What's new

Steve Smith vs Hashim Amla in ODIs

Buffet

Buffet

Post of the Week winner
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Runs
27,372
Post of the Week
3
.

Yes, this comparison may look too one sided to many PPers, because Amla averages high and all that. Many will simply take Amla because Smith is not a consistent performer in the ODI format.

Let's take a quick reality check.

Amla and Smith , both have played ODI only in the last 10 years. Amla started in 2008 and Smith started in 2010.

In the last 10 years, if you take W/L then SA, Aus, Ind, Eng and NZ are the top 5 teams.
.
.

smith.jpg

Now , Smith is and Amla both average 40, but Smith is striking near 90 while Amla is striking near 83.

Smith does have a poor average against the top 5 when playing away by averaging only 28 and Amla averages 40, but Smith performed in WC and Amla has been missing in the WC. So I will call it even.


I saw threads like Amla fastest to 8K kind of threads, but does it really matter if you are averaging just 40 against the top 5 sides? Going by trend, in 2-3 years, Amla may even average in mid 30s against the top 5 sides.

I used Smith just as an example here because no one takes Smith's name in ODI. You could take Mathews as an example. No one talks about him, but he average same as Hashim with similar SR against the top 5 sides. I will pick Hashim over Mathews, but just putting it in perspective.

Just take AB for example, you can pick on him for many things, but he is averaging 61 against the top 5 sides in the same period. Similarly, Kohli is averaging 54. That's called top class performance against the top sides.
 
Smith Played many series without their main bowlers as well but still he isn't great odi player but if i have to bet on one player in 2019 who can win worldcup then it's gonna be Steve Smith well ahead of Virat kohli.
 
Only argument for Smith here can be that Amla is spineless and Smith has decent performances in WC. But when we are considering 10 years of performances, we need to take a much broader view. And Amla beats Smith in overall scenario.

Amla is a tier-2 ODI batsman. Smith is tier-3 at best.
 
Princejain191 said:
Only argument for Smith here can be that Amla is spineless and Smith has decent performances in WC. But when we are considering 10 years of performances, we need to take a much broader view. And Amla beats Smith in overall scenario.

Amla is a tier-2 ODI batsman. Smith is tier-3 at best.
Click to expand...

10 years of performance against the top 5 sides, Smith beats Amla as well.

So you have two arguments here.
 
Buffet said:
10 years of performance against the top 5 sides, Smith beats Amla as well.

So you have two arguments here.
Click to expand...

Average of 28 away against top 5 doesn't sit down well with me. I don't consider him even in the 3 most impactful batsmen in his team. Warner, Finch and Maxi ahead for me. He hates Maxi for some reason.

And Amla ahead against the top 5 too for me.
 
One interesting question:

Odi batsmen- Rohit or Dhawan? Who would you take?
 
Smith had a legendarr World Cup in 2015 and has far better stats in ODI Tourneys overall. His form has gone down but I'd rate him above Amla tbh.


Cric Talk said:
Dhawan Not in the list!!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah, he hasn't been that consistent in Bilaterals but an absolute beast in every ICC Tournament without fail. Best Indian ODI batsman at the moment for me.
 
Princejain191 said:
Average of 28 away against top 5 doesn't sit down well with me. I don't consider him even in the 3 most impactful batsmen in his team. Warner, Finch and Maxi ahead for me. He hates Maxi for some reason.

And Amla ahead against the top 5 too for me.
Click to expand...

Smith is not being compared to his team mates here.

If you want to compare impact of Smith and Amla then you can do it directly. Amla has played 86 ODIs with 7 tons against the top 5 and Smith has played 69 ODIs with 6 tons against the top 5.

Smith is striking it near 90 while Amla is striking it at 83. Not sure why Amla is having more impact against the top 5.

Smith is poor away from Aus with average of 28, but Amla is not really hitting the ball out of park with his average of 40 as well. Not sure where do you see impact with Amla when it comes to performing against the top 5 sides.
 
Amla is a minnow basher in odis.

Top5 is a little harsh but against top7, Amla averages only 44 which is good but nothing exceptional.
 
Ab Fan said:
One interesting question:

Odi batsmen- Rohit or Dhawan? Who would you take?
Click to expand...

If you take against the top 5 sides,

Rohit avg 36 & SR 79

Dhavan avg 47 & SR 97

Dhavan without doubt when you combine it with him scoring in tournaments.
 
Ab Fan said:
Amla is a minnow basher in odis.

Top5 is a little harsh but against top7, Amla averages only 44 which is good but nothing exceptional.
Click to expand...

It's harsh, but tells you the trend. You can see the same story against the top 7 as well.
 
Buffet said:
.

Yes, this comparison may look too one sided to many PPers, because Amla averages high and all that. Many will simply take Amla because Smith is not a consistent performer in the ODI format.

Let's take a quick reality check.

Amla and Smith , both have played ODI only in the last 10 years. Amla started in 2008 and Smith started in 2010.

In the last 10 years, if you take W/L then SA, Aus, Ind, Eng and NZ are the top 5 teams.
.
.

View attachment 78864

Now , Smith is and Amla both average 40, but Smith is striking near 90 while Amla is striking near 83.

Smith does have a poor average against the top 5 when playing away by averaging only 28 and Amla averages 40, but Smith performed in WC and Amla has been missing in the WC. So I will call it even.


I saw threads like Amla fastest to 8K kind of threads, but does it really matter if you are averaging just 40 against the top 5 sides? Going by trend, in 2-3 years, Amla may even average in mid 30s against the top 5 sides.

I used Smith just as an example here because no one takes Smith's name in ODI. You could take Mathews as an example. No one talks about him, but he average same as Hashim with similar SR against the top 5 sides. I will pick Hashim over Mathews, but just putting it in perspective.

Just take AB for example, you can pick on him for many things, but he is averaging 61 against the top 5 sides in the same period. Similarly, Kohli is averaging 54. That's called top class performance against the top sides.
Click to expand...

You are hurting some fragile egos. No Pak in the filter :) and calling them not the one of the top five teams :)
 
Gubol123 said:
You are hurting some fragile egos. No Pak in the filter :) and calling them not the one of the top five teams :)
Click to expand...

Trend with Amla looks the same even if you take top 7. He has simply bashed WI to keep his career average above 45.
 
Ab Fan said:
You must be right but surprising really!
Click to expand...

Dhawan doesn't even have 4.5K runs in ODIs. not at all surprising that he has less than 2K runs against top five teams. He has played only 100 matches. He broke into Indian team late due to Sehwag, Tendulkar, occupying openers slot
 
Buffet said:
If you take against the top 5 sides,

Rohit avg 36 & SR 79

Dhavan avg 47 & SR 97

Dhavan without doubt when you combine it with him scoring in tournaments.
Click to expand...

Rohit was very bad in his first 50 odd matches...we have to consider their recent form/stats
 
Buffet said:
If you take against the top 5 sides,

Rohit avg 36 & SR 79

Dhavan avg 47 & SR 97

Dhavan without doubt when you combine it with him scoring in tournaments.
Click to expand...

you mentioned cut off is 2K...how soon he is to get into that 2K club...he will be in top 5 ahead of Dhoni....

Probably none of the indians know the true worth of dhawan...he is not that highly rated..
 
Buffet said:
Trend with Amla looks the same even if you take top 7. He has simply bashed WI to keep his career average above 45.
Click to expand...

True.. unfortunately. He has scored 2400+ runs against BD, IRL, Netherlands, WI and ZIM at 73. Only BD has somewhat good bowling attack among those five teams.. That kind of stats can only be categorized as minnow basher.
 
Cric Talk said:
you mentioned cut off is 2K...how soon he is to get into that 2K club...he will be in top 5 ahead of Dhoni....

Probably none of the indians know the true worth of dhawan...he is not that highly rated..
Click to expand...

1200 runs against the top 5 right now.
 
Gubol123 said:
True.. unfortunately. He has scored 2400+ runs against BD, IRL, Netherlands, WI and ZIM at 73. Only BD has somewhat good bowling attack among those five teams.. That kind of stats can only be categorized as minnow basher.
Click to expand...

Not a bad thing to bash poor attacks. I don't consider it as negative, but he has not scored much against the top sides. That's a huge negative. That's why fastest to this or that is meaningless.

A good batsman, but SA is pretty much AB or bust when it comes to some one performing over a long period against the top sides.
 
Buffet said:
Smith is not being compared to his team mates here.

If you want to compare impact of Smith and Amla then you can do it directly. Amla has played 86 ODIs with 7 tons against the top 5 and Smith has played 69 ODIs with 6 tons against the top 5.

Smith is striking it near 90 while Amla is striking it at 83. Not sure why Amla is having more impact against the top 5.

Smith is poor away from Aus with average of 28, but Amla is not really hitting the ball out of park with his average of 40 as well. Not sure where do you see impact with Amla when it comes to performing against the top 5 sides.
Click to expand...

I added the teammates part because that tells you about the player too. Amla has consistently been the second best in his team for a long time while Smith has been in the background for too long. And there is not much to choose between the no. of hundreds or SR of both players away from home but Smith has an average that is 30% less than Amlas' away from home against same oppositions and that is a huge difference. 40 is respectable, 28 is awful. Amla hasn't been too impactful but certainly a lot more than Smith.

Not a contest for me here. Root vs Amla would probably make for a better comparison.
 
Except for the 2015 WC, Smith hasn't done really much in ODIs.

In bilaterals, Amla is better.
 
Why does eveyone forgers that smith started playing as a batter only in 2014 and as a top order batter in 2015.
By the time he retires he will be well ahead of Amla and kohi.
Smith might not reach statistical brilliance of kohli but he would have won aus more important games than bilaterals.
Its a bit like sachin vs lara. You know who has got statistical edge but deep inside you know who is better.
 
Smudger said:
Why does eveyone forgers that smith started playing as a batter only in 2014 and as a top order batter in 2015.
By the time he retires he will be well ahead of Amla and kohi.
Smith might not reach statistical brilliance of kohli but he would have won aus more important games than bilaterals.
Its a bit like sachin vs lara. You know who has got statistical edge but deep inside you know who is better.
Click to expand...

what bakwas is this!

Dude Kohli has 29 100s and averages 70+ when India won the match.

Some people just preoccupy their brain with rigid thinking and assumptions without knowing or experiencing the truth. His statistical edge = team winning. there is no such a difference for him. He is just way better ODi batter than Smith, it's truth statically + in reality.
 
Smudger said:
Why does eveyone forgers that smith started playing as a batter only in 2014 and as a top order batter in 2015.
By the time he retires he will be well ahead of Amla and kohi.
Smith might not reach statistical brilliance of kohli but he would have won aus more important games than bilaterals.
Its a bit like sachin vs lara. You know who has got statistical edge but deep inside you know who is better.
Click to expand...

Smith can't reach Kohli's shoes in 100 lifetimes in LOI. He's not even as good as Warner in ODIs. An injured, out of form Kohli is 10x the batsman Smith will ever be in ODIs
 
Smudger said:
Why does eveyone forgers that smith started playing as a batter only in 2014 and as a top order batter in 2015.
By the time he retires he will be well ahead of Amla and kohi.
Smith might not reach statistical brilliance of kohli but he would have won aus more important games than bilaterals.
Its a bit like sachin vs lara. You know who has got statistical edge but deep inside you know who is better.
Click to expand...

Lara played in more defeats than almost anyone else bar Ban players. You like Lara more but that does not mean you have to put down Sachin. What important games did Lara won for WI ? And are you sure that Sachin dint do that ?
 
Proactive_ said:
Yeah saw that in the WC 15 Semi.
Click to expand...

Virat won an Asia cup , Champions trophy . All those away from home. But yeah , don't worry WC 2015 is the best since Smith scored at his home. WT20 2016 and 2014, Virat single-handedly took India to the semi and finals respectively. He scored big in those finals as well .
 
Amla is better, but not by much. He is in the similar league as a batsman though and not in the league of ATGs, nowhere close. I respect him a lot as a test batsman , but he is even going downhill in that format.
 
Amla>>>>>>Smith
Dont believe in dumb "only wc performance matter logics"
If only wc matters than pak is nowhere near to india in lois.
Some posters bring new rules just to humiliate a particular player.
 
Proactive_ said:
Smith had a legendarr World Cup in 2015 and has far better stats in ODI Tourneys overall. His form has gone down but I'd rate him above Amla tbh.




Yeah, he hasn't been that consistent in Bilaterals but an absolute beast in every ICC Tournament without fail. Best Indian ODI batsman at the moment for me.
Click to expand...
So according to you india is better loi team historically than pak. Just because we beat you everytime you meet us in"the real odis".
Accept it or let your double standards be exposed.
 
Pakistani ODI bowlers of note who played in the last ten years:

Saeed Ajmal, Shoaib Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Hafeez, Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Irfan and Wahab Riaz.

New Zealand bowlers of the last ten years:

Trent Boult, Tim Southee, Matt Henry, Chris Martin and... ?

And India? Seriously? They've only now started having a decent bowling side and even that is heavily based upon their two fantastic leggies. They've not been one of the best bowling sides of the last ten years. Failing against them is like failing against Sri Lanka. It's got nothing to do with your ability against quality bowling.

Let's do a fair analysis:

Both Amla and Smith have played around 40 matches against Pakistan and England, teams who have always had good bowling attacks over the last ten years. Amla averages just a shade under 50 and strikes at just a shade under 90. Smith averages below 38 and strikes at below 84. They're also neutral teams that both of them have played against.

And if WC performances are the be all, end all, then Smith is a better ODI batsman than Kohli and de Villiers too, not just Amla. And Imran Khan is a better ODI batsman than Sachin Tendulker.
 
Bilal7 said:
Pakistani ODI bowlers of note who played in the last ten years:

Saeed Ajmal, Shoaib Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Hafeez, Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Irfan and Wahab Riaz.

New Zealand bowlers of the last ten years:

Trent Boult, Tim Southee, Matt Henry, Chris Martin and... ?

And India? Seriously? They've only now started having a decent bowling side and even that is heavily based upon their two fantastic leggies. They've not been one of the best bowling sides of the last ten years. Failing against them is like failing against Sri Lanka. It's got nothing to do with your ability against quality bowling.

Let's do a fair analysis:

Both Amla and Smith have played around 40 matches against Pakistan and England, teams who have always had good bowling attacks over the last ten years. Amla averages just a shade under 50 and strikes at just a shade under 90. Smith averages below 38 and strikes at below 84. They're also neutral teams that both of them have played against.

And if WC performances are the be all, end all, then Smith is a better ODI batsman than Kohli and de Villiers too, not just Amla. And Imran Khan is a better ODI batsman than Sachin Tendulker.
Click to expand...

And Munaf Patel is better bowler than Waqar Younis
 
Buffet said:
Not a bad thing to bash poor attacks. I don't consider it as negative, but he has not scored much against the top sides. That's a huge negative. That's why fastest to this or that is meaningless.

A good batsman, but SA is pretty much AB or bust when it comes to some one performing over a long period against the top sides.
Click to expand...

Amla averages 50 at a SR of 90 against Pakistan and England, with a sample size of 40 matches.

Kohli averages 43 at a SR of 90 against the same teams with a sample size of 38 matches.

ABD averages around 49 with a SR of 90 against the same with a sample size of 60-odd matches.

Smith averages far lower and strikes far slower than Amla.
 
Bilal7 said:
Amla averages 50 at a SR of 90 against Pakistan and England, with a sample size of 40 matches.

Kohli averages 43 at a SR of 90 against the same teams with a sample size of 38 matches.

ABD averages around 49 with a SR of 90 against the same with a sample size of 60-odd matches.

Smith averages far lower and strikes far slower than Amla.
Click to expand...

Why just compare Pakistan and England? SA and Aus too have very good bowling attack.
 
CanadianG00se said:
Why just compare Pakistan and England? SA and Aus too have very good bowling attack.
Click to expand...

Because they are not neutral teams. Smith has never played against the Australian bowlers and the Saffers haven't faced their own bowlers. All four of them have faced Pak and Eng.

Amla has done poorly against Australia for sure, but let's not pretend that he's a minnow-basher.
 
Bilal7 said:
Yes, which is preposterous. WC performances are not the be all, end all.
Click to expand...

Is there a stat on how Amla does in a decider of a bilateral?

Additionally, you cannot say whether Amla is better than Smith based on results against Pakistan and England. All of the top 6 teams need to be taken into account. India might not have had a legendary bowling lineup but have been good enough to be one of the top 3 ODI teams of this and the previous decade.
 
You also have to consider that pitches have become more flatter in England, SA and Aus after 2015.

Root and Qdk average is and will be a bit inflated due to that IMO.

Hence, we cant parallely compare the avgs of say Smith and Root and that to Amla and de Villiers.
 
Bilal7 said:
Amla averages 50 at a SR of 90 against Pakistan and England, with a sample size of 40 matches.

Kohli averages 43 at a SR of 90 against the same teams with a sample size of 38 matches.

ABD averages around 49 with a SR of 90 against the same with a sample size of 60-odd matches.

Smith averages far lower and strikes far slower than Amla.
Click to expand...

NZ, Aus, India and SA have been the 4 best ODI sides of this decade. This selective stuff doesn't work Bilal. Thing is Amla has been average against good attacks and in important times. Sorry if it hurts you but it is the truth. Average of 40 against good teams over a career is awful
 
Princejain191 said:
NZ, Aus, India and SA have been the 4 best ODI sides of this decade. This selective stuff doesn't work Bilal. Thing is Amla has been average against good attacks and in important times. Sorry if it hurts you but it is the truth. Average of 40 against good teams over a career is awful
Click to expand...

Average of 40 is certainly not awful. But it's a tad underwhelming for the hype he gets.
 
Dead Ball said:
Average of 40 is certainly not awful. But it's a tad underwhelming for the hype he gets.
Click to expand...

For someone who averages 50+, he is not even in the top 10 against the top teams when it comes to averages. A lot more than tad underwhelming when you add to the average a strike rate of 83. Given that he is an opener, he should be averaging much more than 40. Quinton started later but already has more hundreds than him against the same oppositions.
 
Princejain191 said:
NZ, Aus, India and SA have been the 4 best ODI sides of this decade. This selective stuff doesn't work Bilal. Thing is Amla has been average against good attacks and in important times. Sorry if it hurts you but it is the truth. Average of 40 against good teams over a career is awful
Click to expand...

In last two ICC champion trophies and World Cups, our bowling had better average, ER and SR.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;groupby=team;series=11237;series=4799;series=4857;series=6537;team=6;team=7;template=results;type=bowling
 
shah_1 said:
In last two ICC champion trophies and World Cups, our bowling had better average, ER and SR.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;groupby=team;series=11237;series=4799;series=4857;series=6537;team=6;team=7;template=results;type=bowling
Click to expand...

Yes, Pakistan's bowling has been better than ours for much of the decade, but when you combine the bowling average for the same tournaments with the batting averages, you will see that batsmen are often under more pressure against India. India has had a more complete side than Pakistan for very long now.
 
Bilal7 said:
Pakistani ODI bowlers of note who played in the last ten years:

Saeed Ajmal, Shoaib Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Hafeez, Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Irfan and Wahab Riaz.

New Zealand bowlers of the last ten years:

Trent Boult, Tim Southee, Matt Henry, Chris Martin and... ?

And India? Seriously? They've only now started having a decent bowling side and even that is heavily based upon their two fantastic leggies. They've not been one of the best bowling sides of the last ten years. Failing against them is like failing against Sri Lanka. It's got nothing to do with your ability against quality bowling.

Let's do a fair analysis:

Both Amla and Smith have played around 40 matches against Pakistan and England, teams who have always had good bowling attacks over the last ten years. Amla averages just a shade under 50 and strikes at just a shade under 90. Smith averages below 38 and strikes at below 84. They're also neutral teams that both of them have played against.

And if WC performances are the be all, end all, then Smith is a better ODI batsman than Kohli and de Villiers too, not just Amla. And Imran Khan is a better ODI batsman than Sachin Tendulker.
Click to expand...


For most of Amlas career England have been rubbish in LO. Which great English bowlers has Amla faced in his LO career? Anderson and Broad aren't great LO bowlers .

Australia have been a much better LO side during Amlas career and he has failed versus them. As always shifting goal posts to suit your agendas. :salute
 
Bilal7 said:
Pakistani ODI bowlers of note who played in the last ten years:

Saeed Ajmal, Shoaib Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Mohammad Hafeez, Umar Gul, Junaid Khan, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Irfan and Wahab Riaz.

