Steve Smith vs Brian Lara

[Johan]

Viv was better

 

[Coronis]

He doesn't sleep during test matches apparently due to anxiety and nerves, that effects things.

Pretty ****ed up.

His fielding also shows a downwards trend. Though its easier to have more chances earlier in a test match and more likely to have unfinished latter innings. Does go from 1.13 catches per innings in the first to 0.75 in the fourth. Probs meaningless tho and of course doesn’t reflect actual drops.

Could possibly be a reason why he often takes blinders and drops relatively easy catches tho.

 

[Spark]

First innings runs are significantly more valuable over a large sample size.

This game now a good example of it tbh. India have been clearly the better side for half the Test so far but because the first innings of the game was so dominant by Australia, they're still strongly favoured to win the match (over an India win, anyway).

Pretty ****ed up.

His fielding also shows a downwards trend. Though its easier to have more chances earlier in a test match and more likely to have unfinished latter innings. Does go from 1.13 catches per innings in the first to 0.75 in the fourth. Probs meaningless tho and of course doesn’t reflect actual drops.

Could possibly be a reason why he often takes blinders and drops relatively easy catches tho.

Suspect this has more to do with pitch conditions than anything else

 

[Johan]

Pretty ****ed up.

His fielding also shows a downwards trend. Though its easier to have more chances earlier in a test match and more likely to have unfinished latter innings. Does go from 1.13 catches per innings in the first to 0.75 in the fourth. Probs meaningless tho and of course doesn’t reflect actual drops.

Could possibly be a reason why he often takes blinders and drops relatively easy catches tho.

Definitely possible, lack of sleep makes a person's everything worse, far worse actually.

 

[Coronis]

This game now a good example of it tbh. India have been clearly the better side for half the Test so far but because the first innings of the game was so dominant by Australia, they're still strongly favoured to win the match (over an India win, anyway).

I feel this gets a bit lost because the great matchwinning innings in latter innings are rarer and more remembered, as well as obviously being towards the end of the match, while its easy to get caught up and forget earlier contributions. But in the long run the first innings runs lead to more sustained success. The game can often already be decided at that point, whereas first innings runs will always matter and in the majority of cases, set the tone for the match.

Suspect this has more to do with pitch conditions than anything else

Yeah its just a random stat that means nothing imo lol.

 

[Spark]

I feel this gets a bit lost because the great matchwinning innings in latter innings are rarer and more remembered, as well as obviously being towards the end of the match, while its easy to get caught up and forget earlier contributions. But in the long run the first innings runs lead to more sustained success. The game can often already be decided at that point, whereas first innings runs will always matter and in the majority of cases, set the tone for the match.

I honestly have no idea where this idea that third and fourth innings runs > first innings runs have come from. First innings runs win Test matches, end of story.

 

[Johan]

tbh, for me runs are runs, regardless of Inning.

 

[Spark]

tbh, for me runs are runs, regardless of Inning.

Nah third and fourth innings runs are often pretty facile if one team has a big first innings lead.

 

[Johan]

Nah third and fourth innings runs are often pretty facile if one team has a big first innings lead.

they can be decisive in low scoring games tho.

 

[Spark]

they can be decisive in low scoring games tho.

But that's only a relatively small subset of games, and so will only contribute in a small way to an overall batting average. First innings runs are literally always important because they set the terms of the game.

 

[Johan]

But that's only a relatively small subset of games, and so will only contribute in a small way to an overall batting average. First innings runs are literally always important because they set the terms of the game.

fair.

 

[Johan]

really shocked Lara is winning this

 

[Spark]

Like, yeah you get the critical come-from-behind/chasing hundred every now and then in the third/fourth innings. But you also get a lot of good old fashioned downhill skiing like Kohli's Perth innings or Warner in the 2013-14 Ashes.

 

[Coronis]

really shocked Lara is winning this

I mean, I haven’t voted cause I can’t completely decide between these guys. The consensus here seems to be they’re about equal too. Or more accurately, that roughly half the people think Lara > Smith and the other half think Smith > Lara.

 

[Johan]

I mean, I haven’t voted cause I can’t completely decide between these guys. The consensus here seems to be they’re about equal too. Or more accurately, that roughly half the people think Lara > Smith and the other half think Smith > Lara.

yeah CW is more realistic to Smith/nicer to Lara than other places

 

[Coronis]

yeah CW is more realistic to Smith/nicer to Lara than other places

I have never had that impression.

 

[Johan]

I have never had that impression.

think I see Ponting or Waugh over Lara more frequently outside CW.

 

[DrWolverine]

If you had someone dominating their era are they better than someone who wasn’t dominant or were there just less high quality players playing at that time.

There is no correct answer for this.

For example : McGrath was the standout fast bowler in first half of 2000s?

Is it because he was simply ahead of the rest?

Is it because other greats such as Ambrose, Donald, Walsh and Akram retired around 2000-01?

 

[ankitj]

CWers finding a hole in Smith's record.

 

[DrWolverine]

What are the obvious flaws in records of Sachin & Smith?