What's new

Is Steve Smith heading towards ATG status in Test cricket?

Hasan123

Test Star
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Runs
38,432
Has centuries in NZ, South Africa,West Indies, England, and Sri Lanka. Has nineties in India and uae. Will have more tours there in there coming years so should have at least one century in those 2 countries. He's also scored ashes centuries.

An average of 57, will he finish his career as a test match great or not? For me if he can score some more big runs in the subcontinent and maintain a 50 and above average I wil consider him atg.

So what do you guys think?

Discuss.....
 
Yeah..Going allright..

But he doesn't seem to have ceiling of Ponting level.

Also struggles on bowling friendly conditions.

Does well when everyone does but not so much when others fail.

199 vs WI was the only exception and WI isn't that real deal.
 
Most underrated of this generation of batsmen.

Clear #1 in test cricket with no failures. Has averaged 40 or higher in his last 11 test series in a row.
 
Id say azhar ALi is a lot better....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah..Going allright..

But he doesn't seem to have ceiling of Ponting level.

Also struggles on bowling friendly conditions.

Does well when everyone does but not so much when others fail.

199 vs WI was the only exception and WI isn't that real deal.


Vs India at home it was mainly him getting the big scores. Vs South Africa in 2014, Australia were 98-4, Smith scored a century and took Australia to 397. An easy win which was possible because of Smith. In the home ashes 2013, at 80-5 he scored a century in a game which Australia won. That was a pressure game as well. Need to look at your facts more bro.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He's performing at an ATG level already, as OP has mentioned in the OP, Smith has a balanced record everywhere and is Australia's best batsman and usually when he scores, the team does tend to win too (at least the matches I've followed) and that is one of the things you look for when judging the greatness of a batsman. If he can continue performing for a few more years than he will be ATG for me.
 
He's performing at an ATG level already, as OP has mentioned in the OP, Smith has a balanced record everywhere and is Australia's best batsman and usually when he scores, the team does tend to win too (at least the matches I've followed) and that is one of the things you look for when judging the greatness of a batsman. If he can continue performing for a few more years than he will be ATG for me.

nah, he isnt even close to being one......
 
why do you say that ?


Smith can dominate bowlers more. He has a better away record. He's much more consistent. He has had to carry Australian batting for the last couple of years alongside Warner. Azhar has had Younis and Misbah to support him

Azhar is a very good test batsmen but Smith is just superior.
 
nah he isnt even close to being one

No, everyone is not an ATG for me.

Someone averaging 57 over 50 Tests with results everywhere is a potential ATG who is performing at an ATG level. That is someone who I regard as one that can become an ATG.
 
Last edited:
Both these statements are factually incorrect. Show the evidence.

Most of his centuries away from home have come when the conditions he came to bat at were easier and he didn't had to work hard for his runs.

Secondly, most of his centuries away from home have come when his own teammates piled up loads of runs.

I will give you examples:

In England, he came to bat at Lords which has been a flat pitch in last few years with Aus 1 down(Warner gave a solid start) and along with Rogers piled up runs in conditions which were easier to bat.Rogers got 178 while Smith had 206...

In a dead rubber game at Kennington Oval and again in SL(3rd test) , he got fairly easier conditions to bat compared to other games in the series and he piled on loads of runs in both games.

Did the same in NZ when the pitch got eased out and scored a century there along with Burns and Voges piling big runs too.

In SA,his century was overshadowed by the one played by Clarke.

You can look at the trend.

He is a world class player but struggles when conditions are bowling friendly.He hasn't done much when his team is in the bother of despair.

He has his plusses too. I will talk about them too.
 
He's performing at an ATG level already, as OP has mentioned in the OP, Smith has a balanced record everywhere and is Australia's best batsman and usually when he scores, the team does tend to win too (at least the matches I've followed) and that is one of the things you look for when judging the greatness of a batsman. If he can continue performing for a few more years than he will be ATG for me.

All very important points.

It is why I agree with Aman when he says KW cannot become an ATG. Same holds for the likes of Pujara, Rahane, Warner, Azhar are unlikely to become an ATG for me.
 
Vs India at home it was mainly him getting the big scores. Vs South Africa in 2014, Australia were 98-4, Smith scored a century and took Australia to 397. An easy win which was possible because of Smith. In the home ashes 2013, at 80-5 he scored a century in a game which Australia won. That was a pressure game as well. Need to look at your facts more bro.

Marsh got 144 in that game vs SA.

Most of his knocks away from home has come in a supporting role whether in Eng, NZ, SA or SL.
 
Most of his centuries away from home have come when the conditions he came to bat at were easier and he didn't had to work hard for his runs.

