Cricket Thread: Aus vs Bangladesh test series... just 4 months away

[Vader]

Head 600 @ 66, striking 88, 3 hundreds
Smith 232 @ 77, striking 61, no hundreds yet (edit 1 ton now).

1 is not like the other.

1 hasn't had the opportunities that the other has enjoyed, but has batted exceptionally well given the limited opportunities available to him.

 

[StonesThrow]

A few interesting comments on cricinfo.

Apparently Smith has just passed Hobbs, and is now the 2nd highest run scorer in Ashes history - behind only Bradman.

There's also an interesting discussion as to whether Smith or Head have been the best batsman of this Ashes series. Head has scored the most runs, and has 3x centuries, but he's also had more opportunities than Smith. Smith has the higher average for the series (currently 74.0 to Head's 66). Smith has only been dismissed 3 times, and he missed out on the best batting pitch (Adelaide). It's an interesting thought bubble.

Wait you're wondering that or someone else is?

Edit : it's you. You say some absolutely crazy things. Kind of like saying someone had a terrible game because they only had 12 touches (without watching the game)

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

1 hasn't had the opportunities that the other has enjoyed, but has batted exceptionally well given the limited opportunities available to him.

1 has scored more than double the runs of the other & 3x tons, winning games off his own bat.

Perhaps Webster should be our best batsman if he scores a ton this innings...

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Can they retire a bowler after he has had 0 wickets and over 140 runs hit off him.

 

[spenze]

Can they retire a bowler after he has had 0 wickets and over 140 runs hit off him.

He is a shot at a double ton ffs

 

[Eagleboy2011]

He is a shot at a double ton ffs

200+. That's MOTM level.

 

[Vader]

Wait you're wondering that or someone else is?

Both. Someone else suggested it. I don't disagree with it.

Edit : it's you. You say some absolutely crazy things. Kind of like saying someone had a terrible game because they only had 12 touches (without watching the game)

I don't say things without watching the game. Ever.

Smith hasn't had the opportunities that Head has enjoyed. If he had... all evidence suggests that he would have made even more runs than Head - but that's just conjecture, because he HASN'T had those opportunities.

 

[spenze]

Poms have to be knackered, if we could keep them out to lunch tomorrow, I don't think they will bat out the day

 

[spenze]

200+. That's MOTM level.

Has to be in the conversation when the decision is made

 

[Vader]

1 has scored more than double the runs of the other & 3x tons, winning games off his own bat.

Perhaps Webster should be our best batsman if he scores a ton this innings...

Smith didn't play on the best batting track so far - Adelaide. Both Smith & Head made centuries in Sydney, and Smith is still going.

Smith took to the bowlers just as much as Head did, in the 2nd innings in Perth, but there weren't enough runs left for him to get for him to make a real score.

The poms simply haven't looked like getting either batsman out all series.

The difference is nowhere near as big as their run totals suggest. Most of the difference between Smith & Head this Ashes has been opportunity. Head has had it, and made the most of it; Smith hasn't had it, but has made the most of the limited opportunities he has had.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Healy and O'Keeke in the commentary are great and funny.

 

[spenze]

Need Potts and Jacks bowling in tandem for the lols

 

[spenze]

Healy and O'Keeke in the commentary are great and funny.

I did like when they were with Howie and they were talking about some of the cricket players getting up early to go out and exercise and Howie saw some when he was going out the hotel at 7 and he asked if Skull was up that early.

Skull said he was up at 5 and saw Healey but she had her high heels in her hands.

 

[StonesThrow]

Smith didn't play on the best batting track so far - Adelaide. Both Smith & Head made centuries in Sydney, and Smith is still going.

Smith took to the bowlers just as much as Head did, in the 2nd innings in Perth, but there weren't enough runs left for him to get for him to make a real score.

The poms simply haven't looked like getting either batsman out all series.

The difference is nowhere near as big as their run totals suggest. Most of the difference between Smith & Head this Ashes has been opportunity. Head has had it, and made the most of it; Smith hasn't had it, but has made the most of the limited opportunities he has had.

He's had 7 innings versus 9 and 3 not outs not including this one.

If someone only plays 1 innings versus 10 but they play well, do you still say the guy that played 1 innings was the best batter of the series?

 

[FR0GGY]

The bigger question is if MOTS is Starc or head.
I think I’m still rolling with Starc given his runs as well.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

The bigger question is if MOTS is Starc or head.
I think I’m still rolling with Starc given his runs as well.

