and what is it without the flat tracks of Pakistan and the minnows (Bang)? Genuine question, I suck with statsguru. I'd wager it'd be in the low 40s. He sucks in Eng, sucks in SA, was mediocre in India too I think and bombed in the West Indies. Steyn made him look like a school boy last time Sri Lanka were here. He got a century thanks to Mark Boucher dropping the simplest of chances when he was in single digits snd still ended up averaging in the 30s for the series. And to the one or two other posters, we can do without the derrogatory remarks. On a forum people will have different opinions. Comment on it in a decent way befitting your background or don't comment at all. The point is, Sangakkara is as much of a home bully as Hussey, Hayden and Sehwag (home bully meaning kinda sucks away from home, especially outside the subcontinet) but he gets a pass whereas the other 3 continually get looked down at.
If the cap fits, wear it. Your malice or stupidity - I'd previously assumed you were merely ill-informed - is manifest in the fact that, even after your case has been completely refuted by a number of other posters, you prefer to continue arguing the toss, to the extent of moving the goal posts by dismissing a team like Pakistan, which has had one of, if not
the most consistently menacing bowling attack in test cricket throughout the time Sanga has been playing - simply because he has an outstanding record against them.
With "what is it without the flat tracks of Pakistan", your jejune hypothesis lost any right it might otherwise have had to be taken seriously. A fair-minded person would set Sanga's average of 66 in NZ - where conditions favouring seam and swing bowlers have led to some great players struggling in the past -, 57 in Australia, and whatever it is against Pakistan - I'm guessing it's probably in the 70s - against the below-par showings in SA (35) and England (30), which are in themselves not exactly disastrous, given that he has scored centuries and made match-saving or match-winning contributions in both countries.
You clearly are neither fair-minded nor in possession of even average analytical capabilities. If you were fair-minded then you presumably would be setting the fact that players as great as Lara and Ponting have had underwhelming records in certain countries as a justification for dismissing them in the same way as you have dismissed Sanga as "mediocre" away from home. If you had even average mental capabilities then you presumably would have used Ockham's Razor as your guide to analysing the data in the round.
This would have helped you to give Sanga's performances in countries like Pakistan and Australia - which have had stronger attacks than some of the countries he has struggled in (relatively speaking) - the weight they deserve. It would have helped you to consider that anomalies due to the tiny sample sizes make definitive statements such as the ones you have made about Sanga, about players who have proved themselves over a great many tests in all sorts of conditions, very problematic. It might even have helped you to attempt to account for the impact that Sri Lanka's limited touring opportunities by comparison to more high profile test playing nations seem to be having on the averages and performances of their best players away from home.
Perhaps all that would have been too much to ask. But your popping off ignorantly at Sanga's supposed "mediocre" away record seems to me to be just another instance of a clever clogs attempting to make a name for 'contrarian' and 'original' analysis on this board by unjustly denigrating a class player. I can think of some rather more appropriate sacred cows for you to slaughter, if you're desperate. Just PM me for advice.