Better test bat: Dravid vs Sangakkara

[shortpitched713]

By the way Sangakkara and Williamson did..... An example of a player who cashed on in a period of mid bowling and flat pitches.

I hate how you kids call "mid" bad. (Okay, I don't actually hate it so much as find it a conveniently annoying thing I can shake my fist at the clouds for, but you get my point).

 

[capt_Luffy]

I hate how you kids call "mid" bad. (Okay, I don't actually hate it so much as find it a conveniently annoying thing I can shake my fist at the clouds for, but you get my point).

Dude, that sounded kinda boomerish...... But mid isn't necessarily bad. It's just not much good either.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Sanga > Dravid pretty clearly for me but I think both make my top 20

 

[Migara]

I'm sorry, how were the 300 runs he scored at Adelaide soft? Find it totally ridiculous how people downplay it. He scored a double hundred from 80-4 with us trailing by almost 500 and then a 70 odd in a nervy runchase. It's the opposite of soft, those are extremely high pressure situation runs. Flat pitch sure but the attack even had two good bowlers in Gillespie and Macgill. It's an atg performance imo. It wasn't Brad Williams at both ends.

Would you consider Sanga's 192 in Australia soft? It was a great knock but it was a road and unlike dravid's innings, it was a hopeless situation with zero pressure because they never had a chance of winning.

SL lost it by 80 odd runs. Sanga never looked getting out in that knock. 80 was not a big issue given the form he was in. He could have taken quarter of that from a MacGill over.

 

[centurymaker]

The number of game changing knocks played by Rahul Dravid, particularly in overseas conditions, significantly outnumber those played by Sangakkara.

Outside of Asia-

Dravid 64 Tests 5443 runs @ 52.3
Sanga 34 Tests 2764 runs @ 44.5


Sangakkara disproportionately padded up against Bangladesh and Pakistan. 17 of his 38 tons are against these two.

 

[centurymaker]

In fact, Sanga's overall stats vs 6 nations-
Aus, Eng, SA, Ind, NZ, and WI are

91 Tests, 7137 runs @ 46.9


If you add back Pak, Bang and Zim, it becomes

134 Tests, 12400 runs @ 57.4


Thats almost 5300 runs vs Bang, Pak and Zim.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In fact, Sangakkara's overall career stats vs
Aus, Eng, SA, Ind, NZ, and WI are

91 Tests, 7137 runs @ 46.9

If you add back Pak, Bang and Zim, it becomes

134 Tests, 12400 runs @ 57.4


Thats almost 5300 runs vs Bang, Pak and Zim.

Pakistan were a good team at the time. Why would you remove it?

 

[centurymaker]

Pakistan were a good team at the time. Why would you remove it?

They often played on highways home and away. whether in Pakistan, Colombo or UAE.

 

[BazBall21]

Pakistan were a good team at the time. Why would you remove it?

Whether it is included or not, Dravid was very prolific in Pakistan too and didn't get to play in Asia as frequently in an era where Asia was often incredibly flat. Sanga's work v peak Ajmal is big though.

 

[centurymaker]

Pakistan were a good team at the time. Why would you remove it?

Just trying to highlight that Sanga bashed up on Bangladesh and Pakistan so much that his career average goes up from 47 to 57. Thats insane! 5000 runs out of 12000 against just 2 nations, including almost half of his hundreds.

Against ALL other nations home and away combined, he is barely averaging 47. Thats not ATG, especially as he debuted in 2000 and played his entire career through the easiest era for batting and on pitches like the SSC.

Not to mention his outside Asia average is 44, it baffles me when I see Sanga rated higher than someone like Dravid, who averages 52 outside of Asia with twice as many runs.

So just because Sanga played beautiful looking drives and looked pleasing on the eye, he is somehow put above so many genuinely better batsmen.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Whether it is included or not, Dravid was very prolific in Pakistan too and didn't get to play in Asia as frequently in an era where Asia was often incredibly flat. Sanga's work v peak Ajmal is big though.

