Pietersen vs Sangakkara

[grecian]

Oh gawd Jono, Soctroll and the android agreeing with I, it's a dark day for me

 

[social]

Oh gawd Jono, Soctroll and the android agreeing with I, it's a dark day for me

First time you've agreed with us

First time you've got something right

There's a lesson in there if you look close enough

 

[GIMH]

Pietersen capable of playing a better innings than almost any batsman but not consistent enough to be right up there, probably.

I'd pick Sanga for the long haul; if I knew I was getting their absolute best for the next match then it'd probably be Pietersen. Probably.

 

[grecian]

First time you've agreed with us

First time you've got something right

There's a lesson in there if you look close enough

yep, being right isn't all that.

 

[Гурин]

That article proves nothing. All it states is that Sanga averages 47 overseas to Ponting's 45. What I said was that Ponting has a much better rounded record overseas, which he does. Sanga averages in the 30s in England, South Africa, West indies and surprisingly, India.
Ponting has done brilliantly everywhere except India, where his early mental block against Harbhajan caused him to struggle. He averages well over 40 everywhere else.

Interesting point of view, let's just say that I don't agree with runs above a certain amount being considered as 'good', it's not the same if a player averages 50 or 75 in a specific country. Actually, from a (team POV it would be better to have quite a few more specialized players to pick out of conditions than trying to build batsmen capable of averaging 40 everywhere, but that's not the point of this discussion.

About Sanga's poor record in some countries, it must be also said that he always played in shortish series when abroad, which, apart from lacking time to standardize his numbers, mainly means less time to adapt and worse performances. Wasn't in the last English tour that he only tonned up in the last game? It's a factor that must be taken into account when considering overseas records for the players of certain countries.

 

[Satyanash89]

Interesting point of view, let's just say that I don't agree with runs above a certain amount being considered as 'good', it's not the same if a player averages 50 or 75 in a specific country. Actually, from a (team POV it would be better to have quite a few more specialized players to pick out of conditions than trying to build batsmen capable of averaging 40 everywhere, but that's not the point of this discussion.

About Sanga's poor record in some countries, it must be also said that he always played in shortish series when abroad, which, apart from lacking time to standardize his numbers, mainly means less time to adapt and worse performances. Wasn't in the last English tour that he only tonned up in the last game? It's a factor that must be taken into account when considering overseas records for the players of certain countries.

Yeah look, i only brought up the 40+ average thing in response to someone saying Sangakkara averaging more than Ponting meant that he was a better overseas batsman. I dont believe in any arbitrary number defining whether a player is good or not which is why i think KP is awesome, even with a sub 50 average.
The point about specialists is a good one, but i generally feel the need to rate a batsman who has proved his ability in a variety of conditions a "greater" batsman than a specialist ike Sehwag, Mahela, etc, even though in certain conditions, the specialist may be a bigger asset.

As for the point about short tours, that's very true. Sanga couldve done better in certain countries if he had been given more opportunities but you have to go with what you get. He's played two match series in England and South africa each, which is pretty standard, and has done very little of note.
I'm just afraid that people are assuming just because i prefer KP to Sanga, it means i think Sanga is crap. Far from it... he's an ATG, but today, i picked KP... another day it might be Sanga. Both are great batsmen with their own inherent limitations

 

[L Trumper]

Sanga is better. But I don't think he is streets ahead though.

 

[L Trumper]

A lot of KP's 'great' innings have come on flat wickets and infact i have seen him look like a wally when faced with lateral movement in the shape of either swing or spin:

Oval 2005 vs Aus: oval is always flat as a pancake, flattest test wicket in Eng by a stretch-not to mention the guy was given about 8 second lives during that innings- could have been out many times

Adelaide 2006: Adelaide- against flattest wicket in Aus

Mohali 2008: very flat wicket again, even flintoff as declining batsmen looked in good nick on that wicket

Adelaide 2010- again, flattest wicket in Aus and batting during the best conditions- only started turing on 2nd session on day 4, by which time he got out to xavier doherty

Mumbai 2012: although indian batsmen played really badly on this track, I would attribute that to poor batting by indians and excellent left arm spin from Monty. I think track was also quite flat- not a rank turner by any means- hence indian spinners couldnt turn it in either innings

I am not really sure Oval 05 , deciding ashes test team 120 odd for 5 falls under batting paradise. Mumbai 12 is not even remotely close to being a batting track. Even Mohali century came at crucial situation when england lost 2 wickets for nothing. So you basically mentioned his 2 adelaide centuries. What a load of rubbish!

 

[CWB304]

I'm just afraid that people are assuming just because i prefer KP to Sanga, it means i think Sanga is crap. Far from it... he's an ATG, but today, i picked KP... another day it might be Sanga. Both are great batsmen with their own inherent limitations

I detect a logical fallacy in your argument. Sanga is pretty widely considered to be an ATG both in Asia and around the world; you're not conceding anything there. KP, on the other hand, most definitely is not. Which begs the question of how you've managed to pick the latter "today" - as opposed to another day when, presumably, you'd rate them in the order that one would logically extrapolate from that state of affairs. Unless you're asking us to infer some additional qualifier, which you've not avowed openly, as in "today...(after my lobotomy)".

 

[Satyanash89]

I detect a logical fallacy in your argument. Sanga is pretty widely considered to be an ATG both in Asia and around the world; you're not conceding anything there. KP, on the other hand, most definitely is not. Which begs the question of how you've managed to pick the latter "today" - as opposed to another day when, presumably, you'd rate them in the order that one would logically extrapolate from that state of affairs. Unless you're asking us to infer some additional qualifier, which you've not avowed openly, as in "today...(after my lobotomy)".

Ok i quit

 

[Гурин]

As for the point about short tours, that's very true. Sanga couldve done better in certain countries if he had been given more opportunities but you have to go with what you get. He's played two match series in England and South africa each, which is pretty standard, and has done very little of note.

Well, that's the problem, a two match series could be standard but it's absolutely not enough, while on the other side England not only plays more test matches but also first class games to prepare. How many games do they play before (and during) the Ashes down under, 3, 4, more? Some players can only wish they can get such a luxorious plan to prepare properly.

Of course, far from me to think that Sanga would have surely scored a lot more in England if SL tours had been planned that way, but it would have helped, that's undeniable.


Apart from all that, they remain two classy players, even if I expected something more from KP's career. By the way, I alway thought that he's unfortunate to be a cricket player, an attitude like his should have deserved a sport like baseball or football, ending up spectacularly in some jail for beating his wife and trying to smuggling heroin to pay debts for some gangster and writing some hip hop album about himself.

Well, too bad, we have still Balotelli for all that

 

[Pothas]

I detect a logical fallacy in your argument. Sanga is pretty widely considered to be an ATG both in Asia and around the world; you're not conceding anything there. KP, on the other hand, most definitely is not. Which begs the question of how you've managed to pick the latter "today" - as opposed to another day when, presumably, you'd rate them in the order that one would logically extrapolate from that state of affairs. Unless you're asking us to infer some additional qualifier, which you've not avowed openly, as in "today...(after my lobotomy)".

class as always.

Was hoping you would make an appearance after day 1 in Dunedin, must have enjoyed Bell's shot?

 

[dhillon28]

That article proves nothing. All it states is that Sanga averages 47 overseas to Ponting's 45. What I said was that Ponting has a much better rounded record overseas, which he does. Sanga averages in the 30s in England, South Africa, West indies and surprisingly, India.
Ponting has done brilliantly everywhere except India, where his early mental block against Harbhajan caused him to struggle. He averages well over 40 everywhere else.. It's just his pathetic India record that brings his overseas average down. I'm not saying the fact that he has a better rounded record makes him better than Sanga (there are other reasons) but there you go


So? it's not possible for more than one batsman to play well on a difficult pitch? Your arguments make no sense.

Note: accidentally voted for Sanga. FFS

It is possible for more than one batsmen to play well on a difficult wicket but if 4 of them play well then that means one of two things, either it was the best collective batting performance of all time or the pitch just wasn't that difficult. I hope that made sense.

 

[dhillon28]

I am not really sure Oval 05 , deciding ashes test team 120 odd for 5 falls under batting paradise. Mumbai 12 is not even remotely close to being a batting track. Even Mohali century came at crucial situation when england lost 2 wickets for nothing. So you basically mentioned his 2 adelaide centuries. What a load of rubbish!

What you've described are scenarios where the batsmen's task was challenging, but the challenge was secondary to an unfavourable team scorecard. A poor team scorecard does not necessarily reflect difficult batting conditions.

My point referred only to difficult batting tasks secondary to challenging pitch conditions e.g. Excessive swing/seam/spin. And the reason I referred to this point was because some ppl claim Sangakarra is supposedly not as good as KP because he doesn't play in challenging pitch conditions i.e. he plays on flat wickets.

 

[Гурин]

It is possible for more than one batsmen to play well on a difficult wicket but if 4 of them play well then that means one of two things, either it was the best collective batting performance of all time or the pitch just wasn't that difficult. I hope that made sense.

My opinion, but often the reason could be simply bad bowling.

 

[Top_Cat]

Honestly, it was a tougher choice than I thought it would be. After a bit of thinking, I realised it was mainly because I wanted KP to be better. Sangakkara has that touch of class but KP has the touch of genius about him so I look at Sangakkara more as accomplished and KP more as unfulfilled. But, on what they've actually done, has to be Sangakkara.

Like they say, talent is hitting the target no-one else can hit, genius is hitting the target no-one else saw. But how highly should you weight the worth of the genius when they're happy with only hitting the target no-one else saw a few times?

 

[thierry henry]

If you actually make a fair comparison of batsman vs batsman and not keeper-batsman v batsman, isn't Sanga "streets ahead" of EVERYONE?

 

[CWB304]

If you actually make a fair comparison of batsman vs batsman and not keeper-batsman v batsman, isn't Sanga "streets ahead" of EVERYONE?

Good point, but that's for another thread. Meantime this one should be closed, and replaced with not one, but a series of more closely matched comparison threads. To be fair, it's difficult to compare KP with any other player. No one else has his singular combination of eye-watering strengths and glaring weaknesses. I'd like to see a Bell vs Sarwan thread.

 

[CWB304]

class as always.

Was hoping you would make an appearance after day 1 in Dunedin, must have enjoyed Bell's shot?

Unfortunately I missed it. Was it one of his trademark chip shots wherein he gives the ring fielders free catching practice?

 

[the big bambino]

Sangakkara is streets ahead and I fail to see how it's even close. He's a far more consistent batsman over a longer period of time and has had the added difficulty of having to keep for 47 tests. As a pure batsman he averages around 68 which is phenomenal.

Also he's played as many matchwinning/match saving innings as KP which have slipped under the radar due to playing for a small team like Sri Lanka. A prime example of such an innings is the 211 against Pakistan in the UAE. He was facing an attack similar to the one that Pietersen was unable to handle and averaged 10 against, and managed to save the game when at one point SL were 5 wickets down in second innings and still 120 runs behind. But this innings generated very little media attention.

This has been a good thread but the above post settles my choice in favour of Sanga. I kind of favoured him anyway without doing a check on their stats so I'm grateful you've done the work Also KP is such a massive ****...

I see the arguments one way and the other saying Sanga struggles in SA and Eng while KP scored alot of runs on roads. I'm not really persuaded by either argument as conditions are the same for all batsmen in their respective sides and these are the 2 men who dominate their team mates. So conditions that others found hard to master these 2 flourished.

So my vote goes to Sanga but I'll vote for KP to even out Satyanash89 who accidentally voted for Sanga