Secondly, most of his centuries away from home have come when his own teammates piled up loads of runs.

I will give you examples:

In England, he came to bat at Lords which has been a flat pitch in last few years with Aus 1 down(Warner gave a solid start) and along with Rogers piled up runs in conditions which were easier to bat.Rogers got 178 while Smith had 206...

In a dead rubber game at Kennington Oval and again in SL(3rd test) , he got fairly easier conditions to bat compared to other games in the series and he piled on loads of runs in both games.

Did the same in NZ when the pitch got eased out and scored a century there along with Burns and Voges piling big runs too.

In SA,his century was overshadowed by the one played by Clarke.

You can look at the trend.

He is a world class player but struggles when conditions are bowling friendly.He hasn't done much when his team is in the bother of despair.

He has his plusses too. I will talk about them too.

Appreciate the examples. Let's dig into them.

At Lord's, on this supposed flat pitch, the Australian batsmen coming after him scored 7, 12, 25 and England were bundled out for 312 and 103. Steve Smith was the MOM.

In SL, he was the only Australian batsman to score a 50 in the first 2 test matches.

In SA, he was batting at #7 and was still the highest aggregate scorer in the series behind Clarke. That is very impressive for someone batting so low.

Bowling conditions were good in the recent home series against SA, and again he was the only Aussie who stood up in the first two test matches.
 
Marsh got 144 in that game vs SA.

Most of his knocks away from home has come in a supporting role whether in Eng, NZ, SA or SL.

The were 80-5, how is he playing a support knock when he was the 2nd highest scorer of the innings. Without that innings there is no guarantee that Australia win that game.

He scored 215 vs England when they were 1 down, I'm sorry but a double century isn't a support knock regardless of the situation.
 
The were 80-5, how is he playing a support knock when he was the 2nd highest scorer of the innings. Without that innings there is no guarantee that Australia win that game.

He scored 215 vs England when they were 1 down, I'm sorry but a double century isn't a support knock regardless of the situation.

He does thrive in conditions which are lesser bowling friendly.The pitch got easier and runs were easy to come after first hour play and Smith made full use of it. What is there to discuss. That double century wasn't a support knock but Smith had got easier conditions to score.

He has his pluss point which I will tell a little later and hence is a world class player.

But that was what I was talking about his flaw.
 
He does thrive in conditions which are lesser bowling friendly.The pitch got easier and runs were easy to come after first hour play and Smith made full use of it. What is there to discuss. That double century wasn't a support knock but Smith had got easier conditions to score.

He has his pluss point which I will tell a little later and hence is a world class player.

But that was what I was talking about his flaw.

I don't subscribe to the theory that he doesn't score in difficult conditions. How can he average 57 overall and 40plus in most countries if he was an ftb?

Yes every player has flaws but smith strengths outshine his weaknesses IMO.
 
Appreciate the examples. Let's dig into them.

At Lord's, on this supposed flat pitch, the Australian batsmen coming after him scored 7, 12, 25 and England were bundled out for 312 and 103. Steve Smith was the MOM.

In SL, he was the only Australian batsman to score a 50 in the first 2 test matches.

In SA, he was batting at #7 and was still the highest aggregate scorer in the series behind Clarke. That is very impressive for someone batting so low.

Bowling conditions were good in the recent home series against SA, and again he was the only Aussie who stood up in the first two test matches.

At Lords, 7, 12 and 25 were scored by over the hill Clarke( who was out of form all through the series), Voges and Marsh.

When Rogers got out, the score was 362/2 and then you know what matters is quick runs on board. Players can have their failures or lack of concentration at times particularly when the job is to attack and score as much as possible.

In SL, he got to fifties and hence he is Australia's best batsmen (also vs spin) but conditions weren't easy and he couldn't really take his team out of trouble in either of games.

In SA 14, I think Warner was leading run scorer so not sure what you are saying there. Anyways, being a second leading run scorer isn't an achievement when I already stated he is a world class player and was just putting out his weaknesses.
 
Appreciate the examples. Let's dig into them.

At Lord's, on this supposed flat pitch, the Australian batsmen coming after him scored 7, 12, 25 and England were bundled out for 312 and 103. Steve Smith was the MOM.

In SL, he was the only Australian batsman to score a 50 in the first 2 test matches.

In SA, he was batting at #7 and was still the highest aggregate scorer in the series behind Clarke. That is very impressive for someone batting so low.

Bowling conditions were good in the recent home series against SA, and again he was the only Aussie who stood up in the first two test matches.

That Lord's pitch was certainly flat, regardless or what injured Clarke and the lower order batsmen scored.
 
I don't subscribe to the theory that he doesn't score in difficult conditions. How can he average 57 overall and 40plus in most countries if he was an ftb?

Yes every player has flaws but smith strengths outshine his weaknesses IMO.

He is not a FTB but not someone whom I will back to score in completely bowling friendly conditions. He doesn't posses that extra to be rated better than his other three competitors.

As for his strength, his biggest plus is his ability to dominate bowlers after he gets set on relatively easier pitches not flat pitches.

This is one of the big reasons why he has hardly missed out on scoring big hundreds after getting set and hence a reason why he avgs a manmoth 57 with his overall avg over 40 almost everywhere.
 
He is not a FTB but not someone whom I will back to score in completely bowling friendly conditions. He doesn't posses that extra to be rated better than his other three competitors.

As for his strength, his biggest plus is his ability to dominate bowlers after he gets set on relatively easier pitches not flat pitches.

This is one of the big reasons why he has hardly missed out on scoring big hundreds after getting set and hence a reason why he avgs a manmoth 57 with his overall avg over 40 almost everywhere.


I rate him higher than Williamson.


He is batting at 4, so if the pitch becomes easier that isn't in his control. He has still scored runs on difficult surfaces though.
 
Favorite batsman along with Joe Root in Tests currently. Also is very underrated.

If you ask me he's already scored lots of runs everywhere at healthy averages. He's probably the best Test Batsman of this generation.

Plus if you look at his stats since is transformation 2014-Current

Matches - 31
Runs - 3341
Ave - 71.08
100's - 13
50's - 13

Those are some incredible numbers and he's played in the following countries since that time - Aus, Eng, WI, SA, NZ, SL, UAE

Here are his number is individual countries since 2014

AUS - Mat - 14 Runs - 1598 Ave - 80 100's - 7
ENG - Mat - 5 Runs - 508 Ave - 56.44 100's - 2
WI - Mat - 2 Runs - 283 Ave - 141.50 100's - 1
SA - Mat - 3 Runs - 269 Ave - 67.25 100's - 1
NZ - Mat - 2 Runs - 262 Ave - 131 100's - 1
SL - Mat - 3 Runs - 247 Ave - 41.16 100's - 1
UAE - Mat - 2 Runs - 174 Ave - 43.50

Those are some great number as he tours those Asian Countries again he's bound to improve those numbers.
 
I rate him higher than Williamson.


He is batting at 4, so if the pitch becomes easier that isn't in his control. He has still scored runs on difficult surfaces though.

Steve Smith is much better than Williamson.

Williamson is kind of over-rated, Steve Smith has been the best batsman in tests since 2014.
 
I rate him higher than Williamson.


He is batting at 4, so if the pitch becomes easier that isn't in his control. He has still scored runs on difficult surfaces though.

Pitches dont become easier as soon as Smith walks. That is a wrong theory.

He has walked in difficult conditions too. Missed out in three tests in England and didn't helped much when his team was losing.

In NZ he scored an impressive 70 odd in first test which wasn't easy when he walked in but he did well there. Still couldnt really convert that into a big one.Finally got a century in 2nd test when the conditions were easier.

In SL, the pitch was best suited to batting in 3rd test and with Marsh back in team he got that assistance and got a century in a dead rubber game.Didn't do much in first two games.

Not much of note in India and UAE where Aussies get whitwashed.
 
Pitches dont become easier as soon as Smith walks. That is a wrong theory.

He has walked in difficult conditions too. Missed out in three tests in England and didn't helped much when his team was losing.

In NZ he scored an impressive 70 odd in first test which wasn't easy when he walked in but he did well there. Still couldnt really convert that into a big one.Finally got a century in 2nd test when the conditions were easier.

In SL, the pitch was best suited to batting in 3rd test and with Marsh back in team he got that assistance and got a century in a dead rubber game.Didn't do much in first two games.

Not much of note in India and UAE where Aussies get whitwashed.

He will do better in India this time, problem is he may not get enough support to score big.
 
Steve Smith is much better than Williamson.

Williamson is kind of over-rated, Steve Smith has been the best batsman in tests since 2014.

I don't think Williamson is ovverated but he doesn't seem to dominate bowlers and dominate series for the reputation he gets.
 
He will do better in India this time, problem is he may not get enough support to score big.

Williamson also doesn't get support in Asia, Eng and SA. He plays in even weaker team than Aus does.So, that is the reason I won't say who is better of two simply on basis of stats.
 
Williamson also doesn't get support in Asia, Eng and SA. He plays in even weaker team than Aus does.So, that is the reason I won't say who is better of two simply on basis of stats.

