How good is Sanga?

[Migara]

But he stopped keeping. So he doesn't have that either. Additionally his batting dropped of when he kept.

Kallis doesn't bowl often too. and Sanga's keeping was early in his career. If he persisted with it would have averaged more than 40. On other hand if he never kept, would have averaged good 5-10 runs more than present.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

He is good, a great for SL and would walk into every side in the world at present and for most of the time he has played (might not have got in Aussie side in 00's) he would have too. Just below ATG as far as world cricket is concerned but at the top of the next level of players for me as is Jayawardene.

 

[Psycho Macaque]

Kallis is 'touching Ponting' in batting. He's a top, top batsman. He's got more shots than any of them - even if he is a bit too obdurate to use most of them a lot of the time. He gets some tough runs too, possibly some of the toughest.

Kallis is 'touching Agarkar' in bowling. He's a lazy, reluctant bloke in this regard - he's pretty lucky he's been able to cheap it up against the minnows (where he suddenly wants to bowl loads) and against the tail when the tired opening pair and first change have had their fill with the top order.

 

[The Sean]

I just personally find it undeserving to group him in the same class as Richards, Lara, Sobers, Bradman, Hobbs, Tendulkar, and the like. I consider him an ATG, regardless, I just don't think he can be classed as in the same tier as the aforementioned.

Hmmm, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree - because if you think that he's up there with Bradman, Lara, Tendulkar, VRichards, Hobbs, Hutton, Sunny and whoever else then I reckon you're loony.

As long as you're lumping Bradman in with those others, both your lists are encompassing more than one class of batsman.

 

[Psycho Macaque]

Well, surely it's not about that. It's about who are likely contenders for the ATG team - Sanga, whilst great, is probably nowhere near.

 

[CWB304]

As long as you're lumping Bradman in with those others, both your lists are encompassing more than one class of batsman.

This thread isn't about Bradman.

 

[watson]

Nearly 10,000 runs at 56.31

8 double tons

30 tons made against all opponents

38 fifties

Strike Rate of 54.12

Gee wiz, what's a bloke goota do to be considered an ATG?

It seems to me that in 20 years time when we're all still doing ATG Drafts someone will post;

'And I choose the great Kumar Sangakkara as my No.3'

To which several people reply;

'Oh hell, I was going to pick him, you ALWAYS get him. It's not fair. Booo hooo.'

 

[CWB304]

So what? You think Tendulkar and Lara haven't had bouts of mediocrity? I suggest you take a look at their stats again since you don't seem to. Yes I will admit Ponting's worst was longer and worse then their worse but their best was also never as good or long as Ponting's best either. His peak alone where he was miles ahead of both of them alone is enough to put him among both of them and the best of batsmen. Kallis too. In fact I think both have cases to be rated above Viv Richrads who I find is kind of overrated because of his style. A lot like how Wasim Akram is as a bowler.

Btw, Ponting still averaged around 45 before 2002.
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Ponting is not rated as being in the class of Lara and SRT. Not by his own teammates, not by the cricketing world in general. Either now or during his peak period. He cashed in for a handful of good years, but I saw his whole career and I know why he's not rated with those guys.

In fact I'd take both peak Sanga and peak Dravid over peak Ponting any day of the week. Those guys, as well as being far sounder technically, are flexible and capable of performing in all conditions. As we all know Punter is/was a walking wicket in certain conditions, and this has never really changed throughout his career. If you examine his shuffling across the wicket style critically, you can only wonder at how many times he would have got to fifty, let alone the spurt of huge scores that suddenly boosted his average by nearly 15 points in his years of plenty. Had DRS been available to opposing teams for the bulk of his career I am convinced he would have regularly been given out lbw for shuffling and attempting to whip thru midwicket before settling.

 

[Spark]

LBW is a very recent weakness for him tbh. If anything it was a strength - bowlers would see him shuffle, target the stumps and disappear through mid-on for four again and again, then look up and realise he was 30* and set.

 

[silentstriker]

Nah you're wrong.

Was brilliant down here last tour on some bowling friendly pitches where his team mates decided to flunk it. Won a game by himself in fact, then he went to Australia and annihilated them before being sawn off on 192.

That was such as shocker - I can hardly believe it every time I see it.

Worst decision that I can remember



Such a great case for the UDRS.


