180 runs @ 30.00

Vs SA
1992-93 in South Africa: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 202 runs @ 33.67
1996 in India: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 166 runs @ 27.67
1996-97 in South Africa: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 241 runs @ 40.17
Total: 18 innings, 0 not outs: 609 runs @ 33.83

Total against AUS, WI, PAK & SA: 56 innings, 3 not outs: 2533 runs @ 47.79

Lara: 1990s vs AUS, PAK & SA
Vs AUS
1992-93 in Australia: 8 innings, 0 not outs: 466 runs @ 58.25
1995 in West Indies: 7 innings, 1 not out: 308 runs @ 44.00
1996-97 in Australia: 9 innings, 0 not outs: 296 runs @ 32.89
1999 in West Indies: 7 innings, 1 not out: 546 runs @ 91.00
Total: 31 innings, 2 not outs: 1616 runs @ 55.72

Vs PAK
1990 in Pakistan: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 49 runs @ 24.50
1993 in West Indies: 5 innings, 0 not outs: 216 runs @ 43.20
1997 in Pakistan: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 129 runs @ 21.50
Total: 13 innings: 0 not outs: 394 runs @ 30.30

Vs SA
1992 in West Indies: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 81 runs @ 40.50
1998-99 in South Africa: 10 innings, 0 not outs, 310 runs @ 31.00
Total: 12 innings, 0 not outs, 391 runs @ 32.58

Total against AUS, PAK & SA: 56 innings, 2 not outs: 2401 runs @ 44.46

So both Tendulkar and Lara still had pretty good averages overall against the very very strong bowling attacks in the 1990s - AUS, WI, PAK & SA

 

[Godard]

It is a phenomenal achievement from Tendulkar. But you have to give it to Smith if his entire career can match or exceed that sample.

Yes. Also considering post 2016, it has not been as easy for batting as say the mid 2000s to early 2010s. Whereas Ponting’s peak was completely in the mid 2000s and his home away record isn’t as complete as Smith or Tendulkar’s.

 

[Slifer]

Tendulkar: 1990s vs AUS, WI, PAK & SA
Vs AUS
1991/92 in Australia: 9 innings, 1 not out, 368 runs @ 46.00
1996 in India: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 10 runs @ 5.00
1998 in India: 5 innings, 1 not out: 446 runs @111.50
1999 in Australia: 4 innings, 0 not outs: 229 runs @ 57.25
Total: 20 innings, 2 not outs: 1053 runs @ 58.50

Vs WI
1994 in India: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 402 runs @ 67.00
1997 in West Indies: 6 innings, 1 not out: 289 runs @ 57.80
Total: 12 innings, 1 not out: 691 runs @ 62.81

Vs PAK
1999 in India (Asian Championship): 2 innings, 0 not outs: 9 runs @ 4.50
1999 in India: 4 innings, 0 not outs: 171 runs @ 42.75
Total: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 180 runs @ 30.00

Vs SA
1992-93 in South Africa: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 202 runs @ 33.67
1996 in India: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 166 runs @ 27.67
1996-97 in South Africa: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 241 runs @ 40.17
Total: 18 innings, 0 not outs: 609 runs @ 33.83

Total against AUS, WI, PAK & SA: 56 innings, 3 not outs: 2533 runs @ 47.79

Lara: 1990s vs AUS, PAK & SA
Vs AUS
1992-93 in Australia: 8 innings, 0 not outs: 466 runs @ 58.25
1995 in West Indies: 7 innings, 1 not out: 308 runs @ 44.00
1996-97 in Australia: 9 innings, 0 not outs: 296 runs @ 32.89
1999 in West Indies: 7 innings, 1 not out: 546 runs @ 91.00
Total: 31 innings, 2 not outs: 1616 runs @ 55.72

Vs PAK
1990 in Pakistan: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 49 runs @ 24.50
1993 in West Indies: 5 innings, 0 not outs: 216 runs @ 43.20
1997 in Pakistan: 6 innings, 0 not outs: 129 runs @ 21.50
Total: 13 innings: 0 not outs: 394 runs @ 30.30

Vs SA
1992 in West Indies: 2 innings, 0 not outs: 81 runs @ 40.50
1998-99 in South Africa: 10 innings, 0 not outs, 310 runs @ 31.00
Total: 12 innings, 0 not outs, 391 runs @ 32.58

Total against AUS, PAK & SA: 56 innings, 2 not outs: 2401 runs @ 44.46

So both Tendulkar and Lara still had pretty good averages overall against the very very strong bowling attacks in the 1990s - AUS, WI, PAK & SA

Respectfully, bear in mind what I listed as great attacks from the 90s. Some of those series listed wouldn't count. For example, the WI tour in '94 to India only Walsh played. The other bowlers included the likes of Dhanraj, Cuffy. Australia '98 again no McGrath. That was Warne, Reifel and Gavin Robertson (lol). The series in '92 self explanatory.

For Lara, his 93 series in Oz wouldn't count because that was pre McGrath.

So my point still stands that Lara/Sachin were middling vs the actual great attacks of the 90s and made hay vs the weaker teams and or vs teams like Australia where their attacks weren't at full strength.

Still, I don't want to you to get this notion that I don't rate either of Lara or especially Sachin; I do. But people keep saying they played in a tougher bowling era, which imo is true but we shouldn't pretend that Sachin averaged 58 inclusive of the great attacks.