Sangakkara was pretty much an automatic choice as a batsman since the initial 48 matches. For that time, as far as I read, he was quite good with the gloves, keeping to Murali in SL. He was replaced as Jayawardene was a superior keeper (than most actually) and a useful batsman. Regarding his average, while keeping probably affected it, he also hit his peak late, as he did with ODIs where he never gave up on keeping.
The poll is for Test Wicketkeepers and, as good as Sanga was, he surely only be judged on those 48 Tests. From that perspective, there are many proven 'keepers who must rate more highly.
Even among keepers who played as long as Sangakkara in 48 matches, very few averages 40+; and none those so while batting at 3.
We are talking 'keeping ability as well as batting prowess. We need to have a balance.
From everything I have read and seen, Sangakkara was a very decent keeper and him keeping to Murali in SL wasn't an issue. And that balance is the reason I haven't votes for Andy Flower, yet.
Sangakkara should still be up there then. Nothing wrong with his keeping. Unlike Andy Flower. Anyone voting for Flower in the top 100 keepers should be infracted.
Dude, do you like hate Andy Flower, especially his wicket keeping for some reason?? You sound like he dropped your first born child on his head behind the stumps.
He's an insult to the art of wicket keeping. Weird face too
There is absolutely no proof for what you say. Say this about Kamran Akmal and I can show you 100s of youtube videos showing up his hilarious wicketkeeping. But Andy Flower was a safe keeper.
Bro you've been proven wrong on this like 7 times on this very forum by multiple posters, including references to Zimbabwe cricket forumers who all hated his keeping how are you still perpetuating this
Quite easily
When I saw "older keepers" I thought you might be talking about the inclusion of Ames or my votes for Evans and Oldfield. I, for one, don't put Healy in the "older" category. He had the benefit of playing in a strong side and keeping to Warne and McGrath but I still see him better (as a keeper) than many more recent glovemen. Certainly well above more contemporary countrymen such as Wade, Paine and Carey (though the latter has improved).
I wasn't really comparing of that class, but the company above that, i.e., alongside the likes of truly elite modern keepers like Saha and Jayawardene.
Not seen Healy live so can't comment really.
This is a bad take. Ian Healy was about as pure a glove man as there's been since the Allan Knott-Bob Taylor era. Genuinely a level above most anyone who's come along since with the gloves save Jack Russell. The bloke was genuinely outstanding.
You literally just did comment on it. You said he was overrated