subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yup. Doesn't make him a better cricketer though.
-
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.
Steve Smith vs Brian Lara
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
BazBall21
International Captain
Smith hasn't faced as many ATGs as Lara but he's faced strong attacks in England, India, New Zealand, South Africa and conquered each of them. Lara wasn't great in England and New Zealand. And against great bowlers, he was a lot better at home than away.
He won't have enough longevity to be called an ATG but the version of Bumrah that Smith faced was a great bowler too. Better than Rabada who you included.
He won't have enough longevity to be called an ATG but the version of Bumrah that Smith faced was a great bowler too. Better than Rabada who you included.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Bumrah wasn't at full fitness in 2020/21.
The_CricketUmpire
U19 Captain
That can be debated.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Genuises play in a way that other greats cannot. But we ultimately judge them by their record.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I base my opinion on the fact that I think Lara would be able to score more runs consistently everywhere against all types of bowlers.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I think you are confusing him for Tendulkar.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I think you are confusing cricket for some other sport.
The_CricketUmpire
U19 Captain
It's best to use the eye test as well as stats etc when forming opinions about players.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I use stats, eye test and peer rating.
_00_deathscar
International Regular
If inconsistency is the reason you don’t rate Sachin that highly, how do you rate the guy that most consider marginally worse than him, many consider him the equal, and some consider him marginally better - a player who was most certainly less consistent - as better than him?For you, my man, you'll get the sneak peak at the whole spreadsheet.
Answering your question directly, Lara > Gavaskar > Hayden, is how it would go in my mind.
Last edited:
Slifer
International Captain
Smh....
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
State Vice-Captain
Lara at his absolute best would be up there with Stan McCabe as the best ever but Smith is a better, more consistent run-scorer
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Lara at his absolute best would still struggle against Wasim, Waqar and Donald IMO. He had limits.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Smith had two big away series against ATG level opposition in Steyn/Philander/Morkel in 2014 and Ashwin/Jadeja (who are ATG level in India) in 2017.
Lara did face more atg level bowlers in terms of the sheer count but Smith has arguably has had just as much success against difficult attacks tbh. Lara was sporadically impressive but inconsistent against Donald/two Ws.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah my sense is Smith would do better against more ATGs had he faced them than Lara.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
solidest proof yet that Lara > Smith
Slifer
International Captain
He was not unique here as we've discussed at length. Sachin struggled just as much vs said bowlers unless you can prove otherwise.
And Lara never faced Donald at his absolute best. He faced Donald in '98 when he was already in the middle of his slump brought on by a myriad of reasons. He faced the Ws in that same period. (96-2001).
Lara's peak was from about 1992 to 1996. The one time he faced Ws, he averaged 43, which is more than his chief rival ever managed against them.
Slifer
International Captain
Specifically for Subs:
stats.espncricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No, having watched Tendulkar during his career, it is clear that Tendulkar didn't struggle against them. He just didn't thrive against them. Whereas Lara clearly had issues facing certain pacers in particular series. We don't need to rehash it.
Injuries are an excuse but poor form is no excuse. And it is a chicken and egg, was he in poor form because of facing these guys, or did poor form stop him from scoring against them.
Yes but these overall averages are misleading. For example, Tendulkar didn't get out to the 2Ws at all when he faced them in the late 90s. He never had a series where he consistently struggled against these pacers like Lara did against the 2W in 97, McGrath in 96 and Donald in 98.Specifically for Subs:
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Tendulkar can be blamed for not prospering more against them though, but having watched him, he didn't struggle against them particularly. Lara had more problems.
Last edited: