cricket betting betway blog banner small
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 160

Thread: Sehwag vs Smith

  1. #1
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890

    Sehwag vs Smith

    assuming that both of them are at the top of the game, which one would you pick to open in your test team?

    below is the comparision of their record:

    Tests:
    Sehwag 54, Smith 63

    Runs:
    Sehwag 4441, Smith 5146

    Avg:
    Sehwag 50.46, Smith 48.54

    HS
    Sehwag 309, Smith 277

    100s:
    Sehwag 13, Smith 14

    A break down of their 100s:

    Sehwag: 105 in SA, 106 in Eng, 147 in Ind [WI], 130 in Ind [NZ], 195 in Aus, 309 in Pak, 155 in Ind [Aus], 164 in Ind [SA], 173 in Ind [Pak], 201 in Ind [Pak], 254 in Pak, 180 in WI, 151 in Aus

    Smith: 200 in SA [BD], 151 in SA [Pak], 277 in Eng, 259 in Eng, 132 in SA [WI], 139 in SA [WI], 125 in NZ, 121 in SA [Zim], 148 in WI, 104 in WI, 126 in WI, 133 in Pak, 147 in SA [WI], 232 in BD

    if we were to remove 100s against WI, BD & Zim then:
    Sehwag 11 / Smith 5


    I would prefer Sehwag .... I like the way he is aggressive at the top, which puts a lot of pressure on the bowlers and helps other batsmen, his ability to score big ones on any surface and against any attack is truly remarkable, esp his 100s against Aus
    Fastest gun in town

  2. #2
    U19 12th Man Googenheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    hooters
    Posts
    221
    Sehwag in tests, Smith in ODIs.

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    I have little doubt that Graeme Smith has it in him to be a far more accomplished Test opening batsman than Virender Sehwag. Whether he will indeed do so, however, we can but wait and see.

    In their careers to date, both are somewhat flat-track (and in Sehwag's case butterfinger-fielder) bullies. With Sehwag, I see no reason to believe this shouldn't continue; with Smith I do, but it hasn't changed in 6 years now, so maybe it's expecting a bit to expect it to change after that.

    Smith is obviously overwhelmingly the better ODI batsman, incidentally.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  4. #4
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I have little doubt that Graeme Smith has it in him to be a far more accomplished Test opening batsman than Virender Sehwag. Whether he will indeed do so, however, we can but wait and see.

    In their careers to date, both are somewhat flat-track (and in Sehwag's case butterfinger-fielder) bullies. With Sehwag, I see no reason to believe this shouldn't continue; with Smith I do, but it hasn't changed in 6 years now, so maybe it's expecting a bit to expect it to change after that.

    Smith is obviously overwhelmingly the better ODI batsman, incidentally.
    haha, you would hardly call Aus and SA as butterfinger fielding sides .... Sehwag has 5 100s against them

    on the other hand, Smith has some 9 100s against BD, WI and Zim, along with 2 against Pak, which is not a gr8 fielding side .... so 11 of his 14 100s are against weak bowling or fielding sides


  5. #5
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by ret View Post
    haha, you would hardly call Aus and SA as butterfinger fielding sides .... Sehwag has 5 100s against them
    In 2 out of his 3 centuries against Australia Sehwag was indeed dropped, on 47 and in single-figures (I think - might possibly have been on 10-odd?) and his only century as an opener against South Africa came on the flattest pitch you could wish to see.
    on the other hand, Smith has some 9 100s against BD, WI and Zim, along with 2 against Pak, which is not a gr8 fielding side .... so 11 of his 14 100s are against weak bowling or fielding sides
    Of Smith's 11 centuries against Test-class teams, 6 have indeed come against West Indies, and apparently both against Pakistan did indeed involve let-offs. However, his century against New Zealand was chanceless, and so was 1 of the 2 against England.
    Last edited by Richard; 23-03-2008 at 09:42 AM.