3 tons is hard to beat, but Starc has been good with bat and ball. 28 wickets someone just said.

 

[StonesThrow]

The bigger question is if MOTS is Starc or head.
I think I’m still rolling with Starc given his runs as well.

Tough one but I'd go head given he's consistently made runs through the series where as Starc dropped off towards the end (understandable). Unless Starc rips through the second innings. Could argue Starc carried a bowling attack when it mattered though (could say the same for head to a degree).

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The bigger question is if MOTS is Starc or head.
I think I’m still rolling with Starc given his runs as well.

Starc for me too.

 

[FR0GGY]

Starc for me too.

Shame he’s tapered off, would have been an all time series effort just about

 

[Cromulant]

Shame he’s tapered off, would have been an all time series effort just about

Back him in for a 5fa in the 2nd innings.

Should be MOTS, and if he can squeeze out a decent score with the bat tomorrow itll settle it.

 

[Vader]

He's had 7 innings versus 9 and 3 not outs not including this one.

If someone only plays 1 innings versus 10 but they play well, do you still say the guy that played 1 innings was the best batter of the series?

He has the highest average of the series, by a wide margin. It's not as if we're talking about a #10 or #11 getting 1 or 2 not outs.

Compare their innings so far this Ashes:
Perth
Head - 21 & 123
Smith - 17 & 2*

No difference between them in the 1st innings. Australia completed the run total before Smith had a chance to put a meaningful score on the board in the 2nd innings.

Brisbane
Head - 33 & 22
Smith - 61 & 23*

Smith the better performer in this game in both innings.

Adelaide
Head - 10 & 170
Smith - DNP

Smith denied the opportunity to bat on the best batting wicket of the series so far, as a result of illness.

Melbourne
Head - 12 & 46
Smith - 9 & 24*

Both failed in the 1st innings, again Smith not out in the 2nd, running out of partners before catching Head's score.

Sydney
Head - 163
Smith - 129*

Smith's innings has been every bit as good as Head's, without affording 3 chances (all of which the pommie fielders dropped). It remains to be seen tomorrow who will be the innings' top scorer.

Head's Ashes series has been exceptional, there is no argument about this, and I have no desire to take anything away from his excellent achievements this summer. The point is that Smith's Ashes series has been underrated, with his exposed form every bit as good as Head's, but without the same opportunities to make the big scores.

 

[Cromulant]

When you dig and dont find anything, you dig deeper.

 

[spenze]

He has the highest average of the series, by a wide margin. It's not as if we're talking about a #10 or #11 getting 1 or 2 not outs.

Compare their innings so far this Ashes:
Perth
Head - 21 & 123
Smith - 17 & 2*

No difference between them in the 1st innings. Australia completed the run total before Smith had a chance to put a meaningful score on the board in the 2nd innings.

Brisbane
Head - 33 & 22
Smith - 61 & 23*

Smith the better performer in this game in both innings.

Adelaide
Head - 10 & 170
Smith - DNP

Smith denied the opportunity to bat on the best batting wicket of the series so far, as a result of illness.

Melbourne
Head - 12 & 46
Smith - 9 & 24*

Both failed in the 1st innings, again Smith not out in the 2nd, running out of partners before catching Head's score.

Sydney
Head - 163
Smith - 129*

Smith's innings has been every bit as good as Head's, without affording 3 chances (all of which the pommie fielders dropped). It remains to be seen tomorrow who will be the innings' top scorer.

Head's Ashes series has been exceptional, there is no argument about this, and I have no desire to take anything away from his excellent achievements this summer. The point is that Smith's Ashes series has been underrated, with his exposed form every bit as good as Head's, but without the same opportunities to make the big scores.

I actually get where you are coming from but it's a whole lot of if and buts. Smith could have gotten out for a goldie in Adelaide and the discussion is moot. Unfortunately, when you look at it in this regard, two of Travis' centuries were game winners when the series was on so even if Smith would have gotten a ton, it would have paled in comparison to the great man getting his from position number 1.

Still if you think Heads batting is good on the pitch, I saw his wife in the stands, nothing he has done this series adds up anywhere close to how he is batting there.

 

[spenze]

Starc for me too.

Yep Starc (wouldn't go against a joing POTS) because his wickets and runs won the first 2 of three matches, when the series was on

 

[Peter Doherty]

Mark Waugh scored more than 150 only once in test cricket.

Head has done it 7 times.