Players with misleading averages....

[Furball]

That is descriptive enough. 40 wickets in 8 matches against England is no big deal for a legendary spinner. 20 wickets in 3 test matches at 25 against India would have been a better bet.
Then why that "exceptional" player could not stand up to "ordinary" NZ attack?

He scored a series winning ton in the 3rd Test in New Zealand when England, batting first, found themselves 4/3 then 36/4.

Anything else you want to selectively ignore?

 

[akilana]

On potential, Sanga is ahead of KP. Would expect Sanga to be far ahead of KP by the time he reties. Sanga's far more talented, has better technique and is easy on the eye. Wish he had more opportunities.

 

[tooextracool]

but I fancy KP to build on what he did in the Ashes this year.This past year he's averaged 50, so he's getting back to something like form, but still a way to go.

This statement has 0 credibility. KP was useless in the Ashes bar one knock in an inning where the game was more or less over by the time he came in to bat. Lets stop kidding ourselves, the guy has done absolutely nothing for 2 years now and to even put him on the same pedestal as Sangakkara is a crime that is jail worthy.

 

[Jono]

Haha agree. KP isn't in the same ball park as Sanga.

 

[robelinda]

Cannot fathom how KP could be seen as better than Sanga. KP has played some great knocks but still isnt quite the batsman KS is.

 

[abmk]

This statement has 0 credibility. KP was useless in the Ashes bar one knock in an inning where the game was more or less over by the time he came in to bat. Lets stop kidding ourselves, the guy has done absolutely nothing for 2 years now and to even put him on the same pedestal as Sangakkara is a crime that is jail worthy.

really now ?

Aus were 245 all out and Eng were 176/2 when he came in to bat. How on earth is the game more or less over at that time ?

 

[abmk]

FMD, People are comparing Pieterson to Sangakkara?

Sanga has been close to godly for the last few years. I've never seen a batsman with that much of an un-dismissable aura about him. Great player. Definetly in my top 5 favourite batsman ever.

try dravid or kallis at their peaks !

 

[abmk]

While sangakkara is the better batsman as of now, it isn't that there is vast difference between him and KP

 

[akilana]

kp vs clarke would be a better comparision

 

[tooextracool]

really now ?

Aus were 245 all out and Eng were 176/2 when he came in to bat. How on earth is the game more or less over at that time ?

2 reasons:
1) Australia had been bowled out on a pitch as flat as a pancake for 245.
2) Trott and Cook had already done the hard yards in wiping off 3/4 of the Australian score.

Call it whatever you want but coming in with 2 wickets down while the batter at the other end is in sublime touch on 80 odd suggests to me that it was an innings that merely rammed home the advantage. The bulk of the hard work had been done by Trott and Cook who virtually put them in a position where they were already miles ahead. Considering that this was his only innings of note on the tour, that to me is pretty ****ing sad, especially when you are facing a bowling attack that would have struggled to get a scarecrow out.

 

[Top_Cat]

Rhino Harris aside, of course.

 

[robelinda]

2 reasons:
1) Australia had been bowled out on a pitch as flat as a pancake for 245.
2) Trott and Cook had already done the hard yards in wiping off 3/4 of the Australian score.

Call it whatever you want but coming in with 2 wickets down while the batter at the other end is in sublime touch on 80 odd suggests to me that it was an innings that merely rammed home the advantage. The bulk of the hard work had been done by Trott and Cook who virtually put them in a position where they were already miles ahead. Considering that this was his only innings of note on the tour, that to me is pretty ****ing sad, especially when you are facing a bowling attack that would have struggled to get a scarecrow out.

Have to agree with all of that, though i'd give his innings a little more credit, but he was dished up some complete garbage, and he did look out of sorts in virtually every other innings on the entire tour. Not really the sort of player who is going to knuckle down and get out of a slump, will always thump his way out of it, at least while his ego is as big as my mother in laws backside.

 

[Howe_zat]

2 reasons:
1) Australia had been bowled out on a pitch as flat as a pancake for 245.
2) Trott and Cook had already done the hard yards in wiping off 3/4 of the Australian score.

Call it whatever you want but coming in with 2 wickets down while the batter at the other end is in sublime touch on 80 odd suggests to me that it was an innings that merely rammed home the advantage. The bulk of the hard work had been done by Trott and Cook who virtually put them in a position where they were already miles ahead. Considering that this was his only innings of note on the tour, that to me is pretty ****ing sad, especially when you are facing a bowling attack that would have struggled to get a scarecrow out.