True but he has been labelled as a future ATG so he should be able to carry the batting line up better and score against the best and in difficult conditions.
 
Favorite batsman along with Joe Root in Tests currently. Also is very underrated.

If you ask me he's already scored lots of runs everywhere at healthy averages. He's probably the best Test Batsman of this generation.

Plus if you look at his stats since is transformation 2014-Current

Matches - 31
Runs - 3341
Ave - 71.08
100's - 13
50's - 13

Those are some incredible numbers and he's played in the following countries since that time - Aus, Eng, WI, SA, NZ, SL, UAE

Here are his number is individual countries since 2014

AUS - Mat - 14 Runs - 1598 Ave - 80 100's - 7
ENG - Mat - 5 Runs - 508 Ave - 56.44 100's - 2
WI - Mat - 2 Runs - 283 Ave - 141.50 100's - 1
SA - Mat - 3 Runs - 269 Ave - 67.25 100's - 1
NZ - Mat - 2 Runs - 262 Ave - 131 100's - 1
SL - Mat - 3 Runs - 247 Ave - 41.16 100's - 1
UAE - Mat - 2 Runs - 174 Ave - 43.50

Those are some great number as he tours those Asian Countries again he's bound to improve those numbers.


Good stats bro.
 
He is not a FTB but not someone whom I will back to score in completely bowling friendly conditions. He doesn't posses that extra to be rated better than his other three competitors.

As for his strength, his biggest plus is his ability to dominate bowlers after he gets set on relatively easier pitches not flat pitches.

This is one of the big reasons why he has hardly missed out on scoring big hundreds after getting set and hence a reason why he avgs a manmoth 57 with his overall avg over 40 almost everywhere.
LMAO, he is definitely better than Kane.

Kane is a mental midget who disappears when the going gets tough.

As much as I hate Smith's batting, the guy is a fighter and I respect that.
 
Whether Smith can become an ATG will depend on his performances near the back end of his career.

He will struggle once his hand eye goes.

If this happens in his mid 30's, he probably will have done enough to be considered an ATG.

If it happens in his early 30's, then the odds are he will likely stick around for too long and hurt his average and reputation.
 
Kinda surprising to see him doing so well consistently with his limited although now improved strokeplay. I remember everyone writing him off initially when he started as a leg spinner who could bat. He has transformed himself into a run machine in the past few years.
 
We certainly did our part in nudging him in that direction
 
1st century vs Pakistan, which is kinda surprising considering he has already played more than 50 tests. How many matches had he played against Pakistan before this one?
 
1st century vs Pakistan, which is kinda surprising considering he has already played more than 50 tests. How many matches had he played against Pakistan before this one?

4 matches before this one. He had 3 fifties though.
 
1st century vs Pakistan, which is kinda surprising considering he has already played more than 50 tests. How many matches had he played against Pakistan before this one?

4 matches including two as a bowler
 
The only thing Smith has going against him is that he is an ugly-as-hell batsman to watch.

Stats-wise, he's already a great of this generation.

Averages have been going up every year, so a 55-60ish average at the end of his career will make him a candidate for ATG status.
 
Here are his number is individual countries since 2014

AUS - Mat - 14 Runs - 1598 Ave - 80 100's - 7
ENG - Mat - 5 Runs - 508 Ave - 56.44 100's - 2
WI - Mat - 2 Runs - 283 Ave - 141.50 100's - 1
SA - Mat - 3 Runs - 269 Ave - 67.25 100's - 1
NZ - Mat - 2 Runs - 262 Ave - 131 100's - 1
SL - Mat - 3 Runs - 247 Ave - 41.16 100's - 1
UAE - Mat - 2 Runs - 174 Ave - 43.50

<b>Those are some great number as he tours those Asian Countries again he's bound to improve those numbers.</b>

I doubt he will improve those numbers when he tours India.
 
Any batsman who has a balanced record everywhere, along with some iconic innings and has spent a good portion of his career as one of th best in the world, if not the best, will go down as an ATG.

I think Smith, Root, Kane and Kohli all have it in them. Let's see where they stand after 100 test matches.
 
I doubt he will improve those numbers when he tours India.

How will he improve those number when they are not even up there. He hasn't toured India in the time span I posted those stats on. Right now he's played 0 matches in India since 2014 so how can he improve those numbers with no matches, he can only go up from nothing.
 
What's changed in Smith's game?

Has he always had potential and is only just realizing it or its just that he's changed his game?

Always had potential but had to fix a whole bunch of issues
 
How Smith stacks up to The Don


The Australia captain is building an impressive record that may almost rival the greatest batsman of all time



Finding a parallel between Don Bradman and any other Test batsman is about as difficult as bowling to The Don himself. In terms of average, nobody has remained as consistently meteoric as Bradman.

Ask Adam Voges, who briefly ascended beyond the summit of 99.94 before slipping and falling to base camp with an average of 61.87, still an incredible number.

In terms of aggregate, nobody has reached 2,000, 3,000, 4,000 and 5,000 Test runs faster than Bradman, and he’s second fastest to 1,000, one innings behind co-leaders Herbert Sutcliffe and Everton Weekes, who did it in a dozen digs. The list of records go on and on, from his absurd ratio of a century every 2.76 innings to his conversion rate of 2.23 for 50-plus scores to hundreds, but there is a figure that can be used as a marker against the Boy from Bowral.

Bradman played 52 Tests, a number of matches that 249 players have reached - the latest of whom is Australia captain Steve Smith. So it’s only fitting that we look to the record books in attempt to discover any parallels between Test cricket’s greatest batsman and the game’s current batting supremo.



The debut In hindsight it might sound absurd, but after one Test Bradman was dropped. Debuting as a 20-year-old against England in Brisbane in November, 1928, he made 18 and 1 batting at No.7 and No.6, respectively, as the visitors won by the small margin of 675 runs.

Smith was 21 when he wore the Baggy Green for the first time in July 2010, chosen as a leg-spinner who batted at No.8 and No.9, scoring 1 and 12 with the bat and claiming 3-41 with the ball. Australia won the match by 150 runs against Pakistan at Lord’s and Smith played the following match in Leeds. The maiden century Bradman made amends for his poor first Test with 79 and then 112 in the second innings at the Melbourne Cricket Ground two Tests after he was axed.

Batting at No.6, he was at the crease for 281 balls and 246 minutes for his 112 in a timeless Test that lasted seven days and saw England seal the five-match series 3-0 with two matches to spare. While Bradman wasted no time in reaching triple figures upon his return, it took Smith until his 12th match to register his first century. He got close with 92 in Mohali in March 2013 and 89 against England in Manchester four months later before he finally broke through with an unbeaten 138 at The Oval in the final Test of the Ashes series, reaching the landmark with a handsome straight six.

The streaks Bradman holds the record of most hundreds in consecutive matches with six, from January 1937 to July 1938. His run of centuries reads: 270, 212, 169, 144no, 102no and 103, with four of those scores coming in the second innings. For good measure, Bradman also put together two streaks of four consecutive matches with a century.

Smith can’t match the Don in this category, however, the animated right-hander scored a century in four straight matches when he rattled off 162no, 133, 192 and 117 against India in the 2014-15 home summer. Smith is the most recent batsman to achieve this feat and the first since perhaps the closest rival to Bradman, the great Sachin Tendulkar, who humbled Bangladesh and South Africa in 2010.


The captaincy In 1936, Bradman was given the Test captaincy and started out in rocky fashion. He lost his first two Tests in charge and was out for two ducks that combined lasted a total of three balls. But you can’t keep an immortal of the game down for long. Bradman peeled off centuries - 270, 212 and 169 - in the next three Tests to clinch the series 3-2. In 24 Tests as captain, Bradman scored 3,147 runs and 14 centuries at an extraordinary 101.51.

He never lost a Test series in charge and bowed out of the game with an ironic second-ball duck at The Oval in the undefeated 1948 ‘Invincibles’ Tour. So far Smith has captained 22 Tests, his first coming in December 2014 when he filled in for the injured Michael Clarke.

Unlike Bradman, Smith started his tenure with a sparkling 133 at the Gabba against India. He took over the top job on a full-time basis in November 2015 and since then has lost only two series – in Sri Lanka last winter and the following series against South Africa at home.

Like Bradman, leadership sits well with him. In 22 matches as skipper Smith has scored 2,384 runs and 10 centuries at 70.11, with his finest hundred in charge perhaps the 109 he crafted in Pune late last month to drive Australia to their first Test win in India in 13 years.

The tale of 52 As it stands, Smith trails only India’s Sunil Gavaskar as Test cricket’s leading run-scorer after 52 matches. And Bradman, of course. Smith sits in third with 4,924 runs, 83 runs behind Gavaskar and a whopping 2,072 runs adrift of Bradman’s mark of 6,996.

Smith’s 18 Test centuries is the joint second-most by an Australian after 52 Tests, equal with Matthew Hayden but 11 behind Bradman’s incredible 29 tons. Smith’s 59.33 is the second-best average by an Australian in the same period and the fourth best ever, bettered by Bradman, Sutcliffe (61.85) and Jack Hobbs (60.21).

