• 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.

Boycott vs Greenidge vs Smith

Who is the best batsman out of these three?(Tests)

  • Total voters
    43
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
shortpitched713 said:
Smith was just Hayden with less productivity. He didn't even have any X factor like Sehwag of scoring absurdly fast. I mean he was still really, really good, and underrated like the other 2, but I just don't see how he's Gavaskar comparable.
Click to expand...
Gavaskar's record is tremendously misleading (see average in WI), think someone raised that post WSC he averaged under 40 in every country away from home.

Don't think he scored a quality 100 on any pitch beyond death ass slow and definitely not on anything close to what Smith's home tests were played on.

Gavaskar's selling point for me was the sheer volume of hundreds he scored and technique. But that (the hundreds) aside, don't think he was that far ahead of Smith, while Greenidge's record for quite a while kept up until Sir Cuthbert's eyes went and average fell off a cliff
 
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
shortpitched713 said:
Smith was just Hayden with less productivity. He didn't even have any X factor like Sehwag of scoring absurdly fast. I mean he was still really, really good, and underrated like the other 2, but I just don't see how he's Gavaskar comparable.
Click to expand...
Unlike Hayden and Sehwag he could bat well away from home though.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
Coronis said:
Well shortpitched thinks Hayden is above Gavaskar but Smith isn’t comparable so yeah, apparently not.
Click to expand...
I efinitely don't think Hayden is above Gavaskar. Gavaskar to me is the greatest post war opener. Hayden is definitely below him, but the clear second, for me.
 
C

Calm_profit

State Vice-Captain
shortpitched713 said:
Smith was just Hayden with less productivity. He didn't even have any X factor like Sehwag of scoring absurdly fast. I mean he was still really, really good, and underrated like the other 2, but I just don't see how he's Gavaskar comparable.
Click to expand...
Sure he doesn't have X factor like Sehwag but strike rate of 60 in tests is pretty fast.
 
Kenneth Viljoen

Kenneth Viljoen

International Regular
shortpitched713 said:
Smith was just Hayden with less productivity. He didn't even have any X factor like Sehwag of scoring absurdly fast. I mean he was still really, really good, and underrated like the other 2, but I just don't see how he's Gavaskar comparable.
Click to expand...
I watched Graeme Smith literally grow up in front of me, I would say there is a huge difference between Hayden and Smith ..

Matthew Hayden was one of the games greatest late bloomers, by the age of 29 he had only played 12 Test matches in 6 years for Australia, with a test average of 26 ..
He scored heavily in Sheffield Cricket , and was backed by Steve Waugh in a set up that was dominating world cricket..
Graeme Smith on the otherhand was a prodigy from his teenage years, he was handed the captaincy at 23 at a difficult time, the ghost of Hansie Cronje still loomed large over South African cricket after the match fixing scandal..
Shaun Pollock had relinquished the captaincy after a botched ODI WC at home, the quota system was being ready for implementation, Smith had to grow up very fast.

Graeme Smith's USP is :

●South Africa never lost a Test Match when he scored a Test Hundred

●Smith opened the batting in conditions that were very challenging for most openers statistically.

●A great batsman away from home , averaging over 50 away from SA, only a select group of batters can say that, and the list is probably shorter for those who have played 100+ Tests.

●4th innings Expert, most batsmen tend to struggle in the 4th innings ,Graeme Smith truly thrived..
All of his 4th innings test hundreds came in winning causes , the most by any cricketer in match winning knocks in the 4th innings. In total, only Younus Khan had more 4th innings hundreds than Smith(4) with 5 tons.
His aggregate of 1611 Test runs in the 4th innings is 3rd on the all time list in Test cricket.

●Captaincy.
Nobody in the game has captained more Test Matches than Graeme Smith, a record that will probably be around for a very long time. 109 of his 117 Tests was spent as Test Captain ! Don't think anyone will ever have a greater percentage of their Test career spent as skipper.
 
Last edited:
B

Bolo.

International Captain
Kenneth Viljoen said:
Graeme Smith on the otherhand was a prodigy from his teenage years, he was handed the captaincy at 23 at a difficult time, the ghost of Hansie Cronje still loomed large over South African cricket after the match fixing scandal..
Shaun Pollock had relinquished the captaincy after a botched ODI WC at home, the quota system was being ready for implementation, Smith had to grow up very fast.
Click to expand...
I really hate this argument and how many times I have heard it made. Pollock captained for 3 years after Hansie, and had a higher win rate than any RSA captains with more than a couple of games has ever managed. If the Hansie thing was impacting Smith's captaincy, but not Pollock's, it reflects badly on Smith.

Also don't like the WC argument. It's ODIs, not tests. And pretty much all the other test captains have had to deal with crashing out a WC brutally. But only Smith gets credit?

Quota system thing is also extremely iffy. That can apply to the newer captains (if you want to go there). Not sure there was ever a selection in Smith's time that wasn't merit based.
 
Kenneth Viljoen

Kenneth Viljoen

International Regular
Bolo. said:
I really hate this argument and how many times I have heard it made. Pollock captained for 3 years after Hansie, and had a higher win rate than any RSA captains with more than a couple of games has ever managed. If the Hansie thing was impacting Smith's captaincy, but not Pollock's, it reflects badly on Smith.

Also don't like the WC argument. It's ODIs, not tests. And pretty much all the other test captains have had to deal with crashing out a WC brutally. But only Smith gets credit?

Quota system thing is also extremely iffy. That can apply to the newer captains (if you want to go there). Not sure there was ever a selection in Smith's time that wasn't merit based.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top