Alastair Cook vs Graeme Smith

[Johan]

For Rabada, you are just saying playing in pace friendly conditions in more words. Cook struggling against Morkel was a Cook issue. These were not great attacks. You are assuming they were because a lot of players from Cooks era on did face great attacks. But he faced worse bowlers. They were better than the average quality of attack Smith faced in RSA. But not 30% (the difference between their averages in RSA) better. 8 games for Morkel, 7 for Rabada and Steyn together meant a lot of overs from some seriously weak bowlers.

The point you are making about quality of attacks rather than eras works both ways. See Smith facing better bowlers in SL and Aus, which is 2/3 places Cook averaged more in.

Anyway, I think Cook likely had it a bit rougher away, but it's close enough to be unclear. The difference between their away records is extremely clear.

Not really, I'm saying Rabada was generally gun from day one and had an output from day one that was greater than the output of the average pacer in South Africa, and thus it's fair to say that the main issue Cook had in South Africa were the pacers and not the condition, considering 9 of his 15 dismissals in South Africa are Morkel/Steyn/Rabada that once again plays into my point regarding a RSA comparision between both being invalid as they didn't face the same bowling. I don't really think Cook was better in RSA than Smith anyway, Cook's output in home condition (England) vs Smith's output in home conditions (RSA) was why I brought up Smith's home stats.

who did Smith face in Australia that Cook didn't? same with Sri Lanka.

I don't even really think it's extremely clear if I'm honest, Cook has the advantage in two of the big three, it's a little more nuanced than just averages but Cook has higher output in Asia and Australia while Smith has higher in England/New Zealand and Carribean (if that can even be considered a fair comparision point.)

 

[Bolo.]

Not really, I'm saying Rabada was generally gun from day one and had an output from day one that was greater than the output of the average pacer in South Africa, and thus it's fair to say that the main issue Cook had in South Africa were the pacers and not the condition, considering 9 of his 15 dismissals in South Africa are Morkel/Steyn/Rabada that once again plays into my point regarding a RSA comparision between both being invalid as they didn't face the same bowling. I don't really think Cook was better in RSA than Smith anyway, Cook's output in home condition (England) vs Smith's output in home conditions (RSA) was why I brought up Smith's home stats.

who did Smith face in Australia that Cook didn't? same with Sri Lanka.

I don't even really think it's extremely clear if I'm honest, Cook has the advantage in two of the big three, it's a little more nuanced than just averages but Cook has higher output in Asia and Australia while Smith has higher in England/New Zealand and Carribean (if that can even be considered a fair comparision point.)

Presenting Cooks dismissals as Steyn + Morkel plus Rabada is extremely disingenuous. Rabada and Steyn are one and two each. It's not a quality of attack issue. It's him stinking it up against Morkel (especially the early 35 averaging version of him) and losing his wicket to a bunch of really poor bowlers.

McWarne were playing for a higher proportion of Smith's career, and he only played Murali.

There is a very clear difference between a batting average of 55 and 46. And their aren't holes in Smith's record to the degree Cook has.

 

[Johan]

Presenting Cooks dismissals as Steyn + Morkel plus Rabada is extremely disingenuous. Rabada and Steyn are one and two each. It's not a quality of attack issue. It's him stinking it up against Morkel (especially the early 35 averaging version of him) and losing his wicket to a bunch of really poor bowlers.

McWarne were playing for a higher proportion of Smith's career, and he only played Murali.

There is a very clear difference between a batting average of 55 and 46. And their aren't holes in Smith's record to the degree Cook has.

Yeah sure, So it's the South African bowlers he had problem with and not the South African wickets, precisely my point, Cook having low output in South Africa doesn't mean that it gives Smith a pass for having low output in the same conditions but in about 50% of his games.

Playing for a higher volume of your career means nothing, Smith only played McWarne away one time, in 2005-6 where he averaged 25 odd, Cook played them once away in his career in the brutal 2007 Ashes and averaged 27 odd, unlike Smith he actually had a hundred is the only thing that can be said about either vs McWarne. Cook also played Murali in 2007-8 too. Smith has no bowlers advatange, let go of that narrative as soon as possible.

ah well, 45 vs 37 is pretty distant as well for home stats. Cook definitely has lower lows than Smith does but also higher highs.

 

[Bolo.]

Yeah sure, So it's the South African bowlers he had problem with and not the South African wickets, precisely my point, Cook having low output in South Africa doesn't mean that it gives Smith a pass for having low output in the same conditions but in about 50% of his games.

Playing for a higher volume of your career means nothing, Smith only played McWarne away one time, in 2005-6 where he averaged 25 odd, Cook played them once away in his career in the brutal 2007 Ashes and averaged 27 odd, unlike Smith he actually had a hundred is the only thing that can be said about either vs McWarne. Cook also played Murali in 2007-8 too. Smith has no bowlers advatange, let go of that narrative as soon as possible.

ah well, 45 vs 37 is pretty distant as well for home stats. Cook definitely has lower lows than Smith does but also higher highs.

Ok, it conditions don't matter. It was just that Cook was too poor a bat to handle mediocre bowling.

Rethink the implications of your second paragraph. Do you think playing a higher proportion of games against better bowling makes no difference?

We've covered their home records already.

 

[Johan]

Ok, it conditions don't matter. It was just that Cook was too poor a bat to handle mediocre bowling.

Rethink the implications of your second paragraph. Do you think playing a higher proportion of games against better bowling makes no difference?

We've covered their home records already.

he struggled with SA home and away, people have that team, Smith himself has that team in form of India, a inferior bowling attack if anything.