Comparing the peerless Bradman to any other batsman is almost futile, but at the same stage, Smith might just be the next best thing.

http://www.cricket.com.au/news/feature/how-does-steve-smith-compare-with-sir-donald-bradman-australia-cricket/2017-03-12
 
How Smith stacks up to The Don


The Australia captain is building an impressive record that may almost rival the greatest batsman of all time



Finding a parallel between Don Bradman and any other Test batsman is about as difficult as bowling to The Don himself. In terms of average, nobody has remained as consistently meteoric as Bradman.

Ask Adam Voges, who briefly ascended beyond the summit of 99.94 before slipping and falling to base camp with an average of 61.87, still an incredible number.

In terms of aggregate, nobody has reached 2,000, 3,000, 4,000 and 5,000 Test runs faster than Bradman, and he’s second fastest to 1,000, one innings behind co-leaders Herbert Sutcliffe and Everton Weekes, who did it in a dozen digs. The list of records go on and on, from his absurd ratio of a century every 2.76 innings to his conversion rate of 2.23 for 50-plus scores to hundreds, but there is a figure that can be used as a marker against the Boy from Bowral.

Bradman played 52 Tests, a number of matches that 249 players have reached - the latest of whom is Australia captain Steve Smith. So it’s only fitting that we look to the record books in attempt to discover any parallels between Test cricket’s greatest batsman and the game’s current batting supremo.



The debut In hindsight it might sound absurd, but after one Test Bradman was dropped. Debuting as a 20-year-old against England in Brisbane in November, 1928, he made 18 and 1 batting at No.7 and No.6, respectively, as the visitors won by the small margin of 675 runs.

Smith was 21 when he wore the Baggy Green for the first time in July 2010, chosen as a leg-spinner who batted at No.8 and No.9, scoring 1 and 12 with the bat and claiming 3-41 with the ball. Australia won the match by 150 runs against Pakistan at Lord’s and Smith played the following match in Leeds. The maiden century Bradman made amends for his poor first Test with 79 and then 112 in the second innings at the Melbourne Cricket Ground two Tests after he was axed.

Batting at No.6, he was at the crease for 281 balls and 246 minutes for his 112 in a timeless Test that lasted seven days and saw England seal the five-match series 3-0 with two matches to spare. While Bradman wasted no time in reaching triple figures upon his return, it took Smith until his 12th match to register his first century. He got close with 92 in Mohali in March 2013 and 89 against England in Manchester four months later before he finally broke through with an unbeaten 138 at The Oval in the final Test of the Ashes series, reaching the landmark with a handsome straight six.

The streaks Bradman holds the record of most hundreds in consecutive matches with six, from January 1937 to July 1938. His run of centuries reads: 270, 212, 169, 144no, 102no and 103, with four of those scores coming in the second innings. For good measure, Bradman also put together two streaks of four consecutive matches with a century.

Smith can’t match the Don in this category, however, the animated right-hander scored a century in four straight matches when he rattled off 162no, 133, 192 and 117 against India in the 2014-15 home summer. Smith is the most recent batsman to achieve this feat and the first since perhaps the closest rival to Bradman, the great Sachin Tendulkar, who humbled Bangladesh and South Africa in 2010.


The captaincy In 1936, Bradman was given the Test captaincy and started out in rocky fashion. He lost his first two Tests in charge and was out for two ducks that combined lasted a total of three balls. But you can’t keep an immortal of the game down for long. Bradman peeled off centuries - 270, 212 and 169 - in the next three Tests to clinch the series 3-2. In 24 Tests as captain, Bradman scored 3,147 runs and 14 centuries at an extraordinary 101.51.

He never lost a Test series in charge and bowed out of the game with an ironic second-ball duck at The Oval in the undefeated 1948 ‘Invincibles’ Tour. So far Smith has captained 22 Tests, his first coming in December 2014 when he filled in for the injured Michael Clarke.

Unlike Bradman, Smith started his tenure with a sparkling 133 at the Gabba against India. He took over the top job on a full-time basis in November 2015 and since then has lost only two series – in Sri Lanka last winter and the following series against South Africa at home.

Like Bradman, leadership sits well with him. In 22 matches as skipper Smith has scored 2,384 runs and 10 centuries at 70.11, with his finest hundred in charge perhaps the 109 he crafted in Pune late last month to drive Australia to their first Test win in India in 13 years.

