Who is Sri Lanka's best ever cricketer?

[viriya]

Saw this poll on cricinfo among the Sanga retirement articles and was surprised that Sanga was voted over Murali..
Sangakkara voted as Sri Lanka's best | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

Probably for sentimental reasons, but thought of doing another poll here to see what people think. I think it's a no-brainer of course - Murali is imo the GOAT bowler so it's an easy choice.

Tests only - no ODIs/T20s.

 

[Red]

Depends on your opinion of Murali. If you think he chucks, then it's Sanga, if you think he's legit, it's him. But not much separates them anyway.

 

[viriya]

Depends on your opinion of Murali. If you think he chucks, then it's Sanga, if you think he's legit, it's him. But not much separates them anyway.

If you this he is legit, how exactly is there not much separating them? Sanga is only arguably 2nd best all-time, Murali would be almost unarguably GOAT bowler. Hardly close.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Murali would be almost unarguably GOAT bowler.

no

 

[viriya]

He would at least be closer to be the GOAT bowler than Sanga would be to be the GOAT batsman/2nd best batsman.

 

[Red]

If you this he is legit, how exactly is there not much separating them? Sanga is only arguably 2nd best all-time, Murali would be almost unarguably GOAT bowler. Hardly close.

Don't really think Murali is unarguably the GOAT. But he certainly belongs in the discussion as potentially the GOAT.

Not even sure what you're asking me tbh. As I said, if you think Murali is legit, he's Sri Lanka's greatest. You wanna argue about how much separates them or summit?

 

[viriya]

Don't really think Murali is unarguably the GOAT. But he certainly belongs in the discussion as potentially the GOAT.

Not even sure what you're asking me tbh. As I said, if you think Murali is legit, he's Sri Lanka's greatest. You wanna argue about how much separates them or summit?

Was questioning your "But not much separates them anyway." comment.

 

[Coronis]

Murali, then Sanga. Then a fair gap.

 

[viriya]

I would say Murali, a fair gap, then Sanga, a fair gap, then Mahela. Just tests of course. If ODIs are taken into account Aravinda and Sanath would come into play probably still at #3.

 

[mr_mister]

Sad Sanath isn't an option. Literally revolutionised cricket

 

[viriya]

Sad Sanath isn't an option. Literally revolutionised cricket

This is just Test cricket, and yes he would've been an option otherwise.

 

[cnerd123]

Poll needs a joke option. Like Jehan Mubarak.

 

[Howe_zat]

Sad Sanath isn't an option. Literally revolutionised cricket

Nope, ICC still in charge unfort

 

[GIMH]

Yeah it's Murali.

 

[AldoRaine18]

Poll needs a joke option. Like Jehan Mubarak.

You voted for Aravinda, didn't you?

 

[fredfertang]

Arjuna

 

[viriya]

I should clarify, this is for Tests only. Would be unfair to leave out Sanath from the list otherwise.

 

[Coronis]

I should clarify, this is for Tests only. Would be unfair to leave out Sanath from the list otherwise.

He still averaged 40 with the bat and 34 with the ball in tests...

 

[marc71178]

If you this he is legit, how exactly is there not much separating them? Sanga is only arguably 2nd best all-time, Murali would be almost unarguably GOAT bowler. Hardly close.

I'm assuming your hardly close comment refers to the ratings of the players in the rest of the post because Sanga is nowhere near 2nd best all time and Murali is definitely not the unarguable best of all time.

 

[marc71178]

Sad Sanath isn't an option. Literally revolutionised cricket

If by literally you mean had a very minor effect on then I totally agree.