Boycott vs Greenidge vs Smith

[Bolo.]

It's not about results , I am talking about the context of SA cricket ..That scandal and his death had a huge impact on the Sa cricketing landscape ..Pollock filled in but he was never viewed as a great leader that the public yearned for, who was not tainted by scandal.
.Also the WC is very important, Pollock got sacked as captain of both the test and odi team as a result of that exit to Sri Lanka.

Without that Graeme Smith does not become captain when Sa tour England in 2003 ..
Smith had a lot of doubters that he could be the next great leader in SA cricket at 23.

As for the quota system the mere presence of it has agitated players ever since its introduction, Charl Langeveldt and Justin Ontong were among the first rumored to be politically influenced selections, these were good players no doubt but it doesn't help for team dynamics on and off the pitch when there is official policy in place that places value on colour.

Pollock was the permanent, long term captain in the aftermath of Hansie for years, and captain for a couple of years after Hansie before Smith even debuted. The Hansie scars fall on his captaincy, not Smiths. Whether he was good or not, I can't tell you, but he got results.

Captains get removed all the time for failure of some sort. Smith is hardly unique in replacing a captain, but he did have the advantage of inheriting a team that was winning a lot.

The Ontong quota thing happened under Pollock, not Smith. When he played under Smith much later, it was on the back of some monster domestic form IIRC.

Langeveldt got onto the team off some excellent ODI form. At a time when Nel was one of the main bowlers, and even Hall had got a lot of games. He obviously was a poor pick, but I don't think we can say he wasn't a merit one, especially not debuting with Hash, Gibbs and Ntini already exceeding the quota numbers they were asking for at the time.

 

[kyear2]

In a era of "dead" tracks, Smith played in the one set of home conditions that bucked the trend. Would of been helpful to Steyn, but would have been challenging for him and anyone else.

Greenidge undoubtedly faced better bowlers, but his home conditions would have been somewhat of a mixed bag in comparison.

Gavaskar (yes, I'm bypassing Boycs), had the easiest home conditions by far, and while he too had some ATG bowlers to contend with, the first half of his career had the easiest opposition of the other two.

Smith was the quickest scorer of the 3, with Greenidge then Gavaskar being up the rear.

Sunny has undoubtedly the best career and numbers if the 3, the number of hundreds alone is just insane. While Sir Gordon's career fell off a cliff when his eyes started to go, in his prime was the equal of anyone. Smith also tailed off a bit at the end, but not as precipitous a drop as GG.

Greenidge had his troubles in Australia, Lillee and Thompson temporarily forced him out of the team and he struggled in Pakistan as well. Smith too had his issues in Australia, and similarly it was an ATG attack and was a little below par vs India and SL as well. Gavaskar's record shows him to be the most well rounded, but he took had his struggles somewhat with the English attack and the post WSC encounters with full strength Australia and WI, especially away from home.

Secondary and tertiary skills / other advantages. Smith was left handed and the faster scorer, but Greenidge and Sunny had better techniques. All three were proficient catchers with Smith being the much more acclaimed of the 3. He also brought captaincy to the table, and had that added burden for the vast majority of his career.

 

[Prince EWS]

The drunker I get the more I'm tempted to come into a thread like this and say that maybe Smith was the greatest opener to debut since WWII.

Then when I wake up the next day I realise it's pretty hard to make the case.

But **** he was such a gun.

 

[Coronis]

In a era of "dead" tracks, Smith played in the one set of home conditions that bucked the trend. Would of been helpful to Steyn, but would have been challenging for him and anyone else.

Greenidge undoubtedly faced better bowlers, but his home conditions would have been somewhat of a mixed bag in comparison.

Gavaskar (yes, I'm bypassing Boycs), had the easiest home conditions by far, and while he too had some ATG bowlers to contend with, the first half of his career had the easiest opposition of the other two.

Smith was the quickest scorer of the 3, with Greenidge then Gavaskar being up the rear.

