Present Era low on talent! 2017

[Bigby Wolf]

Look. I am not denying smith is good in test and the best right now.

What I am telling is, when these players play all the formats, you have to consider all the formats when you are rating as a overall good cricketer. These players have played good amount of matches in all formats. SO, one has to consider those formats too. That's common sense. If you want to tell only test matters, let them quit playing odi and t20i.

Telling smith is the best and root, kane , kohli is not, is BS. Kohli has best T20I stats and ODI stats and decent test stats. Whether you like it or not, that's the truth. Same goes with root and kane . They are no less than smith when you are rating them as best cricketers.

More than decent in tests in my opinion after Smith and Root.Getting 3 double hundreds in a single season is no fluke apart from that England tour he is been brilliant in overseas too.

 

[zwarrior]

More than decent in tests in my opinion after Smith and Root.Getting 3 double hundreds in a single season is no fluke apart from that England tour he is been brilliant in overseas too.

Well ya. But few thick heads want to deny that.

 

[Yash.]

Kohli although has not been as great as Smith... But these people are acting like he is the worst batsmen ever in Test Cricket!

 

[Markkkkk]

Talking about talent and using tests as the medium --> Guy states Smith (who has the 3rd/4th highest ranking ever, better than Kallis, Tendulkar, Lara etc.) is better than Kohli, KW, Root --> People argue that Kohli and co. are better than Smith in ODIs and T20s.

I mean, come on. We're clearly talking about Test cricket in terms of talent and the lack of right now. Smith is clearly one of the best ever, we're privileged to watch someone of his ability live. Stop talking about ODIs and T20s.

If all the top 4 batsmen were to retire right now, and keep their stats that they have, after 100 years when people look back at stats Smith will be considered better. Is he the better all-round batsmen? You can't say. But since tests are the only medium we have to judge players from all periods that is how people will be rated. So Smith is the 'better' batsman.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

Ya ok Got it ! Test is the best and Smith is the best after Bradman!

 

[CerealKiller]

If all the top 4 batsmen were to retire right now, and keep their stats that they have, after 100 years when people look back at stats Smith will be considered better.

I think it'd be useless to look at a playr's stats at a certain point of his career and compare them with other players' stats at the same point of time. You need to look at the stats at the end of his career.
Every batsman goes through a bad run of form in his career, which brings his average down a bit. Smith has yet to go through a bad run. Plus the way he bats will not help him when he's in his 30s, especially considering his workload

 

[Bigby Wolf]

For some Only Test cricket is revelant that too only in NZ,SA,Eng and Aus and its thick as sh*t in subcontinent!

 

[Satan666]

Look. I am not denying smith is good in test and the best right now.

What I am telling is, when these players play all the formats, you have to consider all the formats when you are rating as a overall good cricketer. These players have played good amount of matches in all formats. SO, one has to consider those formats too. That's common sense. If you want to tell only test matters, let them quit playing odi and t20i.

Telling smith is the best and root, kane , kohli is not, is BS. Kohli has best T20I stats and ODI stats and decent test stats. Whether you like it or not, that's the truth. Same goes with root and kane . They are no less than smith when you are rating them as best cricketers.

Just to make myself clear I am not on the Smith bandwagon but he had an impressive series in India and Kohli a bad one. I wouldve argued all the way Kohli and Root are the best batsmen playing thr game before this test, with Kohli being my fav, and Ive based that solely on his Test/odi exploits. At present though Smith is ahead of the pack but in the long run I still think its between Kohli and Root as the best.


I wouldnt bother arguing T20 cricket with you anymore, gonna have better luck discussing with a brick wall.

 

[Satan666]

For some Only Test cricket is revelant that too only in NZ,SA,Eng and Aus and its thick as sh*t in subcontinent!

The main reason being India have produced some awful pitches in the last decade, roads for Sachin to amass runs amd now a couple minefields. Playing in Pakistan is non existant and Bangladesh have been poor side playing few tests at home for the last decade.

