Debate thread for 2024 Ranking of batsmen poll

[Socerer 01]

Does Kyle Jamieson even make a NZ first XI? What are we talking about here.

and it was a meme ranking last time

when the dust settles on Smith’s career, consensus will be behind Lara and probably Ponting

if Jamieson was from the 80s and had led his team on debut to a series win over the 80s Windies*, then won them their 1st ever ICC trophy** by being MoM in the “final” and was an important part of a famous drawn test in the 80s Windies* but proceeded to only play sporadically since then this forum may rate him as one of the great what ifs and get him in there, you would have NZ fans getting him in their atg xi too

hell they do it with Bond because he was great at other levels and formats of cricket and Jamieson’s slightly done more than him imo, there was talk in the other of how Cowie’s an atg for them and a contender for their atg xi, Cowie’s got only 30 fc matches more than Jamieson and 10 less tests

* - this is by no means to say that 2019-20 India = 80s Windies im merely using them as equivalents for being the best side at that time
** - 2nd trophy i know in present day

as for Smith, im a big Ponting fanboy if it wasnt clear with my vote but he isnt as good as Smith

 

[Fuller Pilch]

if Jamieson was from the 80s and had led his team on debut to a series win over the 80s Windies*, then won them their 1st ever ICC trophy** by being MoM in the “final” and was an important part of a famous drawn test in the 80s Windies* but proceeded to only play sporadically since then this forum may rate him as one of the great what ifs and get him in there, you would have NZ fans getting him in their atg xi too

hell they do it with Bond because he was great at other levels and formats of cricket and Jamieson’s slightly done more than him imo, there was talk in the other of how Cowie’s an atg for them and a contender for their atg xi, Cowie’s got only 30 fc matches more than Jamieson and 10 less tests

* - this is by no means to say that 2019-20 India = 80s Windies im merely using them as equivalents for being the best side at that time
** - 2nd trophy i know in present day

as for Smith, im a big Ponting fanboy if it wasnt clear with my vote but he isnt as good as Smith

Some good points re Jamieson but we lost in India 0-1. The 1st was drawn with Rachin (on debut) and Ajaz at the crease, but we were thrashed in the 2nd despite the 10-fer for Ajaz.

Another point in Jamieson's favour is that he is NZ's best 3rd seamer by absolutely miles.
Hadlee, Cowie, Bond, Boult, Southee, and C Cairns are/were all new ball bowlers with Wagner being a 4th seamer.

 

[Socerer 01]

At the very top he may have some question marks.
The ban actually came at a good time for him (arguably), he looked dodgy in that SA series and then the pitches especially since then have been spicier for sure, when he has struggled to cash in except vs weaker opponents at home. He had the incredible Ashes series in that but otherwise he’s definitely in a slump. That he had an insane peak and his “trough” is still averaging 40 ish speaks to why he’s in that general top echelon and not closer to Kohli.

Smith in this decade averages 45, thats the 20th best with a 10 innings cutoff and you could easily argue that some of the names ahead of him have issues with sample size and playing against weaker teams. by no means is that as bad as some here like bleating about

to debunk the next myth that certain individuals have been sprouting, Smith has averaged 48 at home in this decade, only behind Labu with his lady luck charm, Khawaja and Marsh who has a small sample size from his side. thats still very good when the consensus has been that he has been “exposed” when home conditions have gotten tougher. its a fall from a ludicrous 83 avg in 2014-19 but 48 is still world class or a level below it at worst in the current era. just where is the exposure?????

the real difference maker is his away average being 40, compared to 64. his Ashes was okay but should have done better, his bgt was poor and those pitches were all not easy to bat on until the last test. prime Smith would have feasted on the Pakistani highways but his efforts were still not bad, his Galle 100 was top class and unfortunately shadowed by Chandimal playing maybe the best knock of his life and he had a good wtc final

now he did fail in NZ but it should be kept in mind that this was his 2nd series in a new role and 1st away assignment, his opening partner was also a dud and only 6 out of 25 openers have averaged above 30 in NZ in this decade. also worth noting that the non Aussie and English players have all at least had 1 opportunity in an away test to fill their boots against significantly weaker opposition to patch up the away records, something Smith and his Aussie brethren dont get because Australia are too high and mighty to play such opposition

like i said before batting has been ****ing tough since 2016ish and i thought it would be reflected in Smith’s rating this time but instead we have had a dude try his best to rival subs efforts with Indian spinners and Himannv disdain of Sanga with Smith in this thread by conveniently presenting numbers with 0 context because his arguments are weak af when considering them

 

[Socerer 01]

Some good points re Jamieson but we lost in India 0-1. The 1st was drawn with Rachin (on debut) and Ajaz at the crease, but we were thrashed in the 2nd despite the 10-fer for Ajaz.

