• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

How good is Sanga?

.....

  • Total voters
    69
L

Lurker100

Cricket Spectator
Laxman is not an ATG.

He has played some great innings but that doesn't automatically make him an ATG. Too many holes on his CV.
 
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
CWB304 said:
You brought up Australia, and Laxman. I simply defended Sanga against your more absurd charges - and comprehensively demolished your arguments while I was at it. Now you seem to have given up on that line of attack - perhaps you should have wasted my time for a few more posts, for form's sake? - and opened up a new front.
Click to expand...
What are you, a kid playing Battleship? I believe I've made four posts in this thread, each one highlighting the guy's lack of runs in three countries that aren't exactly cricketing backwaters. Maybe I went off on a bit of a tangent, bringing the three Indians into the conversation, but that was an aside as to why a lot of sub continental batsmen aren't rated highly abroad.

The only person wasting your time is you. You strike me as the kind of guy who'd blame the world for his missus sneaking out on him when his incompetency in the sack obviously contributes a fair bit to the old woman's peccadilloes.
 
C

CWB304

U19 Cricketer
Arachnodouche said:
What are you, a kid playing Battleship? I believe I've made four posts in this thread, each one highlighting the guy's lack of runs in three countries that aren't exactly cricketing backwaters. Maybe I went off on a bit of a tangent, bringing the three Indians into the conversation, but that was an aside as to why a lot of sub continental batsmen aren't rated highly abroad.

The only person wasting your time is you. You strike me as the kind of guy who'd blame the world for his missus sneaking out on him when his incompetency in the sack obviously contributes a fair bit to the old woman's peccadilloes.
Click to expand...
I'm amused by the analogy but you still haven't explained what it is that makes Laxman "far greater" than Sangakkara.
 
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
CWB304 said:
I'm amused by the analogy but you still haven't explained what it is that makes Laxman "far greater" than Sangakkara.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll call it a truce, and say only "just greater" than Sangakkara.

Averages better while playing in SA and Eng. Not by much, and he does play down the order, so would help in terms of not outs. But since we're taking recourse to plain figures, there you go.

Averages 48 in SL to Sangakkara's 35 in India. Sangakkara's obviously a monster at home, Laxman less so. Then again Laxman's 51 to Sangakkara's 63 isn't so bad.

Has played in Oz 15 times for an average of 44, no doubt drastically reduced due to his poor performances this time around. Sangakkara averages 63 alright, but that is over 3 Tests only, and he made 2 runs in one of those 3 games.

But far more importantly (to me), and I'm playing to sentiments and popular emotions here, he's played some of the most memorable innings I've seen, and his batting is everything that is right and true and pure about the game of cricket. His knocks against the Australians are the stuff of legend, not just because he belongs to a cricket crazy nation that often loses sight of reason, but because they were so against the grain. I don't have the patience to rummage through cricinfo any more, but he has pulled off more improbable scenarios for India than anybody else. I realize I'm being subjective here, but there you go.
 
Last edited:
C

CWB304

U19 Cricketer
Arachnodouche said:
Ok, I'll call it a truce, and say only "just greater" than Sangakkara.

Averages better while playing in SA and Eng. Not by much, and he does play down the order, so would help in terms of not outs. But since we're taking recourse to plain figures, there you go.

Averages 48 in SL to Sangakkara's 35 in India. Sangakkara's obviously a monster at home, Laxman less so. Then again Laxman's 51 to Sangakkara's 63 isn't so bad.

Has played in Oz 15 times for an average of 44, no doubt drastically reduced due to his poor performances this time around. Sangakkara averages 63 alright, but that is over 3 Tests only, and he made 2 runs in one of those 3 games.

But far more importantly (to me), and I'm playing to sentiments and popular emotions here, he's played some of the most memorable innings I've seen, and his batting is everything that is right and true and pure about the game of cricket. His knocks against the Australians are the stuff of legend, not just because he belongs to a cricket crazy nation that often loses sight of reason, but because they were so against the grain. I don't have the patience to rummage through cricinfo any more, but he has pulled off more improbable scenarios for India than anybody else. I realize I'm being subjective here, but there you go.
Click to expand...
You could have spared us all the trouble of reading this rubbish and written simply that "it's because he's Indian".
 
Contra

Contra

Cricketer Of The Year
Spark said:
Test batting is as much about not getting into the fire as it is getting out of it though. Laxman's firefighting ability is second-to-none, but on the other hand his conversion rate is shocking.
Click to expand...
personally feel he's been a bit unlucky in terms of the # of 100's he's got. He's made a lot of 80's and 90's over the last 2 years without hitting 100, and his batting order makes it a lot more difficult for him to have the same amount of 100's as some of his fellow team mates.
 
MrPrez

MrPrez

International Debutant
Ooh seems I've missed out on some audacious claims! Laxman greater than Sanga... Haddin greater than Prior too I presume because Prior has a greater team backing him up aye?
 
C

Cricketismylife

U19 12th Man
Arachnodouche said:
Ok, I'll call it a truce, and say only "just greater" than Sangakkara.

Averages better while playing in SA and Eng. Not by much, and he does play down the order, so would help in terms of not outs. But since we're taking recourse to plain figures, there you go.

Averages 48 in SL to Sangakkara's 35 in India. Sangakkara's obviously a monster at home, Laxman less so. Then again Laxman's 51 to Sangakkara's 63 isn't so bad.

Has played in Oz 15 times for an average of 44, no doubt drastically reduced due to his poor performances this time around. Sangakkara averages 63 alright, but that is over 3 Tests only, and he made 2 runs in one of those 3 games.

But far more importantly (to me), and I'm playing to sentiments and popular emotions here, he's played some of the most memorable innings I've seen, and his batting is everything that is right and true and pure about the game of cricket. His knocks against the Australians are the stuff of legend, not just because he belongs to a cricket crazy nation that often loses sight of reason, but because they were so against the grain. I don't have the patience to rummage through cricinfo any more, but he has pulled off more improbable scenarios for India than anybody else. I realize I'm being subjective here, but there you go.
Click to expand...
This is just embarassing and ridiculous posting. To say that Laxman is just better than Sangakkara is a massive joke, how the hell can you explain away a difference of 11 points in average?! It's nonsensical, this nit picking is pointless when there is an 11 difference in average between 2 players in the same era.

This isn't even an argument and I'm not sure why I'm bothering to reply, but all you have done is shown how crazily biased you are. I can do the same and say that Mark Butcher is better than Laxman, because he has a better average in England.

You then decide to bring up Australia and downgrade Sanga because he has only been able to play 3 tests there. Then you refer to the fact that he made 2 runs in 1 low scoring test, not mentioning that one of the dismissals was run out and therefore not a technical issue. You then fail to mention his scores of 74 and 66, the 66 which actually drew the test match, followed by a 57 and a brilliant 192 in a flimsy batting line up.

Laxman is a class player, but to compare him with Sangakkara, a player who is not that far off Dravid (if he is at all) is shameful.
 
C

CWB304

U19 Cricketer
Cricketismylife said:
This is just embarassing and ridiculous posting. To say that Laxman is just better than Sangakkara is a massive joke, how the hell can you explain away a difference of 11 points in average?! It's nonsensical, this nit picking is pointless when there is an 11 difference in average between 2 players in the same era.

This isn't even an argument and I'm not sure why I'm bothering to reply......
Click to expand...
On the contrary, I thought the douche was being quite fair minded - for an Indian fan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top