Greg Smith (continued)

Comments on the Falcons Forum tonight suggested that I made a 'disgraceful personal attack' on Greg Smith last night, which is nonsense.

I simply pointed out the inaccuracies of the player's account of recent events in comparison to what actually happened. It was not 'personal' because I don't 'do' personal. I am a fan of the club and by extension the players within it - and that includes Greg Smith.

I have seen Greg bat brilliantly on occasions. Against Kent at Derby in a Sunday fixture in 2007 he made a superb 88 and repeatedly hit the bowlers over their heads, bisecting long off and long on and keeping us in a match that we seemed set to lose until he ran out of partners. His strokeplay around the wicket was brilliant, by any standards. At that point he looked set for the big time, but such innings have been too sporadic for the player to make the next step, at least as far as I'm concerned. Four years later, it remains his highest score in List A matches.

If I heard that Smith had a change of heart and was staying I would be delighted. As someone pointed out last night, he may be a late developer, like Paul Collingwood. His versatility as a bowler is useful, although wickets have not come his way, especially in one day cricket, as often as they perhaps should for a player of his undoubted talent.

He IS capable of scoring a thousand runs a season, but after six seasons has not done so. He started this year like a train, but has, to continue the metaphor, run out of steam lately. The Middlesex game was a microcosm of the player - two sparkling knocks, the second given away when the innings cried out for someone to keep their head down. Maybe batting him higher might give him additional responsibility or then again might expose fallibilities in his technique. Dropping him down to seven is, in my opinion, too low.

One of last nights comments suggested he was a fine one day player, which got me on the research trail.
His 68 last weekend against Kent was his first List A fifty since 2009, which was itself his first since 2007, when he made two. That's five half centuries in six seasons for a top six batsman. As for bowling, in 2009 he took 21 wickets at 25, his best, but last year had 7 wickets at 47 and this year three at 56. Only once in six years has he taken four wickets in an innings.

What about T20? There was that century at Headingley, which we all remember, though it was in 2008. Apart from that there have been four fifties, none since 2009. Last year he averaged 16, this year just under eight.
Bowling? He took 13 wickets last season and did OK with the ball, but has otherwise taken seven wickets in his career at the club in T20.

My point is that he has not yet produced the statistics to justify a serious salary hike. If, like Paul Collingwood, he is a late developer, then his next contract at 30-31 could well be the biggie he craves. One thing is for sure though - he will have to get himself qualified for England, or he will struggle to find anyone to take him on. That is not criticism of the player but a comment on a system that doubles the pressure to perform after a player is 26 and no longer earns his club ECB money, let alone costs them a fair amount.

Whether there are yet more twists in this saga I don't know. A fit and in form Greg Smith, registered for England, is undoubtedly better than we'll pick up elsewhere this winter and would be an asset to the side - as long as he was realistic in his demands. It is, after all, a team game and the team, for me, is all important.

Keep your eyes on this one.

On a different tack, in answer to another comment, Karl Krikken does the coaching at the club and Chris Grant, a man with a strong financial background, does the contracts. That's a logical way of handling things for me and undoubtedly the right way forward. Krikk identifies who he wants, the Chairman does the deal. No problems.

Finally, Mark Eklid today has suggested that Matt Lineker and/or Paul Borrington may make the team later in the week for the Championship match. Much will depend on the televised game on Thursday night, when runs for both Wayne Madsen and Martin Guptill might earn them a reprieve.

We'll doubtless see soon enough.