Top On-Field Personalities

[Richard]

Or maybe he was unlucky and careless - treading on his stumps, getting given lbw incorrectly and being run-out.
And if you seriously think getting him caught off a Hook-shot is working him out, you're delusional!
Bicknell has got him lbw twice, Hoggard once - and 3 times he's played at balls he needn't (and not doing that is his biggest strength), being at Headingley, PE and Kingsmead (first-innings all 3 times).
Before long he's going to get back his judgement of most of the rest of his innings, leave the balls he needs to leave, and wait for the totally unavoidable balls on the pads.
He'll probably stop missing straight balls, too - given that he's not done that much, either.
And if he gets caught Pulling or Hooking again this series I'll be quite amazed.
It's been a combination of different circumstances that have caused his cheap dismissals - until there is a sequence of similar dismissals, you can't say anyone's worked him out.

 

[sledger]

Or maybe he was unlucky and careless - treading on his stumps, getting given lbw incorrectly and being run-out.
And if you seriously think getting him caught off a Hook-shot is working him out, you're delusional!
Bicknell has got him lbw twice, Hoggard once - and 3 times he's played at balls he needn't (and not doing that is his biggest strength), being at Headingley, PE and Kingsmead (first-innings all 3 times).
Before long he's going to get back his judgement of most of the rest of his innings, leave the balls he needs to leave, and wait for the totally unavoidable balls on the pads.
He'll probably stop missing straight balls, too - given that he's not done that much, either.
And if he gets caught Pulling or Hooking again this series I'll be quite amazed.
It's been a combination of different circumstances that have caused his cheap dismissals - until there is a sequence of similar dismissals, you can't say anyone's worked him out.

agreed,

unless they can work out a method to get him to tread on the stumps again

 

[Richard]

Well they seemed to reckon on the radio that Giles had him in trouble today.
Apparently it took incredible consistency of accuracy to carry the thing out, though, and it might have worked once but until it works again I'll not consider much of it.

 

[marc71178]

I seem to remember Giles also caused him more problems than anyone else in the 2 innings on which his hype still exists.

 

[Richard]

Caused problems - and got him out through good bowling once (ironically the time where he didn't get any credit).
Causing batsmen problems is no use - you've got to get them out.

 

[badgerhair]

Or maybe he was unlucky and careless - treading on his stumps, getting given lbw incorrectly and being run-out.
And if you seriously think getting him caught off a Hook-shot is working him out, you're delusional!
Bicknell has got him lbw twice, Hoggard once - and 3 times he's played at balls he needn't (and not doing that is his biggest strength), being at Headingley, PE and Kingsmead (first-innings all 3 times).
Before long he's going to get back his judgement of most of the rest of his innings, leave the balls he needs to leave, and wait for the totally unavoidable balls on the pads.
He'll probably stop missing straight balls, too - given that he's not done that much, either.
And if he gets caught Pulling or Hooking again this series I'll be quite amazed.
It's been a combination of different circumstances that have caused his cheap dismissals - until there is a sequence of similar dismissals, you can't say anyone's worked him out.

Compare and contrast this with one of Richard's dissections of an England batsman.

Note how Graeme Smith, a batsman with a by now fairly well-established record of carelessness and limited technique, is being hailed as someone who can eradicate his persistent faults overnight, while an English batsman who continues to succeed despite Richard's distaste is always about to fail because of his multifarious technical deficiencies which are ineradicable.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[marc71178]

It hadn't escaped my notice either.

Maybe it's because he's been talking up Smith as the best since Bradman (or near enough that) and is still hanging onto that belief regardless of actual performances.

On the other hand, once he's written someone off, any runs are either (a) luck, (b) poor bowling or (c) flat wickets

 

[Richard]

Or maybe it's because plenty of people have questioned Trescothick's ability at Test-level, I am by no means the only one.
I've pointed-out luck in batsmen I both rate and don't rate, I'll always do it and there's no way around it for the supporters of those batsmen.
Flat pitches and poor bowling are pretty much a given in most situations ATM.

 

[marc71178]

So how come your beloved Smith isn't averaging 100 then?

 

[Richard]

Because no-one averages 100, it's a totally unrealistic expectation.

 

[marc71178]

I thought that seeing as he's the best since Bradman and Bradman would average 1000 in current cricket, surely he can average 100 seeing as he has no obvious flaws that mean people can work him out and dismiss him cheaply?

 

[Langeveldt]

So was the above.
Insulting long-standing CW members is invariably a waste of time.

Long standing?
Pah! Gimme a break

 

[Richard]

I thought that seeing as he's the best since Bradman and Bradman would average 1000 in current cricket, surely he can average 100 seeing as he has no obvious flaws that mean people can work him out and dismiss him cheaply?

I said Bradman might average 1000 in one-day-cricket.
Of course he has obvious limitations, but that doesn't automatically mean people can work him and dismiss him cheaply.
If Smith finishes his career with an average in the 60s (looking unlikely ATM - but there's still ages and ages to go yet) there will be a case for him being the best since Bradman.

 

[marc71178]

How is there a case for that if he averages in the 60s seeing as there's many others who are also up at that level, and I think most people would take Dravid or SRT ahead of him for sure.

I note he scored another superb 2 today - really doing well against England isn't he?

 

[Richard]

Yep - Hoggard and Bicknell combined have suggested they might just be working him out.

 

[Tim]

Obviously Richard, you missed Graeme Smith fall to pieces after Fleming had a crack at him early last year in an ODI at Eden Park.

 

[tooextracool]

Or maybe he was unlucky and careless - treading on his stumps, getting given lbw incorrectly and being run-out.
And if you seriously think getting him caught off a Hook-shot is working him out, you're delusional!
Bicknell has got him lbw twice, Hoggard once - and 3 times he's played at balls he needn't (and not doing that is his biggest strength), being at Headingley, PE and Kingsmead (first-innings all 3 times).
Before long he's going to get back his judgement of most of the rest of his innings, leave the balls he needs to leave, and wait for the totally unavoidable balls on the pads.
He'll probably stop missing straight balls, too - given that he's not done that much, either.
And if he gets caught Pulling or Hooking again this series I'll be quite amazed.
It's been a combination of different circumstances that have caused his cheap dismissals - until there is a sequence of similar dismissals, you can't say anyone's worked him out.

and carelessness is also a weakness that can take years to fix, something that you yourself pointed out with regard to flintoff. of course smith can solve that problem overnight.

 

[nikhil1772]

Top on-field personality? AJAY JADEJA takes the honours...anybody who agrees raise ur hands up!

 

[Richard Rash]

 

[marc71178]

of course smith can solve that problem overnight.

I didn't think Smith had a problem though, being second only to Bradman of all time as he is?!