The tale of 52 As it stands, Smith trails only India’s Sunil Gavaskar as Test cricket’s leading run-scorer after 52 matches. And Bradman, of course. Smith sits in third with 4,924 runs, 83 runs behind Gavaskar and a whopping 2,072 runs adrift of Bradman’s mark of 6,996.

Smith’s 18 Test centuries is the joint second-most by an Australian after 52 Tests, equal with Matthew Hayden but 11 behind Bradman’s incredible 29 tons. Smith’s 59.33 is the second-best average by an Australian in the same period and the fourth best ever, bettered by Bradman, Sutcliffe (61.85) and Jack Hobbs (60.21).

Comparing the peerless Bradman to any other batsman is almost futile, but at the same stage, Smith might just be the next best thing.

http://www.cricket.com.au/news/feature/how-does-steve-smith-compare-with-sir-donald-bradman-australia-cricket/2017-03-12

Interesting article
 
Still too early to say. May give verdict in 5 more years. However atm Smith is a tier ahead of anybody in test
 
He is going well on the way to attain ATG status in tests.

18 hundreds in 52 tests is an awesome record.

Should end up with 11k+ test runs at avg 55+ around 120-125 tests and 35 hundreds to his name.
 
Milking on second grade bowlers .. would not have survived at all in 90s and early 2000s ... comapring him to Pointing is a disgrace
 
Milking on second grade bowlers .. would not have survived at all in 90s and early 2000s ... comapring him to Pointing is a disgrace

yes he wouldnt have 'survived' in 90s but our favorites such as Williamson and Kohli who have inferior records to Smith would have been greats in the 90s as well :facepalm:
 
Not sure what to make of Smith. I haven't followed him too closely and achievements on Australian pitches should be taken with a grain of salt but said accomplishments are too many to ignore and downplay. Like others, I'll wait until he's toured a bit more before passing judgement. Either he'll go on to be one of the top five batsmen of all time or he'll take a major fall like Hussey, Pujara and Voges before him.
 
Averages less than 45 in 4 out of 8 countries he has played in.

He might end up as an ATG if he improves his record in Asia. From all the current batsman, he has the best chance to be a test ATG.
 
Not sure what to make of Smith. I haven't followed him too closely and achievements on Australian pitches should be taken with a grain of salt but said accomplishments are too many to ignore and downplay. Like others, I'll wait until he's toured a bit more before passing judgement. Either he'll go on to be one of the top five batsmen of all time or he'll take a major fall like Hussey, Pujara and Voges before him.

Smith's already played 50 odd tests and averages 60.
 
Smith's already played 50 odd tests and averages 60.

Only has solitary tours of South Africa, Sri Lanka and the UAE (2 tests). On inspecting his stats closer, he's done some serious HTB-ing with an average close to 70 in 24 test matches. Add in his monstrous average of 130 in the two tests he's played in New Zealand and that goes up even further. He's been similarly super in the West Indies with a 100+ average.

In the UAE, India and Sri Lanka however, he's merely been good. Averages around 40 in all three countries. Did well on his sole tour of South Africa. Seems to struggle against spin.
 
Only has solitary tours of South Africa, Sri Lanka and the UAE (2 tests). On inspecting his stats closer, he's done some serious HTB-ing with an average close to 70 in 24 test matches. Add in his monstrous average of 130 in the two tests he's played in New Zealand and that goes up even further. He's been similarly super in the West Indies with a 100+ average.

In the UAE, India and Sri Lanka however, he's merely been good. Averages around 40 in all three countries. Did well on his sole tour of South Africa. Seems to struggle against spin.

So you actually watch some cricket or just go by Stats?
Smith strugles against spin? He is one of the best player of spin bowling In the world.
The pitches In India and Sri Lanka were not easy to bat on so an average of 40 is very good.

Smith strugles vs quality swing bowling early.
 
So you actually watch some cricket or just go by Stats?
Smith strugles against spin? He is one of the best player of spin bowling In the world.
The pitches In India and Sri Lanka were not easy to bat on so an average of 40 is very good.

Smith strugles vs quality swing bowling early.

You need to learn how post in a non-hostile manner, Mobashir. Don't take your life's frustrations out on your fellow posters.

Yes, the pitches on this tour of India and on the tour of Sri Lanka may have been tough but they were not all that difficult on his first tour of India, where the home team was racking up big runs. The pitches in the UAE were not tough either where even Warner, a certified failure in Asia, managed to average 50+.

All in all, my point was that he has not played enough for me to make a judgement either way and I will refrain from calling him an ATG or a FTB until he has played a few more away tours. He does struggle against movement early on, which was evident in the last Ashes.
 
Smith strugles against spin? He is one of the best player of spin bowling In the world.
The pitches In India and Sri Lanka were not easy to bat on so an average of 40 is very good.

