• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Sehwag vs Sangakkara - as batsman

Who is the better bat?

  • Total voters
    47
  • Poll closed .
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
'He wouldn't lose any ground he's gained up to that point though. If he continues doing well he'd be #2 for sure, otherwise he's still in the mix but not definie #2. And in no case does he suddenly become worse than guys who averaged more over much shorter careers assuming other factors are constant
Click to expand...
Read that again. I clearly mean if he keeps that up for 160+ tests genius.
subshakerz said:
Which means you basically agree with my point. Latter career and post-peak performance affects ranking.
Click to expand...
I don't principally because you don't have one beyond pretty average gud.
 
Victor Ian

Victor Ian

International Coach
It seems the problem is trying to distinguish between the top 1% of players, based on simple averages, when, at that level, the other things like pitches you played on, the team mates you played with, the game positions you came in at, blur any definite answers.

I'd take any of the top players and feel confident they'd all perform to a similar level given the exact same simulation, just based on averages.

What is behind Smith's 60 average are some spectacular series altering performances that earned wins, or staved off whitewashes. That is not like Vogues. What makes Smith stand above others is the vibe of inevitability he has created, and he has done it enough that it will stick.

He is like letting the grease and gunk build up in your oven for ten years before you one day try and remove it. You are going to be there forever removing that **** and the effort of removing it is going to solidify his greatness, rather than diminish it.

The coming year is quite exciting from a legacy perspective.
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
Victor Ian said:
It seems the problem is trying to distinguish between the top 1% of players, based on simple averages, when, at that level, the other things like pitches you played on, the team mates you played with, the game positions you came in at, blur any definite answers.

I'd take any of the top players and feel confident they'd all perform to a similar level given the exact same simulation, just based on averages.

What is behind Smith's 60 average are some spectacular series altering performances that earned wins, or staved off whitewashes. That is not like Vogues. What makes Smith stand above others is the vibe of inevitability he has created, and he has done it enough that it will stick.

He is like letting the grease and gunk build up in your oven for ten years before you one day try and remove it. You are going to be there forever removing that **** and the effort of removing it is going to solidify his greatness, rather than diminish it.

The coming year is quite exciting from a legacy perspective.
Click to expand...
Yeah I can’t wait. This time next year he’ll have a series win in India, an away Ashes win and the WTC.
 
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
Is Smith an accumulator or a boundary-hitter? I feel like he's in a strange place in between where he nurdles around a lot especially early on and his technique off the bat doesn't seem like he would be an audacious striker or risk-taker. But he also does get a lot of fours away through his innings or at least that's been my impression whenever he's wrecked our guys.
 
A

Ashes81

State Vice-Captain
As much as it pains me to say it as an Englishman, but I don't think Smith gets enough credit.

His record is brilliant yet he's not spoken about in quite the same terms as other recent greats such as Tendulkar, Lara and Richards. However his record is better than any of them.

I think much of that is due to his style, for such a brilliant player he's not particularly pleasing on the eye.

But that doesn't really matter, and it's runs on the board that matters and Smith gets more than his fair share.

By the time he finishes I think he'll be the 2nd greatest batsman of all time and that's one hell of an achievement.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Nah, the point was that I said Ponting got downgraded from 2007 peak to end of his career which you contested, not just compared to Chappell but overall as a bat.

Now you don't want to admit the same logic for Smith because it would undermine your point, even tho from above you all but agree that Smith will lose some places if his average slips compares to other contestants for the no.2 spot.
Click to expand...
How is Smith losing places? We haven't assigned him a place yet because he has played about 90 tests, not 120-130 tests.

Another 2+ years of excellence from him will assure him amongst the very very best regardless of a big fall in the final 3 years.

Suppose he is averaging 59.5 after 125 tests and then retires at 56 after 150 tests. Last 25 tests won't put him in the No.6 to No.10 range. But keeping his average like 58 after 150 tests will propel him into no.2 though.

So it's a bit of both. Late career performances count but NOT AS MUCH as you are making it out to be. He will pretty much ...not fall into no.6 to no.10 range, after another 2-3 years of top performances, regardless of how 'bad' he does after that!!
 
Last edited:
0

_00_deathscar

International Regular
Ashes81 said:
As much as it pains me to say it as an Englishman, but I don't think Smith gets enough credit.

His record is brilliant yet he's not spoken about in quite the same terms as other recent greats such as Tendulkar, Lara and Richards. However his record is better than any of them.
Click to expand...
How? This whole thread is literally about that.
And his record is better than any of them because he’s only played about 90 tests or whatever. Go check Sachin’s records - it’s not unprecedented.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
_00_deathscar said:
How? This whole thread is literally about that.
And his record is better than any of them because he’s only played about 90 tests or whatever. Go check Sachin’s records - it’s not unprecedented.
Click to expand...
Wasn't there a thread on Smith recently with everyone singing his praises?
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Arachnodouche said:
Is Smith an accumulator or a boundary-hitter? I feel like he's in a strange place in between where he nurdles around a lot especially early on and his technique off the bat doesn't seem like he would be an audacious striker or risk-taker. But he also does get a lot of fours away through his innings or at least that's been my impression whenever he's wrecked our guys.
Click to expand...
His natural mode is definitely an accumulator. But every now and then he'll play an innings where he decides to strike at 80+ instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top