Darren Lehmann's Root Comment...

Is there only me that thinks there's some truth in it? He has consistently failed in Australia. The big three aside (Williamson, Kohli and Smith) there are other less renowned English batsman that have scored runs all around the world and Australia.

Is Root over hyped or under rated? He accumulates runs quickly but doesn't play the expansive drives of his contemporaries.

 

Smith has been found out and is now on the decline. His test average has dropped from around 62 to 56 (could drop even lower if struggles in the current India series) albeit he has scored runs all over the world. That Ashes series in the UK after the ball tampering scandal in South Africa he was absolutely phenomenal. England couldn't get him out!
I'm not a massive fan of Kohli but Williamson has also scored runs all over the world.
Root again is a phenomenal player but not quite at the same level of Williamson and or Smith until he scores runs in Australia.

 

It's all relative though, because you can level similar accusations to the others regarding certain "Big" countries.

Kohli hasn't done much in England, and I don't think Williamson has excelled in India.

Smith was clearly the best up until a few years ago but has regressed.

I'd put Root in the company of those four - they're certainly the best of our generation.

 

Do the media like to pull a player apart too? The piece on Labuschagne by the BBC seemed to me to be a counter story by our media after the Root/ Lehmann story.

Labuschagne might be out of form but you just know he'll score runs again at some point.

 

Roots definitely up there. Class batsman, makes it look effortless. He has got 89 as his highest score down under, if he got another 11 that time would it have made that huge a difference!? He's got the most runs of that lot too!
I'm a fan of Kohli, love watching him bat, he gets the runs when it matters for his team.

 

His record in Australia is way below his usual standard. Look at how brilliant Michael Vaughan did over there.

 

Vaughan, Cook, Petersen, Flintoff, Collingwood, Strauss. All had that bite and stoicism about them. Stokes to a degree too.

Roots converting his fifties to centuries more now and isn't getting out after drinks, lunch, tea etc.

Proof of pudding will ultimately be in the eating.

Might be just Aussie media trying to put a monkey on his back. However, I reckon Brook will be our main threat by then.

 

Vaughan had one good tour in 02/03 when he was absolutely on top of his game. Never had the consistency before or since.

 

Root is the only great batsmen in our line up. Leagues ahead of any one of the flat track sloggers he has to play alongside.

 

Number 1 test batsman according to ICC - rankings take into account the opposition standard as well. He's miles in front at the minute

 

Load of tosh if you ask me, greatness as a test batter can only be based on the total number of runs scored irrespective of where they were scored. You wouldn't say that Harry Kane isn't a great striker because he never scored for England in (say) Brazil would you?

I don't know if he scored in Brazil or not by the way.

 

Common trait from Australia to make comments like that prior to an Ashes tour

 

Smith was part of the leadership group regarding the infamous ball tampering disgrace who rightly got banned

Kohli is an over aggressive fielder and his batting has been on the decline over the last 3 years

Williamson is a class act but injuries have impacted him of late.

Root is a class act.

Lehmann firing the early Ashes shots and trying to get in Roots head. look at his numbers.

 

They should be let loose on Meadowhall next.

 

Brian Lara only averaged 33 in India, the useless b4stard.

Pre-ashes bluster. A batsmen with a realistic chance of scoring more runs than any other test player in history is not considered a 'great'?

 

Love Lehmann for all his great years at Yorkshire. However I think this is a load of nonsense and is probably just to wind people up.

He averages 51 vs Kohl 48 for example, and I'd argue that in home series, Root generally has more difficult batting conditions than Smith and Kohli for sure. Smith's average is fantastic but has been on the decline. Williamson doesn't play as many Tests due to playing for a smaller nation that don't play as much Test cricket.

There is perhaps an argument that at their absolute best, is Root 4th of the big 4? Maybe Smith, Kohli and Williamson were slightly better when absolutely bang in form. Possibly. Root's longevity is most impressive of the 4 though, in terms of maintaining consistency. Current Test runs:

Root 12,754
Smith 9,702
Kohli 9,145
Williamson 8881

All these players will have better records in some countries than others, it's just the way it goes, so overall I can't agree with DL.

 

Here is that Labuschagne article for reference. It does seem a little harsh.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cvg0yv23w9vo

 

I’d put £100 on Root to score a ton on the next Ashes tour.

License to print money

 

Ian Bell too.

Root is playing with more freedom due to not being captain any more. He was a poor captain, knew it, and it took a toll on his batting, especially in the last Ashes.

That was exacerbated by having an awful top order, excluding him, which added more pressure. Still got the most runs and averaged over 30. Crawley and Rory 'Coconut Shy' Burns, Pope and Hameed both dreadful as well.

I'm interested to see how he gets on next winter.

 

Me too wish I was ten years younger. I'd love a crack at them on those rock hard pitches when they don't aim at the stumps. Have an absolute field day.