That's not what he said at all.Doesn't that prove the quality of Kohli and India then? The logic is circular and incorrect. Kohli isn't good because his runs against Herath don't matter as he only does well against bad batsmen.
Yeah but Lara is several orders of magnitude better than anyone in the England line up tbf.Lara wouldn't allow Lyon to settle in on a length like the English batsmen had. Lyon would have more to worry about after he had been lifted into the Adelaide stands a few times.
If Warne and Murali struggled against Lara, it's madness not to conclude that he would have marmalised Lyon.
Would Stokes really make that much of a difference? I'm not sure his bowling would be great shakes against Aust on these flat wickets, but perhaps his middle order batting would have be handy.. I guess. As for really making a difference from what we've seen between these two sides... I doubt it.how much would Smith love that Root got single figures haha
Man the ashes is over already unless Ben Stokes appears next test.
He's always been this speed iircwhat’s the go with Haze bowling mid 140s? is this gonna be like that 2011/12 summer where Siddle and Hilfenhaus were bowling 150s?
The reason they look weak is because India/Kohli are so good against them.I don't think anyone could seriously argue that Kohli is not a great batter, particularly in limited over games, but he hasn't really proven himself to be quite as good of a test match batter as others.
All of the matches India played against Sri Lanka help him a lot. They have a weak bowling attack right now and he's played a ton of matches against them.
Lara is the greatest batsmen of all-time.Yeah but Lara is several orders of magnitude better than anyone in the England line up tbf.
As opposed to?Smith is statistically number 1
A point you've made about 15 times in the last week or so.Smith is on his own as the number one batsmen in the world. Incredible record in the last 3 years.
That being said, if he was playing cricket in my backyard I'm not even sure I would open the curtains to watch.
But record wise, can't fault him.
A box office draw of a player.As opposed to?
Watch him slow one up the next over or two and hit the shoulder of the bat.
Yeah, has seriously ratcheted up his level. Can still get a bit to much on the legs against righties but no where near as much as previously. Deadly against the lefties. In the last two years he's averaging 21.8 against lefties.He's averaging about 20 this year. On friendly pitches, tbf, but he's at that level.
I don’t agree with that but I think he belongs in the argument for second. Had a level he went to which very few players ever could. He was so good to watch.Lara is the greatest batsmen of all-time.
I think he became a better bowler once he started bowling around the wicket to right handers a lot more and was able to bottle them up.Yeah, has seriously ratcheted up his level. Can still get a bit to much on the legs against righties but no where near as much as previously. Deadly against the lefties. In the last two years he's averaging 21.8 against lefties.
and went to that level more often than the few others who could also go to those heights.I don’t agree with that but I think he belongs in the argument for second. Had a level he went to which very few players ever could. He was so good to watch.