Ian Bell vs Thilan Samraweera

[Xuhaib]

Thilan
Thilan Samaraweera | Sri Lanka Cricket | Cricket Players and Officials | ESPN Cricinfo

Bell
Ian Bell | England Cricket | Cricket Players and Officials | ESPN Cricinfo

Almost same number of tests with similar number of runs. Bell has more hundreds but Samara has a better average.

Samraweera has enhanced his reputation in SA while things have gone down south for Bell in UAE but overall 2 excellent players so who would you back to have a better test career?

 

[Prince EWS]

Samaraweera's better at the moment and has had a better career so far but I'd be pretty surprised if I still said that by the time they both retired. Samaraweera is pretty close to the end.

 

[ganeshran]

Bell IMO. He is a joy to watch (when on song) unlike Samara who grinds his way to painful 50s.

However, off late Samara has been more effective and useful for Lanka than Bell has been for England

 

[Teja.]

Samraweera by a comfortable margin if you're asking me who I'd pick right now. Would have him in a World XI.

My opinion did not change based on this series, ftr.

 

[smash84]

Ian hell has been terrible playing spin this series and if I subscribe to CWB304's theory (which I am beginning to) then I would pick Samara

 

[Spark]

Samaraweera.

 

[amanuensis]

Pointless comparison - Samaraweera is about 6 years older, so at a completely different stage of his career. I'd pick Samaraweera in Asia & Bell otherwise.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Pointless comparison - Samaraweera is about 6 years older, so at a completely different stage of his career. I'd pick Samaraweera in Asia & Bell otherwise.

Bell is only conclusively better than Thilan in England and Australia. Everywhere else they are too close to call or Thilan is better. Anyway its difficult to judge records in countries with very small sample sizes. Samaraweera has had the better test career so far and is the better batsman. At the end of their careers the question will probably who is better, a 50-55 averaging batsman who has scored 6000 runs or a 43-45 averaging batsman (where I expect Bell will end up) who has scored 10000 runs.

I'd go for the 50-55 averaging batsman personally. It's a bit like Cook v Younis. Cook will end up with way more runs, but is he the better batsman?

 

[Spark]

If he scores 10000 runs with an average of 43-45 then that's a mindboggling number of Tests he's played.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Samaraweera is better, expecially considering he's had to overcome the notable handicap of being a victim of black pudding.

 

[Cricketismylife]

If he scores 10000 runs with an average of 43-45 then that's a mindboggling number of Tests he's played.

England play so many test matches. Bell has been played around 70-75 tests to make his 5000 runs. I'm assuming he might play for another 6-7 years as he isnt 30 yet. In that time he could play another 70-75 tests and score another 5000 runs.

If you think Bell is scary, think about Cook. There is a chance he could end up playing more test matches than Sachin, despite starting at 21 as opposed to Sachin's 16.

 

[Spark]

Oh I'm certainly not saying it's impossible, but he will have to play sooooooooo many more Tests than everyone else who's reached 10000 if he averages in the low-40s.

Averages 48-odd now, doesn't he?

 

[Himannv]

Two players that I like a lot so its fairly close for me. Very different types of players but will vote for Bell despite the fact that Samaraweera is one of my favourites in the SL team at the moment.

I hate to compare stats and numbers and all that bull**** when I judge players, so going for which one I feel is better based on what I've seen of them. Aesthetically, I have always liked those classy players who are awesome to watch and do things differently from the rest of the crowd.

Samaraweera is great to watch in a sense that he is always a bloke who walks in when we are in a spot of bother and grinds out the runs and fights all the way; man to go to war with, etc. He's also got a great attitude when it comes to playing the game.

However, there is something so classical in the way Ian Bell plays that somehow it takes you back in time and gives you a brief look at the art that comes along with batting instead of the usual smacking around that T20 has brought about. I think he's not done as well as everyone hoped he would but somehow that seems the case for many of the players I tend to favour.

For those who like the shorter posts: Himannv votes for Ian Bell.

 

[Nomanculture]

Art doesn't get you runs, art doesn't get you out of holes, art doesn't help you make comebacks after failures. All hail the grittiest player in recent years

 

[Himannv]

Art doesn't get you runs, art doesn't get you out of holes, art doesn't help you make comebacks after failures. All hail the grittiest player in recent years

True enough.

 

[marc71178]

Art doesn't get you runs, art doesn't get you out of holes, art doesn't help you make comebacks after failures. All hail the grittiest player in recent years

Chanderpaul?

 

[smash84]

 

[Lostman]

Chanderpaul?

Never got shot, technical disqualification.

 

[Spark]