Good point, Smith's away series against McWarne was 3 tests and Cook's was 5 tests, against Murali away it was 2 for Smith and 3 for Cook, point in Cook's favour then.

Yeah, a clear and easy conclusion would be Cook has greater home output and in India and Australia, while Smith has greater output in England and New Zealand, it shouldn't really be that controversial.

 

[Bolo.]

he struggled with SA home and away, people have that team, Smith himself has that team in form of India, a inferior bowling attack if anything.

Good point, Smith's away series against McWarne was 3 tests and Cook's was 5 tests, against Murali away it was 2 for Smith and 3 for Cook, point in Cook's favour then.

Yeah, a clear and easy conclusion would be Cook has greater home output and in India and Australia, while Smith has greater output in England and New Zealand, it shouldn't really be that controversial.

I don't think that the idea that a higher proportion of games against better attacks contributes to quality of attacks faced is a tough concept.

6/9 countries is not in any way equal to England and NZ.

 

[Johan]

I don't think that the idea that a higher proportion of games against better attacks contributes to quality of attacks faced is a tough concept.

6/9 countries is not in any way equal to England and NZ.

I told you the number of away games Smith played McWarne and Murali is 5 in Smith's case and 8 in Cook's, with Cook having 2 hundreds, I'm very much playing within your logic, Cook simply got the upper hand.

No chance I'm giving you Bangladesh considering Cook was averaging 100+ in Ban when Graeme was an active plYer IE same attack and conditions, you can have UAE though if you want.

 

[Bolo.]

I told you the number of away games Smith played McWarne and Murali is 5 in Smith's case and 8 in Cook's, with Cook having 2 hundreds, I'm very much playing within your logic, Cook simply got the upper hand.

No chance I'm giving you Bangladesh considering Cook was averaging 100+ in Ban when Graeme was an active plYer IE same attack and conditions, you can have UAE though if you want.

Which of Smith and Cook played a higher proportion of their games vs Murali and McWarne?

 

[Chin Music]

Averages in some respects are a little misleading when reviewing them standalone. We know Cook had a phenomenal series in 2010/11 but he was up against an Aussie attack on home soil that was both far less good than nearly every other edition that they had produced this century, or was hit by injuries.

Cook had a rough ride in Australia in 2006/7, was particularly poor in 2013/14 and was also poor in 2017/18 barring a double ton when Australia decided to rest some of their side on an absolute road at Melbourne. His overall average is good, but you would say he was often at odds there in all but one series.

 

[Chin Music]

Which of Smith and Cook played a higher proportion of their games vs Murali and McWarne?

Given Smith debuted circa 3 years earlier, it would be him.

 

[Johan]

Which of Smith and Cook played a higher proportion of their games vs Murali and McWarne?

like home games included? Wasn't the conversation away? but regardless

Murali — 7 innings for Smith, 6 for Cook

McWarne — 12 innings for Smith, 10 for Cook

 

[Johan]

Averages in some respects are a little misleading when reviewing them standalone. We know Cook had a phenomenal series in 2010/11 but he was up against an Aussie attack on home soil that was both far less good than nearly every other edition that they had produced this century, or was hit by injuries.

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.

 

[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.

I recall that Starc was left out of that game and one of the other seamers pulled up ill and basically didn't bowl out of Cummins/Hazlewood.

 

[Johan]

I recall that Starc was left out of that game and one of the other seamers pulled up ill and basically didn't bowl out of Cummins/Hazlewood.

Only Mitch Marsh didn't bowl much iirc which tbf is a plus for Australia, regardless I don't think Cook was a ATG in aus or anything but definitely better than smithy and sehwag imo

 

[Betterpolo]

Just looking at his career I didn't know (or more likely had forgotten) about Smith's huge opening stand with Gibbs early in his career vs Pakistan. Must be right up there in the record books.

On his momentous debut tour of England, you look at the scorecards and England fielded a lot of high quality bowlers - Gough, Anderson, Harrison, Flintoff. Just shows you need to dig a little deeper and understand where these players were in their careers at this time. Richard Kirtley played just twice but ended up as 2nd highest wicket taker and with the lowest average. A truly great series though.

 

[Bolo.]

like home games included? Wasn't the conversation away? but regardless

Murali — 7 innings for Smith, 6 for Cook

McWarne — 12 innings for Smith, 10 for Cook

Yes, we are talking away.

Absolute numbers are not relevant to proportion.

Smith has 1/3 series in Aus against McWarne, plus the ICC. And 1/1 against Murali.

Cook is 1/4 McWarne and 1/2 Murali.

 

[Johan]

Yes, we are talking away.

Absolute numbers are not relevant to proportion.

Smith has 1/3 series in Aus against McWarne, plus the ICC. And 1/1 against Murali.

Cook is 1/4 McWarne and 1/2 Murali.

so, in summary Cook has outperformed Smith against McWarne even though both sucked, and happens to average 10 whole runs more than Smith in Australia. It's pretty clear whose better in Australia lol

Do you genuinely believe Smith is better in Sri Lanka than Cook?

 

[Bolo.]

so, in summary Cook has outperformed Smith against McWarne even though both sucked, and happens to average 10 whole runs more than Smith in Australia. It's pretty clear whose better in Australia lol

Do you genuinely believe Smith is better in Sri Lanka than Cook?

Why does it take to many posts to make the simple point that Smith had a harder job in Aus and SL?

IDK who was better in either of these countries, or most of the others. And I don't think these country by countries are a good way to compare players. Smith is generally better across countries though, and that is a good way to compare.