Not really. First off, seamers prefer bats who just try and block them rather than unsettle their line and length with strokeplay.
what makes you think Hutton won't deduce something even you (no offense) have deduced?
So your position is that Head fluked a great series against Bumrah, Smiths runs should be ignored because he didn't look comfy and Roots runs are all soft.
Maybe because he had his own natural style of play that was dour and conservative.
Adaptive.
Lol in these scenarios we are assuming they are playing as they naturally are. In a scenario where in England he has to survive against Asif by grinding it out, I give Asif the advantage most of the time.
I'm saying his natural style was adaptive and changed as the match demanded.
No. I said Smith wasn't comfy and Root scored soft runs in India, so I don't think I will rate either as the winner to Bumrah. And that hitting out won't work regularly, just because it did once for Head. Lol lol, you were the one who said with "guarantee" Viv will average 40+ to Bumrah, lol
Smith and Root scored runs against Bumrah, that's all that matters. Neither lost against Bumrah.
And I don't agree. I think at best I can say Root vs Bumrah was a draw, vs Smith he clearly won.
How again is it a clear win against Smith if Smith averages over 40 with three tons? Are we supposed to ignore that?
Smith average less then 36 vs bumrah with three tons.
Tbf, I think more often than not batsmen vs Bowlers hardly represent the way the matchup went properly. I mean, if you think about it, that's really the smarter thing to do. If a batsman scores some runs in a match against a bowler they, we will all praise the batsman irrespective of how many he scored to them. The same is not true for bowlers.