  6. #6
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890
    tbh, i don't remember the details of dropped chances now but it would be interesting to know what constitutes a drop chance .... a full blooded shot that a fielder got his hands too or a simple regulation catch that was not taken

    and then one can even argue abt close LBWs not given and so on

  7. #7
    International Captain Woodster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    6,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    In 2 out of his 3 centuries against Australia Sehwag was indeed dropped, on 47 and in single-figures (I think - might possibly have been on 10-odd?) and his only century as an opener against South Africa came on the flattest pitch you could wish to see.

    Of Smith's 11 centuries against Test-class teams, 6 have indeed come against West Indies. However, UIMM neither of his 2 centuries against Pakistan involved dropped catches. Nor did his century against New Zealand, and 1 of the 2 against England did.
    Think you'll find Smith survived numerous lbw shouts in his second hundred against Pakistan, and was dropped in the slips during his first hundred, when only on 54.

  8. #8
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by ret View Post
    tbh, i don't remember the details of dropped chances now but it would be interesting to know what constitutes a drop chance .... a full blooded shot that a fielder got his hands too or a simple regulation catch that was not taken
    If it's hands and if it's not a fielder absurdly close, it should indeed be caught. It is, in fact, regulation. Not an absolute sitter, but if a batsman middles a ball straight to a fielder at standard extra-cover\mid-off\mid-wicket\whatever, it most certainly should be caught.

    If it hits the fingertips of a fielder it's obviously not catchable.
    and then one can even argue abt close LBWs not given and so on
    Same thing.

  9. #9
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890
    points like dropped chances, close LBW calls, etc are part of the game .... it's rarely that we will find someone playing a big innings w/o a chance .... if you try to bring in dropped chances against Sehwag then someone can bring in other factors like LBWs, runouts, missed stumping, etc against Smith

    for some even getting out to a no-ball constitues a chance to a batsman lol. i have seen some ppl telling 'oh, if only that was not a no-ball, he would have been out'. ofc this is not the right way to look at it but some ppl do consider that a factor too, so the point is why not focus on the end result of the inning and there is a reason why ppl say that luck favors the brave

  10. #10
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by ret View Post
    points like dropped chances, close LBW calls, etc are part of the game .... it's rarely that we will find someone playing a big innings w/o a chance .... if you try to bring in dropped chances against Sehwag then someone can bring in other factors like LBWs, runouts, missed stumping, etc against Smith

    for some even getting out to a no-ball constitues a chance to a batsman lol. i have seen some ppl telling 'oh, if only that was not a no-ball, he would have been out'. ofc this is not the right way to look at it but some ppl do consider that a factor too, so the point is why not focus on the end result of the inning and there is a reason why ppl say that luck favors the brave
    They're all the same thing. A let-off is a let-off regardless of whether it's a dropped catch, missed stumping, botched easy (not direct-hit-requiring) run-out, bad Umpiring decison (whether caught or lbw), no-ball, whatever. They're part of the game, yes (unfortunately) but they're certainly not part of good batting.

    And it's not rare at all that batsmen score big innings without a chance. Not remotely rare. Some batsmen get more good fortune than others, and it's only sensible to assess this when you're trying to look at whose achievements are more notable.

  11. #11
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    They're all the same thing. A let-off is a let-off regardless of whether it's a dropped catch, missed stumping, botched easy (not direct-hit-requiring) run-out, bad Umpiring decison (whether caught or lbw), no-ball, whatever. They're part of the game, yes (unfortunately) but they're certainly not part of good batting.

    And it's not rare at all that batsmen score big innings without a chance. Not remotely rare. Some batsmen get more good fortune than others, and it's only sensible to assess this when you're trying to look at whose achievements are more notable.
    But then it's difficult to find a reliable record of at what point during the inning a batsman got chances .... now someone would say, he got dropped on 90, while for some the same chance could imply a boundry saved rather than a dropped chance. same with other forms of getting out

    And then focusing on one mode of dismissal i.e. catches while igoring other modes doesn't make a strong point

    Since there is no reliable record that documents chances that a player got during an innings, discussions become subjective

    So until we have some reliable record on how many chances a batsman got during an inning, there is little point in discussing that .... the unreliability of the accounts of chances that a player gets also takes merit out of this point
    Last edited by ret; 23-03-2008 at 10:11 AM.

