<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 16 2017 at 11:37 PM

WRF  (Premier Login AlexRoberts)
Owner

 
"The scale of the damage done to England by Steve Smith's double century in the third Ashes Test is only matched by the sense of inevitability that the Australia skipper would get a monster score when he had only a few runs to his name." - BBC

BBC article


""

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 2:43 PM 

The lack of replies suggests a lack of interest or we are all secretly afraid to admit it?

 
 
Roundhegian
(Login Roundhegian)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 4:19 PM 

The statistics suggest he is but wait till the end of his career. My choice would be Tendulkar or Viv Richards.

 
 
Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Best Aussie certainly

December 19 2017, 4:31 PM 

He is up there and I would put him as the best Aussie batsman since Bradman certainly.

Doesn't help being called Smith of course, he might get lost a little in history whereas Tendulkar, Richards, Lara, Ponting, Sobers and Kallis might not.

 
 
Pauld
(Login pdowgill)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 5:34 PM 

Far too early to say - at one point Voges was on course to have an average as high as Bradman's but best since, i think not. So we need to wait and see what his final figures are - but no one will ever talk about his technique in the same breath as Richards et al.

 
 
Guest
(Login BrickyardBoy)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 6:28 PM 

How is best defined? Most runs? Highest average? Best technique? Most attractive? Most exciting?

In which of these senses was Bradman the best?

 
 
Pauld
(Login pdowgill)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 6:38 PM 

Quite simply having average over 30 runs better than anyone else who has played the game...a century once every three innings, it goes on..

 
 
Guest
(Login BrickyardBoy)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 19 2017, 9:27 PM 

"Quite simply having average over 30 runs better than anyone else who has played the game...a century once every three innings, it goes on.."

"...it goes on.."

You make my point very clearly. Before comparing Smith against all other batsmen with Bradman, it is necessary to establish the criterion upon which the judgement is to be made, otherwise the exercise is a recipe for disagreement.

The next highest average, would be one criteria. A century once every three innings, would be another. Performance over the whole of a career would be a third, and probably, essential criteria.

Unfortunately, "it goes on" is not a criteria, but it is an unresolved complication.

Establish the criteria first, make the comparison and come to a conclusion.

 
 
Bennyfishel
(Login Bennyfishel)

Best Australian since Bradman

December 20 2017, 1:35 AM 

I was very grateful that I saw the Bradman/Morris partnership @ Headingley 1948, it was a pleasure to see Don in full flight, however as far as technique goes I have no doubts in MY mind that the greatest technique I have ever seen was GREG CHAPPEL. It was like watching " POETRY IN MOTION" Even a bit better in technique than LEN HUTTON. Now,coming from a Yorkshire expat,that is really something

 
 
Pauld
(Login pdowgill)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 20 2017, 12:24 PM 

Brickyard with due respect with regards to Bradman there is no need for further criteria if we are discussing the greatest/best batsman of all time; now if the question is who had the best technique or was the most destructive or gave most pleasure to watch then that is totally different than identifying the GOAT as in identifying greatest most would look at the performance at international level and DB is head and shoulders beyond anyone in those stats that count.

 
 
Guest
(Login BrickyardBoy)

Re: Steve Smith: Best since Bradman?

December 20 2017, 1:05 PM 

The question, of course, is not about the pre-eminence of Bradman's record. Rather it is about who comes second best. So criteria do matter.

I merely wanted to establish what the question is asking. If it asks "Who has the best statistics since Bradman?", then that is a fairly easy thing to do by looking at the record. That is fine by me.

In order to do this for Smith, for example, we would now have to wait for him to finish his career, so that we know what his final statistics are in the end.

At present he appears to be well on the way. Time will tell.

 
 
 
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2018 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk