3rd ODI: England v Australia at Manchester on Sep 8, 2015

[JJ]

Smith had everything to prove though ? He was being heavily criticised and he responded with a century.

.

So did Watson when he did it! He was heavily criticised, Hayden too - bottom line is the English weren't up for the last test, but the were in the ones that counted

I simply said the top 6 wasn't good - Rogers was the only consistent one, there are many ways to get an average. Sure, Smith had two good tests, hurrah... he was as shit as anyone on the moving decks when a performance really counted - and Warner's fast 70s were kind of useless really

 

[Pete Cash]

Two good tests is fine....it means you need one other batsman to step up once and you have potentially won a series.

Again Smith, Warner and Rogers all averaged over 45 and only one Englishman did that. What we needed was someone in the middle order to calm things down at edgbaston.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Matt Wade with 70 and 42,the Haynetrain knew this guy was a good batter,what a tank i am

 

[JJ]

Wade and the Haynetrain - formidable!

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Wade and the Haynetrain - formidable!

:thumb

 

[Red Bear]

Smith had a a very average Ashes series. Anyone who understands cricket realises that.

He barely scored a run in 3 of the 4 live tests. When Australia needed him most he looked awful on seeming pitches with that Frankenstein technique being exposed.

Smith will be another Clarke. An absolute bully at home on flat decks but will struggle in foreign conditions his whole career.

Clarke still averaged greater than 40 most places. Better at home, but pretty consistent overseas.

Steve Smith averages over 50 away from Australia at present. Not that bad. First big away series batting at three. He had far from his best series but he was ok (bigger problems than him, anyway).

Joe root 60 at home, 43 away fwiw.

Almost like judging them after 30 odd tests is slightly flawed

 

[Pete Cash]

Yeah but Smith looks weird and that really winds some people up. For the record I absolutely cannot stand the English baseballer stance and think it is a huge part of why the English have often struggled to tour Australia but I don't entirely judge Joe Root based on how ugly I find his technique. It works against the moving ball in England and that is why they use it.

I think his tour of the RSA will be interesting. Very similar to Australia in conditions so it will be interesting to see if he can get out of his habit of staying on his backfoot to fast bowlers in those conditions.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Two good tests is fine....it means you need one other batsman to step up once and you have potentially won a series.

One good test in the four that mattered.

On a super flat deck, batting first.

The rest where you need your best batsman to stand up he was atrocious.

 

[Pete Cash]

How did the English score at lords ?

 

[Pete Cash]

Also how does Smiths record in England compare with Roots in Australia Tommy ?

 

[Tommy Smith]

No idea. I haven't mentioned Joe Root once and wasn't seeking to compare them.

Both are way behind Ab de Villiers as the world's best batsman anyway. Amla and Kohli are also better.

I'd put Smith and Root equal with Kane Williamson behind those three.

 

[Pete Cash]

Nobody is saying any different Tommy but Smith averages above 40 in every country he has played in and has played the same amount of games in England as he has in Australia. So England can't be hurting his average too much. I think for an Australian batsman in his mid 20s batting at three he had a pretty good tour.

 

[TheParraboy]

So did Watson when he did it! He was heavily criticised, Hayden too - bottom line is the English weren't up for the last test, but the were in the ones that counted

I simply said the top 6 wasn't good - Rogers was the only consistent one, there are many ways to get an average. Sure, Smith had two good tests, hurrah... he was as shit as anyone on the moving decks when a performance really counted - and Warner's fast 70s were kind of useless really

Hayden was criticised cause he hadn't scored a test century for the previous 17 tests, he decided to do it in a dead rubber. What has Smith done over the last 12 months?

Watson? does it really need explanation?

Bit of perspective goes a long way

 

[JJ]

Hayden was criticised cause he hadn't scored a test century for the previous 17 tests, he decided to do it in a dead rubber. What has Smith done over the last 12 months?

Watson? does it really need explanation?

Bit of perspective goes a long way

Yeah, they came out of bigger slumps and were under more pressure - Smith wasn't under selection pressure

This is getting silly - at the end of the day England won the Ashes, on the back of horrific batting, including Smith. It's also laughable to suggest that the team's best bat only needs to perform in two tests, and the others need to do the rest - he didn't perform when the team was I the shit... his series was below par and his technical issues and over confidence were exploited... he's a terrific young player , and in the long run if he's not stupid this is good for him - and luckily for those preoccupied with averages, little damage has been done there

Anyway, series getting interesting - Starc not bowling like Starc - tired?

 

[Pete Cash]

When we whitewashed England in recent times our best batsman performed only really twice ? Ponting and Clarke scored two centuries in those series iirc.

JJ I have to ask are you grinding a kane Williamson agenda here because you are posting nonsense. Who was the last mid 20s Australian batting at 3 to score like Smith did in England lol.

 

[Red Bear]

Writing off a double ton coming off a badly lost test match is also laughable. England didn't bat so well on that pitch

 

[Pete Cash]

It's obviously hard for Australians to bat in England. Especially now because they are so rarely exposed to English conditions. Our top 3 who are exposed to the new ball had a reasonable series. There is plenty to criticise Smith for his idiotic shot during the second innings at Trent Bridge and as mentioned his stupid dismissal at Cardiff but where was the middle order.

If we use Tommys standard then roots first century doesn't count because it was batting first on a flat wicket and his second doesn't count because Australia had failed so badly and he had anti scoreboard pressure on him. What a bad series Joe Root had when we arbitrarily remove all his runs.

 

[JJ]

When we whitewashed England in recent times our best batsman performed only really twice ? Ponting and Clarke scored two centuries in those series iirc.

JJ I have to ask are you grinding a kane Williamson agenda here because you are posting nonsense. Who was the last mid 20s Australian batting at 3 to score like Smith did in England lol.

Not sure what Williamson has to do with it, I think they're both fine young players - Smith's done more in tests, Williamson more in odis

I merely said your top 6 has been poor, and Smith's acting like he's under pressure (not as a bat, just generally) which he's not


twizzle then went off on some tangent - I'm kind of over it now...

 

[Pete Cash]

It's his first series as full time captain. Why wouldn't he be feeling some pressure.

 

[JJ]

It's his first series as full time captain. Why wouldn't he be feeling some pressure.

Because he's the world's #1 ranked bat, his record as captain is very good, he's the best player in the team, and the team is weakened, and just lost the Ashes - not sure expectations are huge - as long as he keeps scoring runs, he'll be given time, and appropriately so