Sunny has undoubtedly the best career and numbers if the 3, the number of hundreds alone is just insane. While Sir Gordon's career fell off a cliff when his eyes started to go, in his prime was the equal of anyone. Smith also tailed off a bit at the end, but not as precipitous a drop as GG.

Greenidge had his troubles in Australia, Lillee and Thompson temporarily forced him out of the team and he struggled in Pakistan as well. Smith too had his issues in Australia, and similarly it was an ATG attack and was a little below par vs India and SL as well. Gavaskar's record shows him to be the most well rounded, but he took had his struggles somewhat with the English attack and the post WSC encounters with full strength Australia and WI, especially away from home.

Secondary and tertiary skills / other advantages. Smith was left handed and the faster scorer, but Greenidge and Sunny had better techniques. All three were proficient catchers with Smith being the much more acclaimed of the 3. He also brought captaincy to the table, and had that added burden for the vast majority of his career.

Yeah but who had the best peak?

 

[kyear2]

The drunker I get the more I'm tempted to come into a thread like this and say that maybe Smith was the greatest opener to debut since WWII.

Then when I wake up the next day I realise it's pretty hard to make the case.

But **** he was such a gun.

How are you ranking them?

 

[Bolo.]

In a era of "dead" tracks, Smith played in the one set of home conditions that bucked the trend. Would of been helpful to Steyn, but would have been challenging for him and anyone else.

Greenidge undoubtedly faced better bowlers, but his home conditions would have been somewhat of a mixed bag in comparison.

Gavaskar (yes, I'm bypassing Boycs), had the easiest home conditions by far, and while he too had some ATG bowlers to contend with, the first half of his career had the easiest opposition of the other two.

Smith was the quickest scorer of the 3, with Greenidge then Gavaskar being up the rear.

Sunny has undoubtedly the best career and numbers if the 3, the number of hundreds alone is just insane. While Sir Gordon's career fell off a cliff when his eyes started to go, in his prime was the equal of anyone. Smith also tailed off a bit at the end, but not as precipitous a drop as GG.

Greenidge had his troubles in Australia, Lillee and Thompson temporarily forced him out of the team and he struggled in Pakistan as well. Smith too had his issues in Australia, and similarly it was an ATG attack and was a little below par vs India and SL as well. Gavaskar's record shows him to be the most well rounded, but he took had his struggles somewhat with the English attack and the post WSC encounters with full strength Australia and WI, especially away from home.

Secondary and tertiary skills / other advantages. Smith was left handed and the faster scorer, but Greenidge and Sunny had better techniques. All three were proficient catchers with Smith being the much more acclaimed of the 3. He also brought captaincy to the table, and had that added burden for the vast majority of his career.

Greenidge played several years longer than Smith. I would pick Smith ahead if not for this fact, but I'm not sure with this in mind. Close. I still might pick Smith ahead, but that might be the South African in me talking.

Good points in this post, but you can go suck eggs for putting Sunny in this group . Your criticisms of him are legitimate, but he's still a class above IMO.

 

[kyear2]

Greenidge played several years longer than Smith. I would pick Smith ahead if not for this fact, but I'm not sure with this in mind. Close. I still might pick Smith ahead, but that might be the South African in me talking.

Good points in this post, but you can go suck eggs for putting Sunny in this group . Your criticisms of him are legitimate, but he's still a class above IMO.

Post war openers are the weakest position along with spinners. Just serious lack of top end talent.

If Barry got 30 plus tests he would be have been automatic, but alas and rightfully he didn't.

Sunil's stats were indeed better, but was Smith that far behind? I didn't want to include Greenidge because he was my favorite player growing up and Sunny is the legit one (and only) player I don't like as a person, but he's beaten Smith on the one on one poll and practically tied here. Once he got last his yips with Lillee and Thompson, he had arguably as good if not a better middle career than even Sunny.

Think looking at their careers with the added layers of context, Smith isn't that far behind as batsman, and brings more to a team. As someone who has captained more experienced cricketers his entire career, he would make a good captain of an ATG team, and that's not ever factoring in catching at 1st. Greenidge, I don't know, the average gap is quite a bit to make up, but also believe he was quality. That and the only cricketer (umm possibly Lara) I ever hung up on my wall.