New Zealand bowlers of the last ten years:

Trent Boult, Tim Southee, Matt Henry, Chris Martin and... ?

And India? Seriously? They've only now started having a decent bowling side and even that is heavily based upon their two fantastic leggies. They've not been one of the best bowling sides of the last ten years. Failing against them is like failing against Sri Lanka. It's got nothing to do with your ability against quality bowling.
Click to expand...

All names are fine, but here are bowling unit's output in the last 10 years.

India bowling average in the last 10 years - 33

Pakistani bowling average in the last 10 years - 33


-------------

Performing against top teams certainly matters. It's not just about bowling average anyway. Top teams will put 30-40 runs extra on average and it' harder to chase due to extra pressure.
 
Hasan123 said:
For most of Amlas career England have been rubbish in LO. Which great English bowlers has Amla faced in his LO career? Anderson and Broad aren't great LO bowlers .
Click to expand...


Many of you are getting bogged down in detail against one or two country. My point was simple. Eng is already included in the top 5 in W/L. Some teams in the top 5 will have good and some will have not so good bowling. No need to even focus on individual teams.

But being in the top 5 means they win more often. Now if you are going to have average of 40 with SR of 83 as an opener then it's not bad, but not really a top tier performance by any stretch. Top teams's makes harder not just by having good bowling, but also piling up runs to put extra pressure on you to get those runs. Chasing 220 against Pakistan may be easier than chasing 320 against WI, even though WI has an inferior bowling.

Also, I was just pointing out trend here. Amla averages below 45 against top 7 as well as an opener. Not bad, but again not a top tier performance in current era.
 
Buffet said:
Many of you are getting bogged down in detail against one or two country. My point was simple. Eng is already included in the top 5 in W/L. Some teams in the top 5 will have good and some will have not so good bowling. No need to even focus on individual teams.

But being in the top 5 means they win more often. Now if you are going to have average of 40 with SR of 83 as an opener then it's not bad, but not really a top tier performance by any stretch. Top teams's makes harder not just by having good bowling, but also piling up runs to put extra pressure on you to get those runs. Chasing 220 against Pakistan may be easier than chasing 320 against WI, even though WI has an inferior bowling.

Also, I was just pointing out trend here. Amla averages below 45 against top 7 as well as an opener. Not bad, but again not a top tier performance in current era.
Click to expand...


I don't rate Amla as a top tier LO batsmen. Just exposing someone's hypocrisy
 
I will go for Smith because I can count on him to come good under pressure. With Amla, I can say with certainty that he will let the team down under pressure almost every single time.
 
Amla is a level ahead of Smith in Odis. Amla has won many games for South Africa in several Bilateral Odi series. He is also a more consistent batsman in limited overs. Smith is not as consistent in Odis and also usually slows the score down. So, Amla is the match winning batsman and that is more important in limited overs. However, one con is obviously that Amla does bottle under pressure in WC games.
 
Last edited:
Tier1

Kohli
de Villiers
Dhoni

Tier2

Amla
Root
Dhawan
Rohit
Guptill
Warner
Qdk

Tier3

Smith
Williamson
Babar
 
Sher Khan said:
Amla is a level ahead of Smith in Odis. Amla has won many games for South Africa in several Bilateral Odi series. He is also a more consistent batsman in limited overs. Smith is not as consistent in Odis and also usually slows the score down. So, Amla is the match winning batsman and that is more important in limited overs. However, one con is obviously that Amla does bottle under pressure in WC games.
Click to expand...

That is a fair assessment. Smith never stamped his authority in the one dayers bar few times. He may do may never do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Buffet
Joe Root versus Hashim Amla in the Test format
2
Replies
158
Views
5K
atreus
atreus
atreus
  • Poll Poll
Ricky Ponting vs Hashim Amla – Who was the superior Test batter?
Replies
39
Views
1K
atreus
atreus
T
Who is the best batter you have seen, who does not average 50 in Test cricket?
2
Replies
118
Views
2K
Van_Sri
Van_Sri
Hitman
Steve Smith announces retirement from ODI cricket
Replies
67
Views
2K
Hitman
Hitman
T
What is the minimum criteria for average and strike rate in ODI cricket in this era?
Replies
15
Views
1K
YousafTheBeast
YousafTheBeast
Back
Top