• 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.

***Official*** Australia in India 2017

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
...maybe the reason Smith (apparently) didn't contribute in the times of dire need were because Smith not scoring was what created the time of dire need in the first place. He was so far ahead of anyone else in this series that he's devalued his own achievement.
Yup. This whole thing is the same trope as "Dravid scored tough runs and Sachin didn't". The definition of tough runs for India was "**** Sachin didn't work!"
 

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, it's definitely Smith's fault.

Not like he was the best batsman of the series by a mile or anything...
Context matters most.

Especially when playing India, who he had an average of around ONE HUNDRED against, prior to series, because they are mostly clueless against him. And Yadav and co were still bowling him on the pads in the last innings ffs. No wonder he has 7 100s against India out of his 20 hundreds and that too in only 10 games against them. Indian bowlers are almost like Zimbabwe to Smith.

And it doesnt help that Ashwin was Ashernia and pacers were bowling on pads, only Jadeja bowled well & thus looked like getting him out and he beat him many times but Smith was clever that he always played for the normal ball or the straight one, never for spin, so would play and miss and survive.

Thus its been a relatively easy ride because India still don't have a clue against his unorthodox batting.


Despite all that, he was still unsuccessful 5 times out of 8 against a team he would destroy in his sleep, especially in situations when his team was under pressure. It's the truth. A guy who averages insane against India and a lot in ODIs too and knows their bowlers inside out (partly due to ipl as well), him failing directly correlates to Australia failing.

Nobody expected other batsmen to be good enough in THOSE situations but Smith probably was but failed to deliver just like his significantly inferior team mates.

That is why Australia could not win and lost.

The blame lies more with who is capable, and less so with the incapables.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Dravid picked up the slack really well when Sachin was dealing with his elbow issues. Thats when he really made his name.
Then Sachin became great again in 2007-10 and Dravid became crap. And then on the England tour Sachin became crap and Dravid became God again.

So frustrating. Stupid Dravid.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nobody expected other batsmen to be good enough in THOSE situations but Smith probably was but failed to deliver just like his significantly inferior team mates.

That is why Australia could not win and lost.

The blame lies more with who is capable, and less so with the incapables.
SMarsh and Warner were supposed to do more. That's why Australia lost.
 

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
Dravid did score tough runs you ****.
Yea.


Tendulkar had all the skill but he did fair amount of downhill skiing. And was often criticised for his **** performances under pressure, it was a habit of his to not perform in those big moments.

And in this series Smith did something similar. He did well but not nearly well enough given his stature as the best batsman by far.
 

Shri

Mr. Glass
Yea.


Tendulkar had all the skill but he did fair amount of downhill skiing. And was often criticised for his **** performances under pressure, it was a habit of his to not perform in those big moments.

And in this series Smith did something similar. He did well but not nearly well enough given his stature as the best batsman by far.
Yeah and those who gave those knee-jerk opinions then were usually morons.
 

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
SMarsh and Warner were supposed to do more. That's why Australia lost.
Maybe Warner but everyone's assessment of his ability in these conditions had changed, so he was expected to continue to fail.

S Marsh over performed tbh, he was not expected to save the 3rd Test. He had already done enough in the 2nd Test in particular. And in the last test he was battling some injury.
 

Top