 

[zwarrior]

Just to make myself clear I am not on the Smith bandwagon but he had an impressive series in India and Kohli a bad one. I wouldve argued all the way Kohli and Root are the best batsmen playing thr game before this test, with Kohli being my fav, and Ive based that solely on his Test/odi exploits. At present though Smith is ahead of the pack but in the long run I still think its between Kohli and Root as the best.


I wouldnt bother arguing T20 cricket with you anymore, gonna have better luck discussing with a brick wall.

So, you are comparing me with brick wall and yet you are the one who is conveniently ignoring ODI again and again when I am discussing about all the 3 formats.

You know what ? Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean you can come up with personal remarks. Comparing with brick wall, calling child and etc. It's your choice, I know. It's a public forum. I am not angry and even I wanted to respond in 'your way' but I just realized that ( stupid of me for realizing it now ), I don't want to get down to that level. I am not like that irl, and I won't be that way here even if I am hiding behind internet as anonymous. Because that's not the way I was raised. I don't want to disrespect anyone. So, I don't think I want to discuss about this topic or any for that matter, with you anymore.

And my last point is, if a particular player is playing in all the formats, I will rate him as how good he was in all those formats when determining as 'best cricketer'. You think T20 is child's play ? Go and play one in that level and you will find out about that. Each set of format takes a different skill to master. You have to adapt to those situations and conditions. If a particular player doesn't have that skill, he will fail in that. Simple as that.

So, when I rate a player as greatest ever or anything in those words, I see and rate him as how good he has played in all the formats he has played. This doesn't mean I rate t20 above test or odi. (If it matters, I rate test=odi > t20) . It means it's only fair if you analyze him in all the formats he has played.

Don't you rate someone on how well he has played in all the countries and against all the opposition ? Similarly, I rate the player as how well he has played across all the formats ( of course if he has played enough matches) . So going by that logic. Smith is the best in tests. (considering only the fab four for this discussion). Kohli is the best in odi ( while others are not behind) and again Kohli as the best in T20I. ( No one even comes close tbh). But as the best across all formats or as 'greatest ever', I would say all four are equal as of now.

That's my last point.

 

[Satan666]

So, you are comparing me with brick wall and yet you are the one who is conveniently ignoring ODI again and again when I am discussing about all the 3 formats.

You know what ? Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean you can come up with personal remarks. Comparing with brick wall, calling child and etc. It's your choice, I know. It's a public forum. I am not angry and even I wanted to respond in 'your way' but I just realized that ( stupid of me for realizing it now ), I don't want to get down to that level. I am not like that irl, and I won't be that way here even if I am hiding behind internet as anonymous. Because that's not the way I was raised. I don't want to disrespect anyone. So, I don't think I want to discuss about this topic or any for that matter, with you anymore.

And my last point is, if a particular player is playing in all the formats, I will rate him as how good he was in all those formats when determining as 'best cricketer'. You think T20 is child's play ? Go and play one in that level and you will find out about that. Each set of format takes a different skill to master. You have to adapt to those situations and conditions. If a particular player doesn't have that skill, he will fail in that. Simple as that.

So, when I rate a player as greatest ever or anything in those words, I see and rate him as how good he has played in all the formats he has played. This doesn't mean I rate t20 above test or odi. (If it matters, I rate test=odi > t20) . It means it's only fair if you analyze him in all the formats he has played.

Don't you rate someone on how well he has played in all the countries and against all the opposition ? Similarly, I rate the player as how well he has played across all the formats ( of course if he has played enough matches) . So going by that logic. Smith is the best in tests. (considering only the fab four for this discussion). Kohli is the best in odi ( while others are not behind) and again Kohli as the best in T20I. ( No one even comes close tbh). But as the best across all formats or as 'greatest ever', I would say all four are equal as of now.

That's my last point.

Lmao!

Enjoy the IPL.

 

[Bluebagger]

Indians get so sulky when you don't praise their players as gods waaaaaah what about Kohli waaaaaaah

 

[Till Valhalla]

All three formats are important as they have different end purpose.
Neither Kohli is better nor Smith is. The only one who is applicable of legend status here is just me.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

All three formats are important as they have different end purpose.
Neither Kohli is better nor Smith is. The only one who is applicable of legend status here is just me.