Gingerfinch wrote:Smith's 100th test tomorrow. After his mediocre start to test Cricket, where he was a batter who could bowl a bit, did anyone seriously believe this man would not only make 100 tests but have 32 test tons to his name with an average of 60?
Smith was actually a leg-spin prospect who could bat a bit. At the time, Hauritz career started to fade as the post Warne option (and IIRC, he smashed his shoulder in fielding in a Shield game, and that was him done for good). Australia picked some pretty filthy options in desperation - Beau Casson, Xavier Doherty, Dan Cullen, Michael Beer, Jason Krejza. It got to the stage they gave Bryce McGain a game, and I think without reservation, he looked like the worst bowler I have ever seen in test cricket. Certain bowled the worst I have ever seen in a test (I cant remember the exact figures, but he went for something ridiculous like 150 runs in 15 overs with not a single wicket or chance).
Going back a while, but I think Smith was picked after the McGain debacle. Was seen a raw, left-field punt, mostly because he could turn the ball sharply and bat a bit- which he really could, but he sprayed and prayed it all over the wicket. I might be totally wrong, but I think after his short initial run where it seemed his bowling would never work at the required level, he started ripping runs out of nowhere. Enough for Australia to give him a go with the bat, and the rest of course is history. A bit of a similar story to KP, who went from nowhere to become suddenly a brilliant batsman.
Where does he stand in the grand pantheon of run makers? 2nd to Bradman?