Another point in Jamieson's favour is that he is NZ's best 3rd seamer by absolutely miles.
Hadlee, Cowie, Bond, Boult, Southee, and C Cairns are/were all new ball bowlers with Wagner being a 4th seamer.

i didnt say you guys won the series tbf, just mentioned that you drew that test where Jamieson did play a vital role at Kanpur

3rd seamer point is important, we dont give too much importance to it when rating bowlers just like spinners being judged on the same ground where as with batsmen the ones that bat 5 and below are termed downhill skiers and the openers get the opener tax removed, not sure why the discrepancy exists

 

[Fuller Pilch]

i didnt say you guys won the series tbf, just mentioned that you drew that test where Jamieson did play a vital role at Kanpur

3rd seamer point is important, we dont give too much importance to it when rating bowlers just like spinners being judged on the same ground where as with batsmen the ones that bat 5 and below are termed downhill skiers and the openers get the opener tax removed, not sure why the discrepancy exists

Sorry, for some strange reason my brain read it as a drawn series (not test).

We actually drew a couple of tests in WI in 1984 (had a 4 test series which we lost 0-2).

Overall in the 80s NZ and WI played 10 tests (6 in NZ and 4 in the Windies).

WI won 3, NZ won 2, and 5 draws.

They won 1 series, we won 1 series, and 1 series was drawn.

 

[Socerer 01]

Sorry, for some strange reason my brain read it as a drawn series (not test).

We actually drew a couple of tests in WI in 1984 (had a 4 test series which we lost 0-2).

Overall in the 80s NZ and WI played 10 tests (6 in NZ and 4 in the Windies).

WI won 3, NZ won 2, and 5 draws.

They won 1 series, we won 1 series, and 1 series was drawn.

80s NZ to me was the 3rd or 4th best test side at that time

 

[ma1978]

The Windies players all describe how bad the umpiring was and how much it was skewed in Nz’s favor

 

[Socerer 01]

The Windies players all describe how bad the umpiring was and how much it was skewed in Nz’s favor

this is the caveat that is there but idk how much was true

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

now he did fail in NZ but it should be kept in mind that this was his 2nd series in a new role and 1st away assignment, his opening partner was also a dud and only 6 out of 25 openers have averaged above 30 in NZ in this decade.

That's because we doctored the pitches specifially to stop him.

 

[Coronis]

re: Headley

I found it interesting that both his average pre war and then “maintained 60+ average for 20 years” were both brought up.

For me at least, I don’t really count his record post-war. Not dissimilar to Hammond or say Faulkner post WWI.

(note these are particular exceptions I only make regarding war interrupted careers, if other players in general experience a natural decline that’s their problem)

 

[centurymaker]

also worth noting that the non Aussie and English players have all at least had 1 opportunity in an away test to fill their boots against significantly weaker opposition to patch up the away records, something Smith and his Aussie brethren dont get because Australia are too high and mighty to play such opposition

But Australia keep inviting minnows WI over every year and they are travelling to WI next year. While England is playing both WI and SL home this year... for 3 Tests each. So they may be travelling less to weaker countries but they keep playing them more often at home which massively skews their home figures, please check avg without minnow bashing to get a clear picture of where someone is at, avg'ing 39 at home since 2018/19. Plus this summer watch the bazballers run riot and break all kinds of records only to struggle against better nations.. Unlike you I am not looking at raw numbers. For eg, Kohli is averaging 33 in the last 4 years excl. the tour of WI where he filled his boots against crap bowling. (Bangladesh in Bangladesh, SL in SL are still sort of test standard).

