Mahela Jayawardene vs Aravinda de Silva

[trundler]

I feel like Jayawardena is getting punished for having a seemingly flattering average. De Silva was supposedly a great player of pace but it's not like he set the world alight against the good pace attacks of his time. Nor was he less of an HTB than Jaya.

 

[Prince EWS]

I feel like Jayawardena is getting punished for having a seemingly flattering average. De Silva was supposedly a great player of pace but it's not like he set the world alight against the good pace attacks of his time. Nor was he less of an HTB than Jaya.

I reckon Aravinda gets rated higher due to ODI exploits in World Cups too. He played in a tougher era but didn't do nearly enough in Tests to account for the massive gap in raw averages IMO.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Would take Aravinda very day of the week and twice on Sundays, but readily admit he's one of my faves so I'm well and truly biased here.

I second that emotion.

EDIT: And on behalf of the RAFC, I'll just bring in a gratuitous mention of the Great Man... Russel FTW.

 

[Burgey]

I second that emotion.

EDIT: And on behalf of the RAFC, I'll just bring in a gratuitous mention of the Great Man... Russel FTW.

Russel something of a fixture at Parra preseason these days in a coaching role

 

[subshakerz]

I feel like Jayawardena is getting punished for having a seemingly flattering average. De Silva was supposedly a great player of pace but it's not like he set the world alight against the good pace attacks of his time. Nor was he less of an HTB than Jaya.

If we switched eras, reckon their overall records would look pretty similar, except DeSilva would likely have slightly better averages away and not average 60 at home like Jaya.

Jaya was just better at dominating in favorable conditions than DeSilva but less competent away which to a lot of posters on this board somehow means he is still a better player.