Member of the Sanga fan club. (Ugh! it took me so long to become a real fan of his)
He is good, a great for SL and would walk into every side in the world at present and for most of the time he has played (might not have got in Aussie side in 00's) he would have too. Just below ATG as far as world cricket is concerned but at the top of the next level of players for me as is Jayawardene.
Kallis is 'touching Ponting' in batting. He's a top, top batsman. He's got more shots than any of them - even if he is a bit too obdurate to use most of them a lot of the time. He gets some tough runs too, possibly some of the toughest.
Kallis is 'touching Agarkar' in bowling. He's a lazy, reluctant bloke in this regard - he's pretty lucky he's been able to cheap it up against the minnows (where he suddenly wants to bowl loads) and against the tail when the tired opening pair and first change have had their fill with the top order.
Well, surely it's not about that. It's about who are likely contenders for the ATG team - Sanga, whilst great, is probably nowhere near.
Nearly 10,000 runs at 56.31
8 double tons
30 tons made against all opponents
Strike Rate of 54.12
Gee wiz, what's a bloke goota do to be considered an ATG?
It seems to me that in 20 years time when we're all still doing ATG Drafts someone will post;
'And I choose the great Kumar Sangakkara as my No.3'
To which several people reply;
'Oh hell, I was going to pick him, you ALWAYS get him. It's not fair. Booo hooo.'
Last edited by watson; 10-07-2012 at 06:33 PM.
“I'm writing a book on magic”, I explain, and I'm asked, “Real magic?” By real magic people mean miracles, thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers. “No”, I answer: “Conjuring tricks, not real magic”. Real magic, in other words, refers to the magic that is not real, while the magic that is real, that can actually be done, is not real magic.”
― Lee Siegel, 'Net of Magic: Wonders and Deceptions in India'
In fact I'd take both peak Sanga and peak Dravid over peak Ponting any day of the week. Those guys, as well as being far sounder technically, are flexible and capable of performing in all conditions. As we all know Punter is/was a walking wicket in certain conditions, and this has never really changed throughout his career. If you examine his shuffling across the wicket style critically, you can only wonder at how many times he would have got to fifty, let alone the spurt of huge scores that suddenly boosted his average by nearly 15 points in his years of plenty. Had DRS been available to opposing teams for the bulk of his career I am convinced he would have regularly been given out lbw for shuffling and attempting to whip thru midwicket before settling.
LBW is a very recent weakness for him tbh. If anything it was a strength - bowlers would see him shuffle, target the stumps and disappear through mid-on for four again and again, then look up and realise he was 30* and set.
+ time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +
Worst decision that I can remember
Such a great case for the UDRS.
What a great innings and what a terrible end to it - that form he was in at that time was fantastic too.
Didn't someone work out that Tendulkar was dismissed LBW a greater percentage of times under 30 (i.e. getting set) than Ponting ever was?
'Twas a year or two ago, tbf, so may have changed.
Just out of interest FJ - What criteria are you using?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)