Yeah I agree with that. It's why I think sanga's average flatters him a bit, though he's obviously great. Only 38 matches outside asia is a huge statistical advantage

 

[ma1978]

Sanga’s great but when you think about not in Dravid’s league as a bat for the reasons articulated above

 

[shortpitched713]

Just trying to highlight that Sanga bashed up on Pakistan

This context of trying to lower Sanga is literally the first time I've ever heard of "Pakistan bashing" of that side from turn of the century to circa 2010. That side always had quality, and somewhat higher averages at Pakistan might be expected due to pitches but nothing due to quality of bowling which was at least middle to occasionally very high Test standard. This is a massive stretch of an argument, to try and take away runs scored against Pakistan.

Edit: I've also heard it used to lower Sehwag as well, actually. Both cases it's equally ridiculous.

 

[centurymaker]

So very often when Pakistan-India or Pakistan-Sri Lanka played each other in that period, they played on insane highways where it didn't matter who the bowlers were. You'd see ridiculous scores with bowlers usually reduced to cannon fodder, batters often having to get themselves out. Pakistan had the worst pitches, followed by likes of Colombo SSC. Sehwag another beneficiary of highway tracks vs Pakistan, against whom he averages 91. He'd been Bradman if only Pakistan existed and they kept playing on those kind of tracks. Bowling quality rendered meaningless. Sadly India pakistan matches didn't happen so often, unlike Pak-SL.

 

[centurymaker]

The two nations whom Sanga played most tests against were England and Pakistan.

vs England
22 Tests, 1568 runs @ 40.20, 3 tons

vs Pak
23 Tests, 2911 runs @ 74.64, 10 tons

vs Australia
11 Tests, 878 runs @ 43.90, 1 ton

Every player of that era was judged against Australia and Mr Sanga had just ONE century against Aus. That's not an insignificant fact.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Yea but we’re not comparing Sanga to Tendulkar, we’re comparing him to Dravid.

What is Dravid’s average and number of hundreds against Australia and South Africa?

 

[centurymaker]

Before someone says what does it mean for Murali? He was a GOAT. He could take the pitch out of the equation, he spun the ball so much. So to negate him "somewhat", Asian nations had no option but to prepare absolute roads. Sri lanka also often did the same at home so that their batters could post big totals, safe in the knowledge that Murali would get the opposition out for less. What a weapon he was especially post doosra.

 

[centurymaker]

Yea but we’re not comparing Sanga to Tendulkar, we’re comparing him to Dravid.

What is Dravid’s average and number of hundreds against Australia and South Africa?

Yes his record is bad vs Aus and SA with just 2 hundreds each. But at least he makes up for it against England with 6 hundreds in England. Sanga doesn't have anything even close to that away from home.

There's a reason that even Dravid isn't considered an ATG, it's because of his 39 average against Australia.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yes his record is bad vs Aus and SA with just 2 hundreds each. But at least he makes up for it against England with 6 hundreds in England. Sanga doesn't have anything even close to that away from home.

There's a reason that even Dravid isn't considered an ATG, it's because of his 39 average against Australia.

In David's defence, both his 100s against Australia were ATGs. You would hardly trade either, especially the Eden 180, for 3.

 

[reyrey]

So just because Sanga played beautiful looking drives and looked pleasing on the eye, he is somehow put above so many genuinely better batsmen.

In fact, Sanga's overall stats vs 6 nations-
Aus, Eng, SA, Ind, NZ, and WI are

91 Tests, 7137 runs @ 46.9


If you add back Pak, Bang and Zim, it becomes

134 Tests, 12400 runs @ 57.4


Thats almost 5300 runs vs Bang, Pak and Zim.

Sangas stats vs 6 nations when not keeping wicket
Aus, Eng, SA, Ind, NZ, and WI are

55 Tests, 5162 runs @ 56.1