Players with misleading averages....

[Prince EWS]

Err guys...

I'd have Pietersen over Sangakkara, only just.

People actually were saying that. It's not a case of putting words in people's mouths at all.

 

[Prince EWS]

Damnit, beaten by Teja.

 

[tooextracool]

Ok well never mind then, cant really believe anyone would say that with a straight face but whatever works.

 

[Jono]

I obviously meant anyone who's opinion that counts.





Blaze wtf is wrong with you?

 

[vcs]

TBF, it wouldn't have been considered an outlandish opinion upto 2008, at which time Pietersen was regularly scoring important runs everywhere and winning his team matches apart from a brief blip towards the end of 2007. After England's tour of WI, Sangakkara has definitely pulled ahead by a good margin.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes what a big difference half of Pietersen career makes.

 

[vcs]

Yes what a big difference half of Pietersen career makes.

2 years. Lara and Tendulkar have had entire slumps lasting that long. Pietersen has also had injuries. I'm no fan of him at all, but people being a tad harsh on him here, I feel..

 

[Jono]

Not really being harsh. He's a 47-50 average player. That's incredibly good, albeit he can be consistent.

But he's not a 57+ average player over more tests like Sangakkara has been. KP wouldn't even be in the top 10 test batsman in the world right now, whereas Sanga is arguably #1.

 

[abmk]

Not really being harsh. He's a 47-50 average player. That's incredibly good, albeit he can be consistent.

But he's not a 57+ average player over more tests like Sangakkara has been. KP wouldn't even be in the top 10 test batsman in the world right now, whereas Sanga is arguably #1.

Please answer to this then :

Wait a sec, so these 2 shouldn't even be compared as batsmen ?

Did anyone say that lara shouldn't be compared with sachin at this stage at the end of 2000 when their averages
at end of 2000 were,

sachin's average 57.25 ( sanga's is similar )
lara's average 48.56 ( KP's is similar )

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I'm sure many ( most probably ) rated sachin higher then, but I don't think there were many saying these 2 shouldn't even be compared, were there ?

 

[abmk]

tbh

not sure why you quoted me in reply to someone asking if someone said KP was a better test bat than sanga. I said sanga was better, but not by much

 

[Jono]

Please answer to this then :

I'll answer that mate.

Lara had many more years of cricket behind him compared to KP. People had seen Lara for an extended period of time be an absolute gun. Not just two years.

KP debuted in 2005. Kumar debuted in 2000.

Yet Kumar averages a ****load more.

KP could come good and be a 53-55+ average player. But right now he's not done it for any extended period of time.

 

[Spark]

I'm honestly starting to have doubts whether KP will ever achieve anywhere near his potential (which is a ~55 player). He just doesn't have the mindset to hit himself out of form that his contemporaries have. I can't see him reworking and tightening his game at all on demand.

I hope, in a way, that I'm wrong, because he is an extraordinary batsman when he gets it all working, but I feel that of his contemporaries he will be the one people look at and wonder what could have been.

 

[abmk]

I'll answer that mate.

Lara had many more years of cricket behind him compared to KP. People had seen Lara for an extended period of time be an absolute gun. Not just two years.

KP debuted in 2005. Kumar debuted in 2000.

Yet Kumar averages a ****load more.

KP could come good and be a 53-55+ average player. But right now he's not done it for any extended period of time.

ok, fair enough , but that also means people had seen lara's slumps for a longer time, right ?

But KP was was excellent till mid 2009 ( that's about 4 years , not just 2 years) .. then - got off to a couple of starts in the Ashes , and a match saving 81 in SA ...'decent' ... it was only after that things got worse

 

[Jono]

No one is saying KP is crap though. He's having solid to very good years.

But at the same time Sanga is having amazing to "OMFG this guys is awesome" years.

So the comparison is silly.

 

[Burgey]

No one is saying KP is crap though. He's having solid to very good years.

But at the same time Sanga is having amazing to "OMFG this guys is awesome" years.

So the comparison is silly.

You're silly, frankly.

 

[Migara]

Any one dares Sangakkara to be superior to KP is silly.

 

[Burgey]

Any one dares Sangakkara to be superior to KP is silly.

You're such a nark Migara. Truly you are. Sangakarra is a better batsman than Pietersen for sure and certain, in my opinion. I was having a crack at Joni.

Lighten the **** up ffs.

 

[Migara]

You're such a nark Migara. Truly you are. Sangakarra is a better batsman than Pietersen for sure and certain, in my opinion. I was having a crack at Joni.

Lighten the **** up ffs.

 

[Burgey]

Bugger.

Got me.

 

[hang on]

not sure i agree that kp is potentially a 55 averaging batsman. a good solid mid to late 40s average is just right for him.

while sangakkara is undoubtedly better than kp, i do honestly think that his average flatters him. he is an excellent batsman, but he does have some gaping holes in his cv which he will have to patch up before one (at least the perpendicular pronoun!) can unhesitatingly pronounce him a great (a 57 averaging batsman is generally a great).