The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread

[Burgey]

Yeah but he makes 80 plus most matches, so there's that

 

[honestbharani]

Don't you reckon Smith is a better player now than he was in 2015? Because I reckon he's miles better tbh. You could have opened with Marshall and McGrath against him last Ashes and it wouldn't have mattered. Bloke was on an Aspy mission and was never going to miss out. If anything, it probably saved Anderson's blushes not being there. He's still very effective but a lot older and a bit slower than he was in 2015 and earlier.

I do not disagree with any of what you are saying. But it did not happen, which was my point.

And personally, I would still define dominance as being able to score at will against someone, and while Smith is an ATG and in God mode during that series, I still don't see him doing that to Anderson in England. And by extension, I do not see anyone doing that to Anderson in England even as late in his career as last year.

 

[honestbharani]

Between 2013 in England and 2017-18 in Australia, Anderson has dismissed Smith three times for a cost of about 321 runs, that's an average of 107 and certainly not 47. Figures may not be exact because of my somewhat patchy mathematical ability, but it's definitely very close.

In conclusion, HB is completely incorrect on this one, and James Anderson is the second most overrated individual on the face of the earth (only behind Billie Eilish ofc)

Lol @ the salt. I never said he woul get Smith out easily, did I? Just that he will be tougher to score off for Smith. I even mentioned the "stalemate" angle.. Anderson won't be able to blast him out or anything, and Smith wont be able to blast him out of the attack either. Anderson hates conceding runs, Smith hates losing his wicket etc.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Lol @ the salt. I never said he woul get Smith out easily, did I? Just that he will be tougher to score off for Smith. I even mentioned the "stalemate" angle.. Anderson won't be able to blast him out or anything, and Smith wont be able to blast him out of the attack either. Anderson hates conceding runs, Smith hates losing his wicket etc.

It doesn't matter at what rate the runs come at, the fact stands that all those runs have come directly off Anderson's bowling, under no conceivable standard or measure is having over 100 runs scored off your bowling between wickets a "stalemate", it is just so blatantly obvious Smith has the wood over Anderson.


And that is by no means just a Smith thing, not is it just an English conditions thing. Anderson has been consistently underwhelming in Ashes cricket throughout his entire career

 

[stephen]

Lol @ the salt. I never said he woul get Smith out easily, did I? Just that he will be tougher to score off for Smith. I even mentioned the "stalemate" angle.. Anderson won't be able to blast him out or anything, and Smith wont be able to blast him out of the attack either. Anderson hates conceding runs, Smith hates losing his wicket etc.

That kind if ignores Smith's whole MO. Hee never takes risks. He simply waits for bad balls and dispatches them. His trigger movements and position at the crease mean that bowlers have a very narrow window for containing him and virtually none for dismissing him. The only ones who have somewhat contained him in recent times is New Zealand last season, and that was more because he was coming in at 2/500 most of the time.

 

[honestbharani]

It doesn't matter at what rate the runs come at, the fact stands that all those runs have come directly off Anderson's bowling, under no conceivable standard or measure is having over 100 runs scored off your bowling between wickets a "stalemate", it is just so blatantly obvious Smith has the wood over Anderson.


And that is by no means just a Smith thing, not is it just an English conditions thing. Anderson has been consistently underwhelming in Ashes cricket throughout his entire career

Once again, you are missing the point. To me, there is an obvious gain for the bowler at the other end if he has Anderson plugging away at Smith from one end. Maybe an indiscrete shot, maybe an unnecessary risk or something but that is my whole point about dominating. He dominated Archer and Broad and whoever else they had bowling that series, I do not see him dominating Anderson like that, scoring at will. If him not having been dismissed a whole lot by Anderson is proof of anything, then the fact that he averages lower and strikes slower against England in England when Anderson is playing is proof of my point too.

All this is just going in circles now, so I am not gonna post anymore on this topic. You can have the last word if that satisfies you. My point is simple: Batsman dominating a bowler to me indicates an ability to score at will against that bowler. Smith never did that to Anderson in England and I do not see any batsman doing that to Anderson in England. Smith has dominated England in England overall for sure.

 

[honestbharani]

That kind if ignores Smith's whole MO. Hee never takes risks. He simply waits for bad balls and dispatches them. His trigger movements and position at the crease mean that bowlers have a very narrow window for containing him and virtually none for dismissing him. The only ones who have somewhat contained him in recent times is New Zealand last season, and that was more because he was coming in at 2/500 most of the time.