I agree that it was pushing the advantage, but that's not something to be dismissed. England really didn't want to have to chase, and he scored with a very good strike rate which helped England get the win in before it rained on the last day. It was an excellent innings.

He got a decent fifty in Melbourne too, plus a couple of starts. So not a failure for the rest of the tour, considering he only played six innings.

 

[tooextracool]

Rhino Harris aside, of course.

The difference between Harris and the others was that Harris was mediocre while the rest were terrible. It's a little hard to describe what it is that makes him look completely unthreatening because he just doesn't look like taking wickets. Perhaps its the fact that hes fairly short. Either way, I'd consider him at best to be a poor man's Andy Bichel

 

[Spark]

Yeah the KP v. Clarke comparison is a much better one - but also one that's been rather done to death. It's also not an easy one to do because of the way their careers have evolved.

 

[abmk]

2 reasons:
1) Australia had been bowled out on a pitch as flat as a pancake for 245.
2) Trott and Cook had already done the hard yards in wiping off 3/4 of the Australian score.

Call it whatever you want but coming in with 2 wickets down while the batter at the other end is in sublime touch on 80 odd suggests to me that it was an innings that merely rammed home the advantage. The bulk of the hard work had been done by Trott and Cook who virtually put them in a position where they were already miles ahead. Considering that this was his only innings of note on the tour, that to me is pretty ****ing sad, especially when you are facing a bowling attack that would have struggled to get a scarecrow out.

while it wasn't a tough position to come in, he still had a LOT of work to do and did it. Considering Eng just about managed to bowl out Aus before the rains came in, I wouldn't downgrade it like you did ... he got starts on other occasions, but didn't carry on

 

[tooextracool]

I agree that it was pushing the advantage, but that's not something to be dismissed. England really didn't want to have to chase, and he scored with a very good strike rate which helped England get the win in before it rained on the last day. It was an excellent innings.

He got a decent fifty in Melbourne too, plus a couple of starts. So not a failure for the rest of the tour, considering he only played six innings.

Meh sorry, Im not buying this. Using the argument that Pietersen averaged 60 in Australia for the Ashes flatters him or at least it is misused to do so. Fair enough the 227 was a good innings, but looking at it in the context of the series he failed every time England were in a pressure situation. 1 good knock out of 6 is hardly a good series, it is awful in fact, its certainly not a sign of his second coming as people seem to be suggesting.

 

[tooextracool]

while it wasn't a tough position to come in, he still had a LOT of work to do and did it. Considering Eng just about managed to bowl out Aus before the rains came in, I wouldn't downgrade it like you did ... he got starts on other occasions, but didn't carry on

Think the point is that if you are going to play one good knock after 2 years, one would at least hope that it was a match winning innings or if not even a big knock in a pressure situation. There's always ifs and buts, but we all know that facing an attack that has already been smashed and demoralized is not the same as facing one that is well and truly on top. Im not saying don't give him any credit but to suggest he is in the same echelon as Sangakkara is just plain stupid given what we have seen from the 2 of them over the past few years.

 

[abmk]

Think the point is that if you are going to play one good knock after 2 years, one would at least hope that it was a match winning innings or if not even a big knock in a pressure situation. There's always ifs and buts, but we all know that facing an attack that has already been smashed and demoralized is not the same as facing one that is well and truly on top. Im not saying don't give him any credit but to suggest he is in the same echelon as Sangakkara is just plain stupid given what we have seen from the 2 of them over the past few years.

one good knock in 2 years ?

what about his 81 vs SA to help Eng save the test ?

what about 80 odd vs Pak out of total of 255 ?

oh and yeah, there isn't that much of a difference b/w him and sanga inspite of the past 2 years ...If sanga plays the kind of special innings KP has in the past , we can talk that way.

 

[tooextracool]

one good knock in 2 years ?

what about his 81 vs SA to help Eng save the test ?

what about 80 odd vs Pak out of total of 255 ?

oh and yeah, there isn't that much of a difference b/w him and sanga inspite of the past 2 years ...If sanga plays the kind of special innings KP has in the past , we can talk that way.

Out of curiosity did you watch the 80 odd against Pakistan? Because any player that can remotely take credit for playing that kind of knock has to have reached shameful levels. Pietersen has always looked clueless against Asif, the less said about any of his knocks against Pakistan the better. If I said he had at least 5 lives in that innings, I would not be exaggerating.

Also, what on earth are you talking about? Sangakkara has played some incredible knocks over the past few years, one feels that he doesnt quite get enough credit simply because his team rarely tours outside of the subcontinent. His twin 100s in NZ against Bond and co in NZ and his 192 in Australia are right up there with the very best knocks played this past decade.