How good is Sanga?

[91Jmay]

Kohli is overrated as a test player. All the ability to be an ATG but averages 40 from 27 matches and is spoken about in reverential tones.

 

[smash84]

Listening too much to Jono I suppose

 

[91Jmay]

Listening too much to Jono I suppose

In this thread even a poster as good as Dan said that because a guy looked like he could be better than him he was 'seriously special'. I think Kohli will be a fantastic player in Tests, but he isn't yet.

 

[cnerd123]

I'm surprised people rate Sanga over Dravid. I would have Dravid as India's best Test batsman, over Sachin even. If Bradman was injured before my ATG XI played a match, it would be a toss up between Punter and Dravid for the #3 slot, decision to be made based on conditions and bowlers faced.

Sanga wouldn't even feature in the discussion. Fine player for Sri Lanka, and while I feel that if he played a lot of overseas cricket over the last 2-3 years he would dominate and score everywhere...the fact that he hasn't does make his record look incomplete.

And I disagree with the points that say with keeping/without keeping shouldn't be considered. As pointed out, some players thrive with the added responsibility and some struggle. If keeping wicket really held a player back to a significant degree, then maybe it's best to judge them without the gloves than with it.

 

[harsh.ag]

Kohli is overrated as a test player. All the ability to be an ATG but averages 40 from 27 matches and is spoken about in reverential tones.

Only in ODIs, afaik.

 

[Dan]

In this thread even a poster as good as Dan said that because a guy looked like he could be better than him he was 'seriously special'. I think Kohli will be a fantastic player in Tests, but he isn't yet.

Even though Kohli has yet to live up to his rep in Test cricket thus far, I think it's hard to deny that there is something special about him. The guy can play, even if it hasn't translated into results yet, and as we've seen in ODI cricket he's crazily talented and has that kind of aura about him.

Bracketed him with the much better performed Pujara because the 'new generation' of Indian batsmen tends to be focussed in on those two as the leaders, and they're both typically regarded to be pretty damn special players -- Pujara in terms of technique and sheer bloody mindedness to make runs, Kohli as the abrasive & aggressive potential leader with all the talent in the world. It wasn't intended to make a judgement on Kohli's performances in Test cricket, other than him being regarded as a very talented batsman.

 

[viriya]

If Rahane ends up averaging 40 in the subcontinent and never tours SA/Eng/NZ again, is he more of an ATG than sanga?

Doing well away from home is just one factor to consider when rating a batsman IMO, other equally important factors:

- ability to make huge runs
- consistent performances over a decade+
- ability to dominate in favorable conditions (that ugly FTB that everybody seems to love to put down)
- match winning performances

Somehow all these factors are ignored or considered insignificant for ATG consideration.. Mahela is just a glorified FTB whose last 150+ at SSC is just irrelevant (amla's on the other hand is just another example of his mastery).. Sehwag is just a glorified FTB who made 225 runs in a day 3 times in his career (something only a certain batsman named Donald has done before) and strike at 80+... He obviously can't hold a candle to that great Laxman.. The oh so great destroyer of the best attack of his time...

Factors like the ability to score huge runs.. Like a 400* or a 375 or just a consistent big 150+ hundred is woefully underrated IMO.. It's how a batsman usually makes a big impact in a match.. But somehow a newbie whose highest score of less than 120 is comparable to someone who's 10th highest score is higher than that because the former had a couple of good series away from home?

The other point to consider here is that claims of FTB can only really be applied to subcontinent batsmen.. Batsmen from Aus, Eng, SA and NZ never have this issue.. Consider this - if sehwag/sanga played for those teams (and were raised there) would they not have the great records they have now? I find it hard to believe.

It would be a fairer argument if a batsman never performed away from home and had technical deficiencies.. But Sanga has proven that he can make runs in tough conditions already while doing outstandingly in the other factors to consider.. A batsman like tendulkar has played more consistently away from home but is worse at making big scores, making runs in favorable conditions and match winning performances - should we not consider all these factors when comparing these two players?