Yes, when he is allowed to bat at his pace but if you remember in that Ashes, he had to accelerate a lot of times coz he was running out of partners. That is where England really missed Anderson IMO.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Once again, you are missing the point. To me, there is an obvious gain for the bowler at the other end if he has Anderson plugging away at Smith from one end. Maybe an indiscrete shot, maybe an unnecessary risk or something but that is my whole point about dominating. He dominated Archer and Broad and whoever else they had bowling that series, I do not see him dominating Anderson like that, scoring at will. If him not having been dismissed a whole lot by Anderson is proof of anything, then the fact that he averages lower and strikes slower against England in England when Anderson is playing is proof of my point too.

All this is just going in circles now, so I am not gonna post anymore on this topic. You can have the last word if that satisfies you. My point is simple: Batsman dominating a bowler to me indicates an ability to score at will against that bowler. Smith never did that to Anderson in England and I do not see any batsman doing that to Anderson in England. Smith has dominated England in England overall for sure.

OK then, you are entitled to your opinion even though I think it's at best tenuous

Anderson having a relatively mediocre Ashes record is not a matter of opinion, whichever way you cut it his statistics aren't flash

 

[TheJediBrah]

Lol @ the salt. I never said he woul get Smith out easily, did I? Just that he will be tougher to score off for Smith. I even mentioned the "stalemate" angle.. Anderson won't be able to blast him out or anything, and Smith wont be able to blast him out of the attack either. Anderson hates conceding runs, Smith hates losing his wicket etc.

And we're back to how we define "dominate"

I think for the vast majority of people, Anderson not being able to get Smith out and Smith making over 100 runs off him personally between dismissal in Test cricket is inarguably him being "dominated". Seems like you are trying to say that unless Smith is smashing him all over the park at better than a run a ball then it doesn't count, which is a bit weird, but ok.

 

[honestbharani]

And we're back to how we define "dominate"

I think for the vast majority of people, Anderson not being able to get Smith out and Smith making over 100 runs off him personally between dismissal in Test cricket is inarguably him being "dominated". Seems like you are trying to say that unless Smith is smashing him all over the park at better than a run a ball then it doesn't count, which is a bit weird, but ok.

Too bad cricket is not played that way then.

 

[honestbharani]

OK then, you are entitled to your opinion even though I think it's at best tenuous

Anderson having a relatively mediocre Ashes record is not a matter of opinion, whichever way you cut it his statistics aren't flash

I am not denying Anderson has a mediocre Ashes record overall at all..

 

[TheJediBrah]

Too bad cricket is not played that way then.

I can see what you're trying to twist this into but it still doesn't work

If you're argument is that with Anderson in the team Smith dominates slightly less, then . . . maybe? Not sure if that's actually the case but he still dominates

 

[Daemon]

Between 2013 in England and 2017-18 in Australia, Anderson has dismissed Smith three times for a cost of about 321 runs, that's an average of 107 and certainly not 47. Figures may not be exact because of my somewhat patchy mathematical ability, but it's definitely very close.

In conclusion, HB is completely incorrect on this one, and James Anderson is the second most overrated individual on the face of the earth (only behind Billie Eilish ofc)

How did you calculate this?

 

[trundler]

Looked up in his spreadsheet, duh

 

[Daemon]

Looked up in his spreadsheet, duh

That’s why I’m asking, mine says Smith has scored 621 runs against Anderson in the same time period and only been dismissed thrice.

 

[Victor Ian]

How did you calculate this?

Probably a prodigy of Daemon School of Stats .

 

[trundler]

Steven Smith vs James Anderson Matchup Statistics | Cricmetric

378 runs for 6 wickets according to this

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Steven Smith vs James Anderson Matchup Statistics | Cricmetric

378 runs for 6 wickets according to this

Yeah that roughly lines up with what I worked out, I said all along I was excluding 2010-11, as Smith was still very much picked as an allrounder back then

FWIW I was just using the ball by ball cricinfo commentary to try and calculate, but going forward that site looks like it could be very handy indeed

 

[Flem274*]

anderson was instrumental in their down under victory but im not so sure he's stopping smith last ashes, even with a duke. smith is very good at leaving outswingers alone and picking inswingers.

archer and stokes were your guys. smith isn't scared of short stuff but he has less control when playing it if you set your field correctly, and if you're patient and accurate enough you can make it work but it will take time.

in terms of england tours smith has been pretty damn good even with anderson around. got very used to falling asleep with him on 40* coming in early and waking up to him on 100+.

smiths unusual in that he's probably the best batsman in the corridor of uncertainty i've ever seen, and the region where you could snick him is far away from the stumps so you can only bowl for the snick. kohli has a massive corridor early on and kane's strength at cute little guides are his weakness early on (along with the legside strangle).

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Pains me to say it but 2010-11 was really a quality collective bowling effort from England, apart from Broad who broke down in Adelaide, every one of the English attack had their moment in the sun at some point