  12. #12
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by ret View Post
    But then it's difficult to find a reliable record of at what point during the inning a batsman got chances .... now someone would say, he got dropped on 90, while for some the same chance could imply a boundry saved rather than a dropped chance. same with other forms of getting out
    It's really not very difficult. Anyone perporting that something was a dropped catch which clipped the fielder's fingertips and saved 2 runs obviously doesn't really know what they're talking about. A chance is just that: something the fielder had a chance to catch. If you understand the basics of the game of cricket, you can tell whether someone should or should not have caught something.
    And then focusing on one mode of dismissal i.e. catches while igoring other modes doesn't make a strong point
    Exactly, which is why neither I nor anyone else has ever done that. They're all the same thing, for about the 4th time.
    Since there is no reliable record that documents chances that a player got during an innings, discussions become subjective
    Subjectivity being, really, what is involved in judging how well a batsman has done. There's always going to be loads of it.
    So until we have some reliable record on how many chances a batsman got during an inning, there is little point in discussing that .... the unreliability of the accounts of chances that a player gets also takes merit out of this point
    There's little unreliability, really - it's not that difficult to work-out what should and should not have been caught. Only contrarions would try to make it difficult.

  13. #13
    Cricket Web Content Updater roseboy64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Jamaica
    Posts
    18,568
    Thought this was about Devon Smith at first and wondered what ret was smoking.
    Sir Alexander Chapman Ferguson = Greatest Ever Manager
    "One from ten leaves zero." - Eric Williams, former T&T PM
    Member of Cricket Web Green
    Member of Northside Power

    R.I.P Fardin Qayyumi

  14. #14
    ret
    ret is offline
    International Debutant ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    It's really not very difficult. Anyone perporting that something was a dropped catch which clipped the fielder's fingertips and saved 2 runs obviously doesn't really know what they're talking about. A chance is just that: something the fielder had a chance to catch. If you understand the basics of the game of cricket, you can tell whether someone should or should not have caught something.

    Exactly, which is why neither I nor anyone else has ever done that. They're all the same thing, for about the 4th time.

    Subjectivity being, really, what is involved in judging how well a batsman has done. There's always going to be loads of it.

    There's little unreliability, really - it's not that difficult to work-out what should and should not have been caught. Only contrarions would try to make it difficult.
    i hv heard some commentators say that cliped his fingers so that technically is a chance, no matter how difficult .... so I guess, whats constitutes a chance is subjective


    Nah, i m not taking abt just the catches but the unrealiable record on how many chances a batsman gets during an inning like dropped catches, run out, close LBW calls, etc .... and what make the point on focusing on catches meritless is the fact that other factors of getting out are totally ignored .... so why is that you only focus on catches when there are so many factors that can get you out

    Unless, we measure all the ways of getting out and that too with the backing of reliable and documented record then only we can ponder over bringing this point in

  15. #15
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by ret View Post
    i hv heard some commentators say that cliped his fingers so that technically is a chance, no matter how difficult .... so I guess, whats constitutes a chance is subjective
    Yes, and these commentators don't have a clue what they're talking about. Wish they'd actually think what they're saying rather than talking in cliches for once.
    Nah, i m not taking abt just the catches but the unrealiable record on how many chances a batsman gets during an inning like dropped catches, run out, close LBW calls, etc .... and what make the point on focusing on catches meritless is the fact that other factors of getting out are totally ignored .... so why is that you only focus on catches when there are so many factors that can get you out

    Unless, we measure all the ways of getting out and that too with the backing of reliable and documented record then only we can ponder over bringing this point in
    I don't only focus on catches. A let-off is the same regardless of what style it takes. So is a completed dismissal.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sehwag v Gayle
    By Captain Cricket in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 09-02-2008, 07:50 PM
  2. sehwag going for 200
    By Swervy in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 12-08-2006, 11:11 PM
  3. Jayasuria Vs Sehwag
    By warne_94 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-08-2006, 09:05 AM
  4. Vivian Richards on Sehwag
    By aliG in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 23-04-2005, 11:26 PM
  5. I may well become sehwag
    By NikhilN in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 25-04-2004, 03:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •