• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Why is Steve Smith considered an all rounder?

GraemeSmith

School Boy/Girl Captain
I keep hearing everyone refer to Steve Smith (giving your kid such a bland name should be a crime) as an "all-rounder". Please explain in what universe someone like him can be considered all rounder with bowling stats like this

First-class Avg 48.84 SR 73.0
List A Avg 43.58 SR 47.9
 

Woodster

International Captain
I keep hearing everyone refer to Steve Smith (giving your kid such a bland name should be a crime) as an "all-rounder". Please explain in what universe someone like him can be considered all rounder with bowling stats like this

First-class Avg 48.84 SR 73.0
List A Avg 43.58 SR 47.9
Presumably it is more on potential rather than anything particularly outstanding in his stats so far. Leg-spin as we all know tkaes time to develop, to master a number of deliveries and gain the accuracy essential to become a real player. Probably wouldn 't read too much into his averages at the moment, the guy's only just 21, but would like to hear how people do rate his bowling.
 

andyc

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He's only played 13 FC games. After 13 Test matches Andrew Flintoff averaged 18 with the bat and 46 with the ball.

See here though for an idea.
 

Noble One

International Vice-Captain
I assume you have never followed an Australian domestic game in your life?

His average is terrible largely due to a very poor start to his domestic career with the ball. His improvement since the start of the previous Australia summer has been immense, culminating in the 7 wicket haul as mentioned by andyc.

The hype surrounding Smith is what he "may" become, rather than his current output. Many wise cricketing heads have alluded to the fact that Smith has a special talent that may only be seen once every generation. The next step is for Smith to start showing his talent more consistently with the ball, with the bat he has already proven enough.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Only going by the impression I've garnered from watching international cricket as Oz FC stuff never gets shown up here, but the SS does seem to be a graveyard for spinners (which is kinda fitting as our own SS would probably put them all in one should he ever become king). Hauritz looks infinitely better than his career figures suggest and, perhaps tellingly, the great man himself, SK Warne, averaged more in first class cricket than in tests.

Smith's raw, but the potential is there to see. There also seem to have been something of a sea change in Oz selectorial policy of late, with the panel rather keener to blood whelps (see also Hazlewood & Warner) than they've been previously.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Only going by the impression I've garnered from watching international cricket as Oz FC stuff never gets shown up here, but the SS does seem to be a graveyard for spinners (which is kinda fitting as our own SS would probably put them all in one should he ever become king). Hauritz looks infinitely better than his career figures suggest and, perhaps tellingly, the great man himself, SK Warne, averaged more in first class cricket than in tests.
Indeed and by quite a bit;

FC overall

301 matches, 1319 wickets, avg 26.11

FC Victoria

46 matches, 161 wickets, avg 34.73

Averaged a whole wicket less per match too.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
He's only played 13 FC games. After 13 Test matches Andrew Flintoff averaged 18 with the bat and 46 with the ball.

See here though for an idea.
A fair comparison as we were hearing Flintoff was going to be a great allrounder for many years before he actually looked anything like one.It got to a stage where i though Bumble had lost the plot.
 
I keep hearing everyone refer to Steve Smith (giving your kid such a bland name should be a crime) as an "all-rounder". Please explain in what universe someone like him can be considered all rounder with bowling stats like this

First-class Avg 48.84 SR 73.0
List A Avg 43.58 SR 47.9
If Garry"I bowl every style crap"Sobers(who took 31 wickets @ 50 in his first 30 tests) can be considered an allrounder,anyone can.
 

pskov

International 12th Man
But never got to be a one BTW.
Maybe if you mean career as a whole, but he was certainly a great player for a decent portion of his career.

His stats 2004-06, 37 tests, 2076 runs @ 37.74, 144 wickets @ 26.96
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Maybe if you mean career as a whole, but he was certainly a great player for a decent portion of his career.

His stats 2004-06, 37 tests, 2076 runs @ 37.74, 144 wickets @ 26.96
If stats selection was the rule, then Mushtaq Mohammed would be the best ever all rounder.
 

Jakester1288

International Regular
He's considered an allrounder because he bats and bowls at a decent standard.

I must say, I cant see the Aussie selectors using him much if his bowling isn't good, unless his batting is great. We have just had Hauritz have a good summer (albeit against dire opposition), and he doesn't deserve being dropped.

Smith (possibly) debuting against Pakistan in England might make him look a bit better than he is, playing a poor opposition. Hope he does well, nonetheless.
 

Top