 

[cnerd123]

All ATGs are FTBs. They'd be useless if they weren't. Can you imagine picking a lineup full of batsmen who weren't FTBs? They'd get bowled out for 300 on a 500 run wicket and you'd lose the test. Being a FTB isn't a bad thing; it's a valuable ability that every test team needs.

 

[viriya]

Some are better FTBs than others but thats held against them. Why can't everyone perform the same if it were that easy?

 

[91Jmay]

Sanga is with Kallis/Dravid IMO, no doubt about that but I'd prefer a guy who scores more 150-200 scores than a guy who gets 300 - 350 occasionally but less 150 + scores. How many triple hundreds win games? Maybe I'm wrong and I haven't researched it but it seems plenty end up in draws.

Yeah those are fair points Dan, my only concern about Kohli is that there is a touch of preordained about him. Still got to score runs! He surely will at the Oval at least though?

 

[sachin200]

How many of them as wicket keeper? Do wicket keeper has to average 40 with the bat every series? Half truth is worse than lies.

He played with a bat.... just like other innings didn't he ?

 

[simonlee48]

The Sanga has played 14 series outside the subcontinent. If we take an average of 40+ as being good for a series, the Sanga has had 4 such series in 14!.......... All of these 4 series are 2 test series or less(the Australian 'series') - so much for lack of opportunities when he hasn't been able to average 40+ in a single 3 test series outside the subcontinent ever. If anything the shorter series have helped him.

Rahane has 2 such series out of 2 (likely to make it 3/3 in England)!
Kohli has 2 such series out of 4 (likely to become 2/5 as his current series has been poor)...

Out of current batsmen, Ab de Villiers averages 40 against and in every country (bar Bangladesh). Easily the best batsman going around, averages that without having to cherry pick matches at random and averages 50+ even when he kept presumably. Greatest batsman of the post Tendulkar/Lara/Ponting generation. Amla and Clarke are next.

Some interesting points raised here. We all can talk for hours but it's clear that Sanga hasn't really performed outside of SC with any consistency. This keeper batsman talk is not making sense. Look at AB. I anyway rate AB as better batsman than Sanga.

Basically, many posters are coming up with reasons for why Snaga is not good outside of SC. May be he played less, may be his keeping did affect him, may be he was not good but fact is he hasn't done well. No one will be impressed by what he has done outside of SC so far. Even in SC, he hasn't done anything in India. Now guys like Dravid/Kallis have done much better on different conditions and they played in the same period. Sanga's record is mainly built on scoring heavily in BD, Pakistan/UAE and SL. We have already seen that BD and Pakistan have been the two easiest bowling units in the last 10 years at home.

Sure, it's not his fault and it's good to capitalize but playing well in different conditions are rated higher than scoring heavily in familiar conditions. True in almost every situation, at least for me. With all available opportunities Sanga had , I don't see his performance as impressive in those different conditions. Sanga is surely far better batsman than Jaya but he falls just short of Dravid/Kallis for me.

Consider this, runs outside the SC are not the be all end all, Sanga in the same class as Jayawardene is highly disputable as well, he is at the very least between that class and the Dravid/Kallis class, IMO he is on par with them two and below Lara/Tendulkar, I'm not certain where Ponting fits in.

From above names: For me,

Tendulkar/Lara > Ponting > Dravid/Kallis > Sanga >> Jaya


5 guys, rated above than Sanga, have played memorable innings more frequently than Sanga. I admit , I saw more Kallis knocks because I tuned up for more SA games but I did follow enough of SL and Ind whenever they were playing away or when Aus was visiting them. Over all, Dravid/Kallis handled different conditions better than Sanga. I will be more comfortable to put all 5 of them in my world XI ahead of Sanga . I am sure that Indians will remember Rahane's knocks more than Rohit's piling up runs at home. Not saying that home runs are meaningless but sure there is something great about piling up runs in different conditions. For me, Cook's best knock is in India for the same reason.

