MJ Clarke - numero uno Test batsman?

[OverratedSanity]

He averages 47 away from home overall though, it's certain series' he's been out of form or whatever - not that he isn't good enough away from home. He will get another chance in early season England next year (barring injury) and we'll get another chance to see him play there and how he deals with it, tbh averaging mid thirties in a few countries isn't too bad IMO

Never said he's bad away from home. I'm comparing him with the likes of Kallis and Dravid... While they too have a few countries they failed in, Sanga just has too many atm. I'm talking about sone of the greatest batsmen if the last decade and splitting them obviously means criteria need to be harsh.
Sanga's last England tour frustrated me greatly. He failed repeatedly when the series was alive and then in the dead rubber goes and scores a superb hundred to save the game. It shows he has the ability to play in those conditions but somehow he didn't do it

 

[Spark]

That last Test wasn't a dead rubber, was it? England were only up 1-0, a drawn series would have been a superb achievement given what happened in Cardiff.

Though obviously when Sanga scored that ton, the series was definitely dead.

 

[OverratedSanity]

That last Test wasn't a dead rubber, was it? England were only up 1-0, a drawn series would have been a superb achievement given what happened in Cardiff.

Though obviously when Sanga scored that ton, the series was definitely dead.

Yeah that was what I meant. Not a dead rubber, but an innings which came when the series was dead

 

[Jassy]

He does average 60 in Oceania though, which I would say is very solid for a subcontinent batsman, especially given he played against some very good attacks in Australia and some fairly green pitches at times. I think with an average of almost 57 it's hard to make an argument that Sanga isn't one of the great batsmen and is instead merely a 'good' one, it's not like SL is an easy place to bat all the time either.

Sehwag averaged closer to 60 than 50 in Aus after 2 trips here and after his first series in SA averaged close to 50 there, averaged nigh on 40 on his first tour to England and scored a ton....and look how he is rated. Talking about SL is neither here or there...the point is he averages a solid 40 point something away from the subcontinent exlcuding minnows which no matter how you dice it isn't that great. His overall away avg is in the mid 40s because he beat up on Pakistan much like a certain Sehwag but the thing is no matter how anyone spins it they'll have a hard time trying to explain 4 to 5 places with an average in the 30s. I am confident that there is no other so called ATG bat who averages in the 30s in that many places, let us hear some names if there are any.

 

[Jassy]

as much chance to improve.

Sure, it's all conjecture the more you play the worse it is for your average (after a certain point i.e). See Amla averages 100 or something in India and Clarke in the 40s. Who is likely to improve on their record and whose record is likely to get worse? And you still haven't answered, if Amla is sooo much better than Clarke away from home why does Clarke beat him in more countries.

 

[Jassy]

Yeah that was what I meant. Not a dead rubber, but an innings which came when the series was dead

Did the same in India 09.

 

[Spark]

I'm not sure that slicing a batsman's career into such small samples is all that instructive, tbh. Sure, if there's an actual inherent cricketing reason - technique, temperament, doesn't like the food or whatever - that a batsman's record in a particular country's conditions may not be so flash, then that's a fair criticism, but there are so many variables to take into account that you're risking the sort of tiresome simplistic analysis which so plagues cricket these days. Maybe he happened to run into a patch of bad form, maybe he got a series of unusually good deliveries, maybe he was unlucky with decisions and run-outs and the like. There's so many factors that go into determining whether a batsman scores runs on a tour beyond just whether a batsman is a good home/away bat or whether he likes Australian/English/subcontinental conditions or what have you that using the former to infer the latter based on just a small number of tours is, IMO, flawed.

It kind of reminds me of some of the debates pre-Ashes about whether Australian conditions would mean that Cook would score more (and some argued much more) runs. Thus far, the exact opposite has happened, but you wouldn't put that down to Cook having a fundamental problem with Australian conditions compared to English (surely the opposite would be true, if anything) - it just goes to show that batsmanship is nowhere near as simple as a home/away/country average.

Watch the actual cricket, basically.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I'm not sure that slicing a batsman's career into such small samples is all that instructive, tbh. Sure, if there's an actual inherent cricketing reason - technique, temperament, doesn't like the food or whatever - that a batsman's record in a particular country's conditions may not be so flash, then that's a fair criticism, but there are so many variables to take into account that you're risking the sort of tiresome simplistic analysis which so plagues cricket these days. Maybe he happened to run into a patch of bad form, maybe he got a series of unusually good deliveries, maybe he was unlucky with decisions and run-outs and the like. There's so many factors that go into determining whether a batsman scores runs on a tour beyond just whether a batsman is a good home/away bat or whether he likes Australian/English/subcontinental conditions or what have you that using the former to infer the latter based on just a small number of tours is, IMO, flawed.

It kind of reminds me of some of the debates pre-Ashes about whether Australian conditions would mean that Cook would score more (and some argued much more) runs. Thus far, the exact opposite has happened, but you wouldn't put that down to Cook having a fundamental problem with Australian conditions compared to English (surely the opposite would be true, if anything) - it just goes to show that batsmanship is nowhere near as simple as a home/away/country average.

Watch the actual cricket, basically.

