• 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.

Debate thread for 2024 Ranking of batsmen poll

centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
Yes. Nobody handled Ashwin Jadeja with that next level of ability. Definitely up there.
Click to expand...
Then what happened in India tour in 2022/23 where his 'top score' in the entire 4 test series was only 38..

You have to see the good with the bad. See the full picture.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Smith was hovering at almost confirmed next best since Bradman with a 61 average until recently had he continued his form. I don't think any bat since Bradman was so far ahead of the next best of his era.

I also don't think a late career dip where he is still averaging over 40 can take that person down 7-8 spots and dropping. That's still better than dips of Viv and Tendulkar, etc. Seems unfairly harsh and wildly unreasonable. CW just seems to flip their criteria on a whim and a mood.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
subshakerz said:
Smith was hovering at almost confirmed next best since Bradman with a 61 average until recently had he continued his form. I don't think any bat since Bradman was so far ahead of the next best of his era.
Click to expand...
His home conditions before 2019 were pretty disgustingly stacked in favour of him though. I don't rate his home record anywhere near as highly as most do. In August 2019 my standardised averages project was nerfing his overall average down from 63 to below 58, and that was despite some gun away performances that it was boosting. He was actually still ranked behind Kohli on it at that point (although only because of longevity it seems - Kohli's average was standardising to 54).

My rating of him hasn't really gone down since that point, I just didn't rate him as highly as others did at the time.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
ataraxia said:
What if he goes on even longer and ends up averaging 49.86?
Click to expand...
For that to happen, he needs to play till he hits his 40th bday. It's not like he is in a hunt for certain world records in terms of runs or tons that you'd expect him to continue playing for so long..

And he is a smart guy who won't do something so silly and will retire much sooner and finish around 53/54. Look he is already doing commentary in IPL so he is already looking beyond!
 
Line and Length

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
It's too easy to judge a player solely on their peak performances rather than an overall career. A player such as Botham is downgraded because of an ordinary latter half of his career. This is why I'm reluctant to judge current players. Smith, for example, had a marvellous peak but his recent performances have been well below his best.
@subshakerz you say "had he currently continued his form" but surely such a condition could be applied to numerous players who peak early.
We are dealing with hypotheticals and "what ifs" when we should only consider facts. "What if" Gooch had continued his form from his debut Test? We would never have seen him again.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
centurymaker said:
If Smith can have a great couple of years coming up, a lot of people will revise their opinion of him and rate him as a lock in top dozen but I actually think he is going to continue to struggle given his hard unorthodox technique and deteriorating hand & eye.
Click to expand...
Think he's well locked into the top 10, if not higher
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Line and Length said:
It's too easy to judge a player solely on their peak performances rather than an overall career. A player such as Botham is downgraded because of an ordinary latter half of his career. This is why I'm reluctant to judge current players. Smith, for example, had a marvellous peak but his recent performances have been well below his best.
@subshakerz you say "had he currently continued his form" but surely such a condition could be applied to numerous players who peak early.
We are dealing with hypotheticals and "what ifs" when we should only consider facts. "What if" Gooch had continued his form from his debut Test? We would never have seen him again.
Click to expand...
My friend, of course Smith was going to take a hit like even Tendulkar and Viv but his baseline accomplishments before his dip and all-round record and skill level plus unparalleled peer rating should have meant to me he would have secured himself a place in the highest echelon. Like he still averages 57 and has a good record everywhere but it's almost as if he has maxed out at barely top ten and I can't for the life of me understand why.
 
CricAddict

CricAddict

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
My friend, of course Smith was going to take a hit like even Tendulkar and Viv but his baseline accomplishments before his dip and all-round record and skill level plus unparalleled peer rating should have meant to me he would have secured himself a place in the highest echelon. Like he still averages 57 and has a good record everywhere but it's almost as if he has maxed out at barely top ten and I can't for the life of me understand why.
Click to expand...
It is because of the competition he is facing. A rank of 7th or 8th of all-time is nothing to be frowned. Why are you so worried that it is 8 and not 6. 8 is not bad. Everyone above him so far does deserve to be ranked above him.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
CricAddict said:
It is because of the competition he is facing. A rank of 7th or 8th of all-time is nothing to be frowned. Why are you so worried that it is 8 and not 6. 8 is not bad. Everyone above him so far does deserve to be ranked above him.
Click to expand...
They don't and he isn't likely to be ranked 8 even.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top