How good is Sanga?

[harsh.ag]

Most great batsmen do not retire until they know they are going downhill, tbf. Just look at Bradman. Left as soon as he realized he wouldn't be able to maintain his 100 average after that match. Overestimated himself by 4 runs there too

I do agree with your points. But an ATG batsman retiring at a point where he is playing like an ATG is just unlikely usually.

 

[thierry henry]

Most great batsmen do not retire until they know they are going downhill, tbf. Just look at Bradman. Left as soon as he realized he wouldn't be able to maintain his 100 average after that match. Overestimated himself by 4 runs there too

I do agree with your points. But an ATG batsman retiring at a point where he is playing like an ATG is just unlikely usually.

Well in Sanga's case, if he retires tomorrow I'm not going to assume he did it to protect his average. I'm not going to assume he saw the decline coming despite currently being in amazing form. The guy is OLD. He's entitled to retire. Maybe he cbf playing cricket anymore.

If he does retire, the only evidence I have is that throughout his lengthy test cricket career (much longer than most), played over a perfectly reasonable age range for a test cricketer, he was pretty awesome. That is better imo than if he had been a combination of awesome and kinda average.

 

[viriya]

Well in Sanga's case, if he retires tomorrow I'm not going to assume he did it to protect his average. I'm not going to assume he saw the decline coming despite currently being in amazing form. The guy is OLD. He's entitled to retire. Maybe he cbf playing cricket anymore.

If he does retire, the only evidence I have is that throughout his lengthy test cricket career (much longer than most), played over a perfectly reasonable age range for a test cricketer, he was pretty awesome. That is better imo than if he had been a combination of awesome and kinda average.

If Sanga retires after the current match, there is no way to think a decline was coming. He just had the best year ever overall for an international batsman ffs. Sure, he's unlikely to maintain that 75+ average but it's not crazy to assume he'd be able to keep at a 40+ average till he's 40. He hasn't averaged below 45 in a year since his debut year in 2000!

 

[thierry henry]

If Sanga retires after the current match, there is no way to think a decline was coming. He just had the best year ever overall for an international batsman ffs. Sure, he's unlikely to maintain that 75+ average but it's not crazy to assume he'd be able to keep at a 40+ average till he's 40. He hasn't averaged below 45 since his debut year in 2000!

Indeed. I agree. My point is that according to PEWSian theory, Sanga would be criticised for retiring now, which I find weird.

 

[Jono]

Indeed. I agree. My point is that according to PEWSian theory, Sanga would be criticised for retiring now, which I find weird.

Sorry TH, but that is not true at all.

 

[thierry henry]

Sorry TH, but that is not true at all.

That may not be your intended argument (just as my argument was neatly and popularly misrepresented/flipped on its head by teh Cribb) but it's certainly an implication.

The basis of the argument certainly appears to be that Tendulkar earns points over Sangakkara for playing longer/playing at points of his career that Sanga wasn't, and doing a decent (if inferior to the rest of his career) job. The implicit flipside of that is that Sanga is "criticised" (or at least, placed lower than Tendulkar in a direct comparison) for not playing (i.e. retiring or not yet having been picked) at certain times.

 

[Blocky]

There is also the little manner of how much you're paid to play Cricket as an Indian player versus how much you're paid as a Sri Lankan. Indian Cricket players don't have to choose between "IPL and Test Cricket" - Indian Cricket Players are also paid handsomely for Test Cricket.

It's sad, but Sri Lankans can make more money retiring and playing for a county side as well as an IPL/BB team than they can playing internationally. The same can be said for NZers, West Indians, Pakistanis, etc.

 

[cnerd123]

There is also the little manner of how much you're paid to play Cricket as an Indian player versus how much you're paid as a Sri Lankan. Indian Cricket players don't have to choose between "IPL and Test Cricket" - Indian Cricket Players are also paid handsomely for Test Cricket.

It's sad, but Sri Lankans can make more money retiring and playing for a county side as well as an IPL/BB team than they can playing internationally. The same can be said for NZers, West Indians, Pakistanis, etc.

How does this effect their batting in Test cricket?

 

[Blocky]

How does this effect their batting in Test cricket?

It effects their age of retirement.

 

[mohammad16]

Is 6 more runs per hundred balls that big a difference? e.g a 120 taking the same amount of time as a 108.

I think it is, especially considering the eras both these batsmen played in. There was a lot of overlap, but Lara pretty much retired right before the t-20 revolution which has tilted test cricket even more in batsman's favour with the shortened boundaries, flat wickets, and the lack of quality bowlers around. The difference in strike rate was quite evident when observing these two on the pitch, Lara always seemed more aggressive, especially when the Windies were pushed into a difficult situation. Sanga has generally seemed more assured but then something has to be said about Lara often seeming too bored to really apply himself.

 

[Jarquis]

I can see I am fighting a hopelessly losing battle in the like-war against "PEWSian CW orthodoxy" , but....

actually yes, that would work (assuming the player's cunning ploy didn't become public knowledge, in which case I would surely hold it against him) if the player had a long career. If he had a relatively short career I would adjust my rating accordingly. It would work because in reality we can't make assumptions about whether the player "wasn't good enough to play test cricket until he was amazing at it" or whether the player was just actually really amazing at test cricket. We can't make assumptions about whether a player was about to decline horribly as soon as he retired, or whether he just retired at what seemed a suitable time (because you can't and are not obliged to play test cricket your whole life).

Your (evidently very popular) opinion at once eschews assumptions, but then seemingly relies on assumptions to rate the Tendulkar-type over the Sanga-type. You have to assume that the player who has big slumps in his career has slumped because he has heroically played on for the good of his team, and you have to assume that the player who doesn't slump avoided the slumps due to quirks of selection or a canny retirement, and not just because he is amazing- and yet typically the only evidence that actually exists is "that guy was amazing". "The bastard avoided an inevitable form slump by retiring at the youthful age of 37" is pure speculation.

It might be semantics but I think the 'PEWSian theory' is to decipher who the 'greater Test batsman' was rather than who was more talented/better.

In terms of assumptions etc etc I think it's fairer to 'assume' that the years the early-retiring player misses have no value than it is to equate the years Tendulkar did spend playing to nothing.

 

[Blocky]

So say Sanga goes out there in this game and scores another 150-200 in a winning effort... ?

 

[Jono]

So say Sanga goes out there in this game and scores another 150-200 in a winning effort... ?

So say Sanga goes out there and leaves a ball on middle stump and gets a duck?

 

[viriya]

If Sanga goes through a slump and starts averaging 19.6 with the bat, he will still be the fastest to 13,000 runs.

He will probably retire within 10 tests though.

 

[Jono]

He will probably retire within 10 tests though.

That will suck. Who's classy cover drives will I adore now

 

[Coronis]

I think it is, especially considering the eras both these batsmen played in. There was a lot of overlap, but Lara pretty much retired right before the t-20 revolution which has tilted test cricket even more in batsman's favour with the shortened boundaries, flat wickets, and the lack of quality bowlers around. The difference in strike rate was quite evident when observing these two on the pitch, Lara always seemed more aggressive, especially when the Windies were pushed into a difficult situation. Sanga has generally seemed more assured but then something has to be said about Lara often seeming too bored to really apply himself.

Well if Lara was too bored to apply himself tbh that counts greatly against him. Similar situation to Keith Miller I believe, who also had that tendency.

 

[cnerd123]

Well if Lara was too bored to apply himself tbh that counts greatly against him. Similar situation to Keith Miller I believe, who also had that tendency.

And so the debate evolves. Inherent ability vs delivered results. Do you pick the batsman who can reach the level only reserved for geniuses, or do you pick the one who actually scored more runs.

 

[hendrix]

That will suck. Who's classy cover drives will I adore now

Tom Latham's.

 

[honestbharani]

And so the debate evolves. Inherent ability vs delivered results. Do you pick the batsman who can reach the level only reserved for geniuses, or do you pick the one who actually scored more runs.

Depends on the words you use.. When judging careers and deciding who has had a better or more impactful career you go by the results... But when you are talking about a hypothetical situation of who had the ability to deal with the best bowlers on any kind of track and score runs against them, then you go by the former.


It has to be said,, deciding who has had the better career can, to a certain extent, be objectified with stats and numbers. Trying to decide who was the better batsman in terms of ability is almost always gonna be subjective and will most likely boil down to personal preference.


Then again, even when comparing careers of Sachin Vs Sanga, I really do not think longevity or the additional years Sachin played should be THE factor to rate him ahead of or below Sanga...

 

[weldone]

Indeed. I agree. My point is that according to PEWSian theory, Sanga would be criticised for retiring now, which I find weird.

I don't know about PEWS, but retiring now when he's the best batsman in the world will be a selfish act in my opinion. I won't rate Sanga lower for that reason though (not lower than, say, if he continues for 3 more years and averages 38 in that time).