I agree with all of that. And yet.... I find myself agreeing with Jassy's point. I can't think of any other ATG who had mediocre averages in so many countries. Most played only a handful of matches in several countries and they still found a way to get runs. Should Sanga be penalised for not having such a spotless record even though most greats have managed it? I don't know... But it's a point worth discussing.

 

[Spark]

Yeah but what I'm saying is that it's all well and good to point out some dodgy away averages but unless you can come up with an actual reason that it might be the case, I don't know whether it's all that meaningful. Especially in the case of SL who might tour a country once every five years or so.

EDIT: Basically what I'm relying on is the idea that the past is not necessarily a very good predictor of the future on its own. Just because Sanga hasn't scored runs there in England the past, unless there was an actual reason that happened beyond the vagaries of form and luck, it doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't score runs there in a proper team with proper preparation in a tour starting next May, say. And, IMO, that's really what counts (though I suspect PEWS would disagree).

 

[OverratedSanity]

Yeah but what I'm saying is that it's all well and good to point out some dodgy away averages but unless you can come up with an actual reason that it might be the case, I don't know whether it's all that meaningful. Especially in the case of SL who might tour a country once every five years or so.

Yeah, there's two ways of looking at that. I agree that SL players like sangakkara get fewer opportunities to prove themselves abroad but when I'm comparing him to guys like Kallis and Dravid and Tendulkar, those are guys who've faced the challenge and have succeeded regularly. Sanga didn't get enough chances, maybe, but he's also had it easier by not really having to play in unfamiliar conditions as often as them. He's scored what 6 hundreds outside Asia I think.

 

[Jassy]

I watch and love my cricket, thank you very much. Like I said, you can spin it however you want but an average in the 30s in so many countries is unprecedented for a a supposedly ATG batsman. At the end of the day you should be rated on numbers, pompousness regarding watching cricket be damned. If we're trying to explain away his English record on the account of form and vagaries (despite him averaging about 30 or whatever which included a dead 100 on his most recent tour when he was still killing it at Premadasa et al) then by the same token I'd argue that his record in Australia and New Zealand - the former in particular - will get worse if he were to play there next year.

 

[Jassy]

While we are on about poor Sri Lankan cricketers who never get to play much outside (I agree with that btw), here's a look at some stats for another player:

Average in New Zealand 59.33
Average in Pakistan 90.42
Average in South Africa 67.80
Average in West Indies 49.50

Overall away average : 47.93

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you, Thilan Samaraweera! No doubt we will still see some excuses for Sanga and some back handed jibes about watching cricket!

 

[smash84]

doesn't sehwag have similar figures though and isn't he labeled an FTB?

 

[Maximas]

look at the big picture Jassy - away averages in certain countries don't define ATG status, no matter how you twist them

 

[Jassy]

doesn't sehwag have similar figures though and isn't he labeled an FTB?

Before his latest tours of England(where he was rushed back) and Australia, Sehwag's away record was very comparable to Sangakkara's. Sehwag had better records in England and WI, Sanga was better in NZ. My issue with Sanga is that everything he does is seen with tinted glasses for some reason so much so that people are ready to overlook an average in the 30s in about half of the countries he has played in. There is not one other ''ATG'' bat as I have said time and again who has a poor record in so many places. Excuses are made left, right and centre....but his own teammates who have been labeled FTBs like Samaraweera have better records away from home....yet Sanga gets a free pass and 2 or 3 innings are pointed to as proof of his ''dominance'' and mastery of such conditions where everyone from Samaraweera, Yousuf, Tamim Iqbal have had the odd innings or tour outside the subcontinent. There is no doubt in my mind that even the Aus average will come down. Hope Aus give SL such pitches when they tour.

 

[Jassy]

look at the big picture Jassy - away averages in certain countries don't define ATG status, no matter how you twist them

Haha I am the one twisting and making excuses? Cool then.

 

[Maximas]

Didn't say anything about making excuses but most batsmen would be considered pretty damn good if they averaged a bit under 50 away from home and over 60 at home, despite a few hiccups in certain countries

 

[OverratedSanity]

Didn't say anything about making excuses but most batsmen would be considered pretty damn good if they averaged a bit under 50 away from home and over 60 at home, despite a few hiccups in certain countries

Again, he IS pretty damn good. He's an ATG. But compared to other ATG in recent times, his record in several countries is undoubtedly inferior. He hasn't succeeded in those countries when others have.
Isnt one of the main reasons Mcgrath and Marshall and Tendulkar and Lara considered so great because they succeeded everywhere against everyone. Surely the sane yardstick should apply to everyone instead of just looking at the "big picture" as you put it

 

[Maximas]

Yes but Sanga is one of the greatest players of this generation behind Lara Sachin and Ponting, his record in a few countries shouldn't shift him from ATG to 'good', all I'm saying, he is not on the same level as those, but neither is he on the same level as someone like Samaraweera, Mahela or Laxman for example just because of his record in a few countries

 

[OverratedSanity]

Of course not... I just want him to correct that record so I can rank him up there with Ponting and Dravid and Kallis. It's fair to rate him an ATG but below their level until then, methinks