Anyways none of it matters that much anyways because if S. Smith puts in 20 good matches opening he's taking the spot anyways.

 

[Coronis]

Post war openers are the weakest position along with spinners. Just serious lack of top end talent.

If Barry got 30 plus tests he would be have been automatic, but alas and rightfully he didn't.

Sunil's stats were indeed better, but was Smith that far behind? I didn't want to include Greenidge because he was my favorite player growing up and Sunny is the legit one (and only) player I don't like as a person, but he's beaten Smith on the one on one poll and practically tied here. Once he got last his yips with Lillee and Thompson, he had arguably as good if not a better middle career than even Sunny.

Think looking at their careers with the added layers of context, Smith isn't that far behind as batsman, and brings more to a team. As someone who has captained more experienced cricketers his entire career, he would make a good captain of an ATG team, and that's not ever factoring in catching at 1st. Greenidge, I don't know, the average gap is quite a bit to make up, but also believe he was quality. That and the only cricketer (umm possibly Lara) I ever hung up on my wall.

Anyways none of it matters that much anyways because if S. Smith puts in 20 good matches opening he's taking the spot anyways.

So Khawaja is automatic?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Post war openers are the weakest position along with spinners. Just serious lack of top end talent.

If Barry got 30 plus tests he would be have been automatic, but alas and rightfully he didn't.

Sunil's stats were indeed better, but was Smith that far behind? I didn't want to include Greenidge because he was my favorite player growing up and Sunny is the legit one (and only) player I don't like as a person, but he's beaten Smith on the one on one poll and practically tied here. Once he got last his yips with Lillee and Thompson, he had arguably as good if not a better middle career than even Sunny.

Think looking at their careers with the added layers of context, Smith isn't that far behind as batsman, and brings more to a team. As someone who has captained more experienced cricketers his entire career, he would make a good captain of an ATG team, and that's not ever factoring in catching at 1st. Greenidge, I don't know, the average gap is quite a bit to make up, but also believe he was quality. That and the only cricketer (umm possibly Lara) I ever hung up on my wall.

Anyways none of it matters that much anyways because if S. Smith puts in 20 good matches opening he's taking the spot anyways.

So, Graeme Smith and Viv is on the same tier?

 

[kyear2]

So Khawaja is automatic?

Are you comparing a batsman who everyone who saw him bat considered him on par with Viv and Garry and above the likes of Chappell etc all, to Khawaja?

Genuinely lost.

 

[kyear2]

So, Graeme Smith and Viv is on the same tier?

No, but neither is Sunny.

Also the statement was that Smith, and I guess Gordon, wasn't that far behind....

And again I have to stress this, he isn't in the same tier, and neither is Sunny. And Sunny is only as high as he is because of the opener tax and because he's the highest of the post war guys and as such elevated. If he was in the middle order, he would have been judged much harsher and ranked somewhat lower.

 

[Coronis]

Are you comparing a batsman who everyone who saw him bat considered him on par with Viv and Garry and above the likes of Chappell etc all, to Khawaja?

Genuinely lost.

Nah I’m comparing a batsman who has performed at higher level for 30 tests than Barry ever did for 30 matches.

Besides didn’t you recently make a post arguing against peer review?

 

[kyear2]

So Khawaja is automatic?

Headley, Pollock and O'Reilly and are all still decently rated.

 

[Coronis]

Are you comparing a batsman who everyone who saw him bat considered him on par with Viv and Garry and above the likes of Chappell etc all, to Khawaja?

Genuinely lost.

Peer resting is ****, as we've discussed with Barrington vs May / Compton etc. it's who was media favorites or popular with the other players. Peer ratings have Lillee and Wasim as one and two all time as bowlers.

 

[kyear2]

Nah I’m comparing a batsman who has performed at higher level for 30 tests than Barry ever did for 30 matches.

Besides didn’t you recently make a post arguing against peer review?