Smith strugles vs quality swing bowling early.

Agree with this. Smith is one of the best player of spin bowling. I rate him and Gautam Gambhir really really highly when it comes to playing spin in the current era and think they are tad underrated; Smith vs spin in tests and GG vs spin in odis.
 
You need to learn how post in a non-hostile manner, Mobashir. Don't take your life's frustrations out on your fellow posters.

Yes, the pitches on this tour of India and on the tour of Sri Lanka may have been tough but they were not all that difficult on his first tour of India, where the home team was racking up big runs. The pitches in the UAE were not tough either where even Warner, a certified failure in Asia, managed to average 50+.

All in all, my point was that he has not played enough for me to make a judgement either way and I will refrain from calling him an ATG or a FTB until he has played a few more away tours. He does struggle against movement early on, which was evident in the last Ashes.

On his first tour of India when his career test average was about 20?
 
Yes he is heading towards all time great status. I Just wish we had some all time great level bowlers to test him.
 
At the very least, Smith has been the only Australian to consistently make runs during this tour. Meanwhile, Warner has been a huge disappointment, and increasingly looks uncomfortable away from home.
 
He really is though.

Special player
 
I dare someone to call him an FTB now.

I predicted that he'll finish career with 70+ international hundreds. If he doesn't do what traditionally most Aussie greats did (retire still as an automatic starter), he'll go further. Doesn't look elegant, but extremely effective in bat movement - as long as his reflex & eye is not fading, he'll maintain this stats - that's another 7/8 years. After that, till 40, he'll still be a very good player averaging in high 40s.
 
It's hard to say because of average inflation. I think players such as Dean Jones would average 55+ in the modern game.
 
I predicted that he'll finish career with 70+ international hundreds. If he doesn't do what traditionally most Aussie greats did (retire still as an automatic starter), he'll go further. Doesn't look elegant, but extremely effective in bat movement - as long as his reflex & eye is not fading, he'll maintain this stats - that's another 7/8 years. After that, till 40, he'll still be a very good player averaging in high 40s.


I don't think he is relaying as much on eye movement and reflex these days. Easily has 7/8 more years, it will be a shock if he doesn't have 35 test centuries minimum by the end of his career.
 
I don't think he is relaying as much on eye movement and reflex these days. Easily has 7/8 more years, it will be a shock if he doesn't have 35 test centuries minimum by the end of his career.

Will be a shame if he doesn't hit 35 hundreds till he retires. Already has 19 hundreds i.e. 2 more than what VVS made in his whole career , only 2 less than AB's whole career and then his innings per hundred is brilliant.
Easily the best test batsmen in the world. He is someone who is among the toughest to get out once he gets his eye in and looks well set.

40+ hundreds and 10k+ runs are well on the cards IMO..
 
It's hard to say because of average inflation. I think players such as Dean Jones would average 55+ in the modern game.

No he wouldnt have.

He'd still not touch 50
 
Yeah..Going allright..

But he doesn't seem to have ceiling of Ponting level.

Also struggles on bowling friendly conditions.

Does well when everyone does but not so much when others fail.

199 vs WI was the only exception and WI isn't that real deal.

lol!
 
Definitely outbatting the overrated Kohli in this series and easily so.
 

He had a lot to prove at that time and if you read the further posts, I was pretty clear on what my expectations were from him.

Seems to have proved me wrong without any doubt.The best batsmen on the show in this series from both sides.
 
If we use the match at The Oval vs England in 2013 as the mark of Steve Smith’s coming of age as a batsman (as he scored his first Test century in the match), since then he has:

- Played 42 matches, including the one which is currently ongoing
- Scored 4400 runs (an average of 105 per match), with 1 innings still to play.
- Made 19 Test centuries in 75 innings (a century every 3.95 inns)
- Has a batting average of 71.
- Made 10 centuries at home, 9 away.
- Scored a hundred everywhere he has played, except for the UAE (where he made a 97)

The output since that match at The Oval is ABSURD.

At this point, barring an absolute collapse in his batting ability, he should comfortably get to 10,000 runs and 35 test hundreds. And that’s the absolute worst case scenario (assuming a batting average of around 42-45 for the next 6 to 7 years).

The stats and achievements become all the more mind-boggling if you think of the comments that were being made about his ability in the first couple of years of his international career.
 
No1 batsman currently although his average is inflated by home advantage..
 
He is halfway there, very good batsman single handedly leading Australia but, Root is slightly better than him in my opinion. Just accentuates the fallacy technique and aesthetics play in cricket.
 
Back
Top