What a great innings and what a terrible end to it - that form he was in at that time was fantastic too.

 

[The Sean]

This thread isn't about Bradman.

Ha ha, what has that got to do with my specific post or the context of the ones it was replying to?

You're either not reading, or being deliberately arsey. Dire either way.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Didn't someone work out that Tendulkar was dismissed LBW a greater percentage of times under 30 (i.e. getting set) than Ponting ever was?

'Twas a year or two ago, tbf, so may have changed.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Nearly 10,000 runs at 56.31

8 double tons

30 tons made against all opponents

38 fifties

Strike Rate of 54.12

Gee wiz, what's a bloke goota do to be considered an ATG?

It seems to me that in 20 years time when we're all still doing ATG Drafts someone will post;

'And I choose the great Kumar Sangakkara as my No.3'

To which several people reply;

'Oh hell, I was going to pick him, you ALWAYS get him. It's not fair. Booo hooo.'

Maybe I am being picky but i'd have him below Ponting, Waugh S, Dravid, Tendulkar, Kallis, Lara, Richards and Miandad who I regard as ATG. He is certainly on the next level down and a level above any English players of the last 20 years so I don't consider myself being biased against him. Just can't put too many players in ATG status or it devalues it totally.

 

[watson]

Just out of interest FJ - What criteria are you using?

 

[The Sean]

Ponting is not rated as being in the class of Lara and SRT. Not by his own teammates, not by the cricketing world in general. Either now or during his peak period. He cashed in for a handful of good years, but I saw his whole career and I know why he's not rated with those guys.

In fact I'd take both peak Sanga and peak Dravid over peak Ponting any day of the week. Those guys, as well as being far sounder technically, are flexible and capable of performing in all conditions. As we all know Punter is/was a walking wicket in certain conditions, and this has never really changed throughout his career. If you examine his shuffling across the wicket style critically, you can only wonder at how many times he would have got to fifty, let alone the spurt of huge scores that suddenly boosted his average by nearly 15 points in his years of plenty. Had DRS been available to opposing teams for the bulk of his career I am convinced he would have regularly been given out lbw for shuffling and attempting to whip thru midwicket before settling.

This thread isn't about Ponting.

 

[Jager]

Kallis doesn't bowl often too. and Sanga's keeping was early in his career. If he persisted with it would have averaged more than 40. On other hand if he never kept, would have averaged good 5-10 runs more than present.

That claim is ridiculous. Basically you're saying that Sangakkara is the second greatest pure batsman ever.

As long as you're lumping Bradman in with those others, both your lists are encompassing more than one class of batsman.

Awta

This thread isn't about Ponting.

 

[watson]

That claim is ridiculous. Basically you're saying that Sangakkara is the second greatest pure batsman ever.



Awta

Just checked Statsgura. Here are Sangakkara's numbers since he gave away his keepers gloves;

Matches = 63
Runs = 6681
HS = 287
100s = 23

AVERAGE = 68.87

Pretty impressive, and at first glance is appears that he 'is the second greatest pure batsman ever'!

Now we argue against those numbers saying things like:
"Yeah, but Viv Richards had to face better bowlers in his time, plus he had no Bangladesh to inflate his average." etc

 

[CWB304]

This thread isn't about Ponting.

Working out where the leading batsmen of this generation - a short list in which most would include Lara, SRT, Dravid, Kallis, Ponting and Sangakkara - stand in relation to one another is far more relevant to the thread than making some recondite point about how Bradman belongs in a class of his own. I don't object to someone implying that instead of regarding the likes of Hobbs, Hammond, Sobers, Pollock, Richards, Lara, and SRT as top tier one should instead consider them to be second tier to adjust for the Don's unique standing in the annals of batsmanship. I just happen to think that it's completely irrelevant to a discussion of Sanga's position. If you reckon he's in the running for second, third or fourth tier by the adjusted standard then so be it. But the discusssion belongs to another thread.

 

[Himannv]

Mangoes > Tendulkar
Apples > Sanga

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Just out of interest FJ - What criteria are you using?

My eyes. Nothing better than that. Maybe Sanga isn't helped due to his dodgy record in comparison against England, the times I have seen him most.

Not swayed by public opinion or press. I am a stubborn bugger. Maybe I should have been an Aussie.