I was referring to people on this forum, multiple actually. Wasn't referencing past players. And again, I also made the distinction between former players and other literature, though both can be biased. Barry was also better than GG while playing for the same club. Think it was obvious that he was special.

 

[kyear2]

Damn you bring receipts. Lol

But yeah, already addressed that.

Barry also stood up well in WSC, again way small sample size, but shows quality.

We also have precious little to go on with regards to him, so unlike Lillee and Wasim, we aren't going against what the stats say.

But again, you go after one throw away line, ignoring the entire context of the post just so you can say gotcha.

 

[capt_Luffy]

No, but neither is Sunny.

Also the statement was that Smith, and I guess Gordon, wasn't that far behind....

And again I have to stress this, he isn't in the same tier, and neither is Sunny. And Sunny is only as high as he is because of the opener tax and because he's the highest of the post war guys and as such elevated. If he was in the middle order, he would have been judged much harsher and ranked somewhat lower.

Would he? I could only think that his record in England isn't really special, but that ofcourse doesn't means it's not good; and he definitely has an ATG series there. His numbers vs WI are definitely elevated against mid bowling attack; but he has two great series against the ATG bowlers and only played failed in one. Same thing for Australia, yeah in the 78 series Lillee wasn't there; but Thomson was at his peak and Sunny had 2 ATG centuries in 2 very spicy Aussie pitches, including Gabba. In one more 3 match series against Lillee, he failed in the first 2 matches, but well on his way to a century in the 3rd and was given an out that resulted in a walkout; and his other series there was quite good against a good bowling side. And I definitely think his record vs Pakistan is very underrated. He played Imran, Nawaz, Qadir and later Wasim extremely efficiently in both home and away; and played one of the best innings vs spin, 96 in Chennai.

 

[Coronis]

I was referring to people on this forum, multiple actually. Wasn't referencing past players. And again, I also made the distinction between former players and other literature, though both can be biased.

But to your other points. Peer resting is ****, as we've discussed with Barrington vs May / Compton etc. it's who was media favorites or popular with the other players. Peer ratings have Lillee and Wasim as one and two all time as bowlers.

Now I’m confused.

Barry was also better than GG while playing for the same club. Think it was obvious that he was special.

And yet Geoff Boycott (career overlaps Richards’ and much of Greenidge’s) was easily better than both in the same competition despite playing with inferior opening partners and playing to a much greater age than either of them.

 

[kyear2]

Now I’m confused.



And yet Geoff Boycott (career overlaps Richards’ and much of Greenidge’s) was easily better than both in the same competition despite playing with inferior opening partners and playing to a much greater age than either of them.

Let's try this again.

I'm not going to ignore stats and go with peer ratings. I do not overly trust peer ratings. Former players are notoriously poor assessor's of talent and go with favorites.

I've argued with Subz about same and I stand by that.
Journalists are almost as bad and tend have an Aussie / British bias. That's just how it is.

In this instance I have nothing but references to go on. He out played even Greenidge in the same club and was almost universally acclaimed as among the very best.

He played well in WSC and in most tours that he was a participant in.

As per my initial reference @fredfertang speaks extremely high of him as does a couple of other members that are from that era that I've specifically asked about him, both of whom's opinions I trust. One ranked him along with Sachin and Viv as the best batsmen they've seen, just ahead of Sobers, Pollock and Lara (going by memory here). Fred rates him, if I recall correctly alongside Sobers (again going by memory). Every innings, every highlight reel I've seen of him screams class. So the eye test matches the peer rating which matches the stats for the few opportunities that he did have.

If you want to dig even further, because obviously you have the time, I've also said that peer rating, though notoriously unreliable still has a place. Though be it below stats and eye test. I know you saw that post, because as usual you responded with a snarky comment about pretty yorkers don't mean anything if it didn't take a wicket. I had to then explain full what eye tests fully involved. Because why make contributing s when you can just pick at what others are saying.

 

[kyear2]

Oh, and you know my opinion of Boycott and why, so wouldn't bore either of us with that back and forth. And yes, I know your retort to that as well and we've had that conversation as well.