Alastair Cook vs Graeme Smith

[Bolo.]

Playing less matches, getting outperformed regardless against the same set of bowlers and still having a tougher job is certainly a stance.

Cook is objectively better in Australia, India and home output, Smith is better in England/New Zealand and UAE, I already told you why Bangladesh and Windies can't be considered, can't put it anymore simply.

6/9 and ahead by greater margins on this poor country by country approach.

 

[sayon basak]

If we take Cook and Smith's home record at face value, Cook's numbers aren't way better.
Averages only 3 points higher with a similar (actually slightly lower) amount of century per innings.

 

[sayon basak]

I like Ashwin but Warne was miles better at home

That's comfortably a stretch.

 

[Johan]

6/9 and ahead by greater margins on this poor country by country approach.

Already gave you the reasoning for preferring aus/ind/home record of Cook and why I can't take WI and Ban comparisions seriously, not going to commit further.

 

[Johan]

If we take Cook and Smith's home record at face value, Cook's numbers aren't way better.
Averages only 3 points higher with a similar (actually slightly lower) amount of century per innings.

he got a lot more home minnow games

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

without Ban/Zim, it's 45 vs 38, not close.

 

[sayon basak]

he got a lot more home minnow games

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

without Ban/Zim, it's 45 vs 38, not close.

That being true, Smith was better than Cook in England. And Cook wasn't any better in SA.

 

[Johan]

That being true, Smith was better than Cook in England. And Cook wasn't any better in SA.

Cook has one decent (2010) and one disaster tour of South Africa (2015-16), though one of the points I gave Smith was he was better in Cook's backyard than Cook was in his. again

Argument for Cook

1. Greater output in Australia
2. Greater output in Asia
3. Greater output in his home conditions

Argument for Smith

1. Greater output in UAE/England/New Zealand
2. much greater output in England than Cook had in South Africa
3. a greater library of knocks

My point revolves around this not being a run away victory for Smith, and that stands.

 

[sayon basak]

Argument for Cook

1. Greater output in Australia
2. Greater output in Asia
3. Greater output in his home conditions

Argument for Smith

1. Greater output in UAE/England/New Zealand
2. much greater output in England than Cook had in South Africa
3. a greater library of knocks

My point revolves around this not being a run away victory for Smith, and that stands.

If you count "output in home condition" as a different point on it's own, you should also count "output in away condition" as an independent point too. IMO, both should be discarded as both of them as included already by considering individual countries anyway.

 

[sayon basak]

H2H Stats:-

 

[Johan]

If you count "output in home condition" as a different point on it's own, you should also count "output in away condition" as an independent point too. IMO, both should be discarded as both of them as included by considering individual countries anyway.

don't really see why, but I can rework my point by saying Cook had higher output in England than Smith had in South Africa but Smith had higher output in England than Cook had in South Africa, it portrays and conveys the same sentiment and point.

 

[sayon basak]

don't really see why, but I can rework my point by saying Cook had higher output in England than Smith had in South Africa but Smith had higher output in England than Cook had in South Africa, it portrays and conveys the same sentiment and point.

Smith in England>Cook in SA
Smith in SA<Cook in England
Smith in SA>Cook in SA
Smith in England>Cook in England
3-1

You see why?
Because by doing what you're doing, you are only considering 2 of the scenarios, and leaving out the other two.

 

[capt_Luffy]

If you count "output in home condition" as a different point on it's own, you should also count "output in away condition" as an independent point too. IMO, both should be discarded as both of them as included already by considering individual countries anyway.

I think home conditions are fundamentally different than any away country really.

 

[sayon basak]

I think home conditions are fundamentally different than any away country really.

Aren't away record supposed to be held higher than home ones?

And if we consider every country individually, should we consider home record as an individual point, even though it was already considered in the country wise comparison?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Aren't away record supposed to be held higher than home ones?

And if we consider every country individually, should we consider home record as an individual point, even though it was already considered in the country wise comparison?

Away records should be rated higher, but just higher; like 55-45 or 60-40 IMO, due to the simple reason that a player is supposed to play around half of his games at home.
A home record is bigger than an individual point. By large, it is the only point with a sufficiently large sample size really.

 

[Johan]

Smith in England>Cook in SA
Smith in SA<Cook in England
Smith in SA>Cook in SA
Smith in England>Cook in England
3-1

You see why?
Because by doing what you're doing, you are only considering 2 of the scenarios, and leaving out the other two.

I moreso agree with Luffy here.

Home can't be treated the same way as away which I can do country by country, considering you play 50% of your matches at home it is a whole different and a huge priority.

 

[Coronis]

@Prince EWS this thread must’ve turned into a favourite of yours

 

[Prince EWS]

@Prince EWS this thread must’ve turned into a favourite of yours

All Grum all the time.

 

[Chin Music]

The same can be said about Smith, he had a far from easy time when facing McWarne, his big series wasn't against a particularly good team either, just that Cook's big series was a lot bigger. The Melbourne pitch might be a little questionable as a pitch (though Anderson and Broad both did well there), the attack of Cummins/Hazlewood/Lyon isn't the worst attack in the world to make runs against. Regardless, Cook averages 49 in Australia compared to Smith's 38, there isn't a comparision, if they were close in output a comparision would make sense.

My general point was that Cook was disastrous on that tour apart from going big when the series was already lost. He essentially went missing, apart from that game, so I find it much harder to give credence to Cook's figures alone when they are so weighted on one admittedly great series and three where he generally sucked. I do include the 2017-18 series as being a poor series as he did not cross 40 in any innings apart from the one at Melbourne, and it was a flat deck . Ashes 2017-18: Cricket officials begin review of MCG's 'graveyard' pit | Pitchcare Cook does deserve credit for pulling that innings out of the bag, as it was in a series where the batting wasn't up to scratch and of course it would have been a successive 5-0 loss in Australia. However, it doesn't for me cover up that he wasn't that good a player of high class fast bowling across his career. His performances in England tended to also reveal that. Very good player of spin, mind.