 

[simonlee48]

A batsman like tendulkar has played more consistently away from home but is worse at making big scores, making runs in favorable conditions and match winning performances - should we not consider all these factors when comparing these two players?

Yes but with an open mind. Let's take your all points one by one.


Big scores:

I consider big score as 175+. Any team is pretty much as likely to win games with 175 runs as with 275 runs. It doesn't really add much for team after certain point. If some one batting at 4, makes 175+ then team is likely to get to 450-500 runs in vast majority of times.

SRT's 175+ score - Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Sanga's 175+ scores - Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Now, some will be quick to the point that SRT played more tests and still has the same number of 175+ as Sanga. True but let's look closely. Post 90s Pakistan has been a pretty ordinary bowling unit and gave most number of runs after BD in home games. Even early periods of Zim had better bowling unit which Sanga didn't have to face but we will keep Zim as one.

• Sanga has 9 big ones when opposition was BD, Zim or (Pakistan of post 90s). He has 4 big ones when opposition was none of those teams.
• SRT has 4 big ones when opposition was BD, Zim or (Pakistan of post 90s). He has 9 big ones when opposition was none of those teams.
• SRT big ones came at 4th position and Sanga's big ones came at 3rd position.

I am not claiming that SRT would have scored lot's of big ones for sure if he had played BD, zim and post 90s Pakistan more but it's not without any logic as well. He played 27 of them and got 4 big ones but had harder time to score big ones against other oppositions. Sanga had even more tough time to score big ones when opposition was not these 3. It's not hard to imagine that with 40-50 tests against these 3, SRT could have gotten 3-4 more big ones.


Match winning performances:

I often find this very difficult to quantify when comparing players. Let me explain why, with one simple example using Sachin's career itself.

• Sachin in 90s: 4 tons in wins
• Sachin in 00s: 12 tons in wins

Can we say that Sachin of 00s should be give more weight because he was a bigger match winner than Sachin of 90s? Not by a little margin, only 3 times bigger match winner. I hope I made my point.

Making runs in favorable conditions

Sachin scored less than Sanga in familiar conditions and it should count against him while doing comparison.

 

[Furball]

Tendulkar | Lara
Ponting
Sangakkara
Dravid | Kallis

Just my opinion of course.

Dravid is much better than that.

 

[Jassy]

Performing away from home isn't the only important thing but it is arguably the most important factor in rating a player. Amla scoring a ton in SL and Jayawardene scoring it are 2 different things....likewise Abd scoring a ton in India and Sehwag scoring one are chalk and cheese. If someone can't understand that there is no point arguing. Otherwise might as well say Gary Ballance has more tons in 5/6 games in England than Sanga does in many more games. Of course the SSC is a disgrace of a cricket pitch far more often than not.

Secondly, no one said the standard does not apply to batsmen from outside the subcontinent. Take Lara and Ponting - Lara gunned it in Pak, absolutely destroyed Murali in SL in 2001...Ponting gunned it vs Pak in Pak(1 game only)/Sharjah/neutral venue and was very good in Sri Lanka as well. That's 2/3 for both of them in the subcontinent (neither had a great record in India...much like Sanga himself)...or take current batsmen....Amla had a monster tour in India in 2010 scoring 3 tons and has generally been gun vs Pak in UAE as well (has a ton in SL too now)...Abd has a good record as well in the SC...I am not sure why anyone would think the same standard does not apply.

Look if people want to argue that Sehwag scoring runs vs Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka and Sanga scoring vs Pakistan in Pakistan as important(if not more) than scoring say vs England in England or SA in SA...that is fair enough. If you look at it that way even Sehwag's record (despite his horrible decline) is still ok. He is good in Aus, very good in WI, great in Pak and SL...poor in England/New Zealand/SA....so he succeeds in more countries than he fails...but the way I rate a player..performances in England/SA/Aus etc rate more in my eyes than performances in SL/Pak/India if a player is from the subcontinent and vice versa.

We can spin it however we want. Bring up Dravid(who averages - without checking - more or less 10 points more than Sanga away from the SC with many more tons) or whoever to sidetrack the discussion but the fact remains Sanga just hasn't been anywhere near as prolific away from the subcontinent as a batsman with that many runs would have been expected to. Blokes like Laxman, Inzamam, Mohammad Yousuf, Younis Khan have done as well as Sanga outside the SC...much better in some cases with more tons. I don't know how many tours away from the subcontinent Sanga has left but he needs to do much more for mine...he goes to NZ in Dec...does he have a tour of Australia left? This discussion is going in circles now...but it is telling a bloke with 10k plus runs and a bloke with what 7 or 8 tests to his name have put in more or less the same number of good performances outside the SC in terms of series. I don't think there is much to be said. You won't change my opinion and I obviously won't change yours.

Best batsmen in recent years:

1)Tendulkar/Ponting
3)Lara
4)Dravid
5)Kallis
.......

And from current players:

1)Ab de Villiers
2)Hashim Amla
3)Michael Clarke
4)Sangakkara
5)Younis Khan

 

[Gowza]

sanga is at least on par with kallis as a batsman for mine. kallis averages in the 30s in 3 countries just like sanga and in 7 out of the same 11 countries they've each played in sanga averages higher than kallis including australia, england and NZ which you'd expect kallis to be better in than sanga since kallis is from RSA and sanga is from SL. sanga's home average is higher than kallis's home average as well which might not mean a lot to some as RSA is regarded as a tougher place to bat but given those should be the most comfortable conditions for each of them as that's where they learnt their cricket it should have some relevance even if it's minimal.

the countries kallis averages higher than sanga in? zim, which sanga averages 140 in anyway, WI which sanga hasn't played in since 2008, south africa which is kallis's home country and india which sanga hasn't played in since 2009. kallis has played 24 matches in zim, WI and india (i'm excluding RSA as being kallis's home he's obviously played a lot more there than sanga), sanga has played 12 matches in these 3 countries. in terms of innings kallis has played 41 and sanga 19 in these 3 countries so kallis has had a lot more opportunities in these countries than sanga has, is that a good thing or a bad thing? i think sanga has shown he can play good knocks in difficult conditions so i'd believe that if he got more opportunities he'd capitalise rather than not but obviously that is just speculation.

sanga has scored a ton every where he's played except for WI, so he's shown that he can play the big innings in all types of conditions.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sanga averaging higher in those countries again needs to be taken with a pinch of salt... He's just played so few matches.

And saying that players would average higher at home because they get used to the conditions doesn't seem to apply to sa. It's generally the toughest place to bat in. Amla, de Villiers, Smith etc all average mid-low 40s. It's just not like India, Australia or Sri Lanka where home players dominate. That Kallis averages 56 there is probably his greatest statistical achievement.

 

[Jassy]

kallis averages in the 30s in 3 countries

One of the 3 is Bangladesh, so convenient! I don't think there is another batsmen with 3 averages in the 30s against the top 8 in the 10k+ club other than Sanga. Kallis has got twice as many centuries in Aus+Nz combined which is basically the issue and as OS says, for that reason you have to take it with a pinch of salt.

Another double standard is how readily we accept Sanga's record in NZ despite him having last played there in 2006 but apparently his records in WI and India are misleading because he last played there in 2008 and 2009 Ditto with his Australia record. His Australia sample size is not much different from his WI sample size and the same as his India sample size(in terms of innings; he has actually played a match more if you factor number of matches). His Australia record is basically built on one innings in 2007. And that really is the problem. In places like SA and even England, he has played a lot more and his average is more meaningful from a statistical POV. He has played almost as many innings in SA as he has in Aus+NZ combined! And that really is the difference. Blokes like Kallis have toured far more often which makes it easier to rate them higher. For example Kallis averages 48.23 in Australia to Sanga's 60.33, but Kallis has played about three times as much and has 3 tons...for which reason I (and I suspect a fair few others) would rather Kallis' record in Australia to Sangakkara's.

Doing a country by country since it is what you seem to prefer:

1)Australia - Kallis for the reason mentioned above
2)England - Sanga
3)India - Kallis
4)New Zealand - Kallis (twice as many matches, again and Kallis' has hardly embarrassed himself there)
5)Pakistan/UAE - dead heat, same number of tons; maybe Sanga averages a few points more overall. Sanga
6)West Indies - Kallis

SA and SL excluded for obvious reasons. If you want to include them Sanga in SL and Kallis in SA(duh!).

Besides, Kallis has had multiple stellar series in the subcontinent..he has 8 tons in India/Pak+UAE....Sanga has 6 outside the subcontinent (and remember that means 6 in Aus, SA, Eng, WI and NZ included...5 countries).

In fact, forget the whole away from the subcontinent business. Even in the subcontinent(including UAE for the purposes of this discussion), here is how they go:

Kallis : 1677 runs@64.50 with 8 tons
Sanga : 1742 runs@60.06 with 6 tons


Forgetting statistics and everything even, how many would really back Sanga against really top quality pace or spin bowling in testing conditions? Please don't give me one innings played in 2006, Umar Akmal also got a century vs Shane Bond on debut in similar conditions as have others I suspect only to fall away later. And that was the reason I brought up Rahane only to get some smart arse reply as to how I was saying they were comparable as batsmen..I was not. It was a reply to the seemingly endless excuses the apologists have - he was a wkt-keeper...(abd has it) - oh but abd batted at 5...he played only 2 test series hence why he couldn't get used to the conditions (but why does this mean bowlers are inherently more likely to succeed in 2 test series and why then has Sanga failed to average well in a 3 test series EVER?)...but that is not the most important thing Ponting sucks in India (but Sanga has not done well in India either)..but Sanga last played in 2009....(how is it Rahane, Kohli and even Vijay are scoring centuries outside the SC from the get go)...how dare you bring up Rahane..Sanga's 10th highest score is better than Rahane's highest......and it goes on and on and on.

The way I see it, unless he goes to Aus and NZ again and shows that those performances were not one-offs it'll be hard to rate him highly. If he has 2 more good tours outside the SC then I'll be happy to concede he's got the game to consistently deliver in not so favourable conditions but otherwise he will always be below Amla and Abd, let alone Ponting, Lara, Tendulkar or Dravid.

 

[Gowza]

in 5 countries kallis has played 5 or less test matches does that mean we should ignore his record in those countries? sanga has that same stat, there are 5 countries where he has played 5 or less matches. the main difference is kallis has played 10+ matches in 4 countries whereas sanga has only played 10+ in 2 countries. sanga has played 6-10 matches in 4 countries and kallis has done that in 2 countries.

in england kallis has played 15 matches to sanga's 11 but they have the same amount of tons with sanga having 2 more half tons from 3 less innings, so no doubt sanga has done better in england than kallis. in pakistan they've both played 5 matches but sanga has played 1 less innings yet he's scored the same number of hundreds (including a double which kallis never did in pakistan) and one more half ton, so sanga has done better in pakistan as well.

but if we're saying sanga hasn't played enough in these countries then we can only really rate him in SL and england. with sanga you can over look his mid 30s averages a bit because he's played so few matches in those countries, and you can do that for 2 of the countries where kallis averages in the 30s but for one of them (england) he's played a good amount of matches (15) and still averages mid 30s

 

[Jassy]

Not sure what you are on about, I said Sanga does better in England and Pakistan/UAE. And if we can overlook his averages in India, WI and SA; then we will also overlook his averages in Aus and NZ...which leaves only England..where he averages 41..a fair indication of his abilities outside Pakistan/SL I would say.