 

[Socerer 01]

But Australia keep inviting minnows WI over every year and they are travelling to WI next year. While England is playing both WI and SL home this year... for 3 Tests each. So they may be travelling less to weaker countries but they keep playing them more often at home which massively skews their home figures, please check avg without minnow bashing to get a clear picture of where someone is at, avg'ing 39 at home since 2018/19. Plus this summer watch the bazballers run riot and break all kinds of records only to struggle against better nations.. Unlike you I am not looking at raw numbers. For eg, Kohli is averaging 33 in the last 4 years excl. the tour of WI where he filled his boots against crap bowling. (Bangladesh in Bangladesh, SL in SL are still sort of test standard).

this has big “if we exclude all the times he made runs, he averages 0” energy

 

[centurymaker]

this has big “if we exclude all the times he made runs, he averages 0” energy

You are now contradicting your own comments. (all the talk about context). Ive only excluded 2 tests from such a long period, falling well short of your claim of excluding all times when someone made runs. If these Atgs need to hide behind a couple of tests against a trash side then things are more dire than you think.

 

[subshakerz]

Smith in this decade averages 45, thats the 20th best with a 10 innings cutoff and you could easily argue that some of the names ahead of him have issues with sample size and playing against weaker teams. by no means is that as bad as some here like bleating about

to debunk the next myth that certain individuals have been sprouting, Smith has averaged 48 at home in this decade, only behind Labu with his lady luck charm, Khawaja and Marsh who has a small sample size from his side. thats still very good when the consensus has been that he has been “exposed” when home conditions have gotten tougher. its a fall from a ludicrous 83 avg in 2014-19 but 48 is still world class or a level below it at worst in the current era. just where is the exposure?????

the real difference maker is his away average being 40, compared to 64. his Ashes was okay but should have done better, his bgt was poor and those pitches were all not easy to bat on until the last test. prime Smith would have feasted on the Pakistani highways but his efforts were still not bad, his Galle 100 was top class and unfortunately shadowed by Chandimal playing maybe the best knock of his life and he had a good wtc final

now he did fail in NZ but it should be kept in mind that this was his 2nd series in a new role and 1st away assignment, his opening partner was also a dud and only 6 out of 25 openers have averaged above 30 in NZ in this decade. also worth noting that the non Aussie and English players have all at least had 1 opportunity in an away test to fill their boots against significantly weaker opposition to patch up the away records, something Smith and his Aussie brethren dont get because Australia are too high and mighty to play such opposition

like i said before batting has been ****ing tough since 2016ish and i thought it would be reflected in Smith’s rating this time but instead we have had a dude try his best to rival subs efforts with Indian spinners and Himannv disdain of Sanga with Smith in this thread by conveniently presenting numbers with 0 context because his arguments are weak af when considering them

I bring out all the anti-Smith arguments but the fundamental point of difference is that I think he has clearly accomplished enough before the dip began to considered in the highest echelon if Tendulkar, Hobbs, etc. His dip for me will just end him at the lower end of that but he has marked himself already higher than Lara, etc.

Can't help but think there is a lot of revisionism now on CW about Lara too.

 

[howitzer]

re: Headley

I found it interesting that both his average pre war and then “maintained 60+ average for 20 years” were both brought up.

For me at least, I don’t really count his record post-war. Not dissimilar to Hammond or say Faulkner post WWI.

(note these are particular exceptions I only make regarding war interrupted careers, if other players in general experience a natural decline that’s their problem)

Yeah agree with this. The only players who should be given a genuine pass for a World War are those who performed both sides of said war. Bradman, Hobbs, Hutton and Nourse are people who get a pass imo.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah agree with this. The only players who should be given a genuine pass for a World War are those who performed both sides of said war. Bradman, Hobbs, Hutton and Nourse are people who get a pass imo.

But what about who missed their best years due to the War? Like Compton, Woolley or Merchant?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

But what about who missed their best years due to the War? Like Compton, Woolley or Merchant?

Cowie

 

[trundler]

Hassett?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Cowie

Moooo

 

[Coronis]

But what about who missed their best years due to the War? Like Compton, Woolley or Merchant?

You’re missing the point completely. The point from me was that I give Headley credit for his pre war exploits, but not for his supposed longevity.

Hobbs and Hutton also missed large chunks of their prime due to the wars, I don’t increase their rating based on “missed large chunks of prime”