Sehwag vs Sangakkara - as batsman

[pasag]

Voted Sehwag as he smacks the bowlers into submission and every other batsmen in the side benefits from that. If I could choose one for Australia though, it would be Sangakkara everyday of the week.

 

[Athlai]

Sangakkara looks fractionally more consistent there - more hundreds and more fifties at basically the same average despite scoring less runs (I'm going to assume a couple less innings). Sehwag evidently goes on with his hundreds a bit more while Sangakkara scores them a bit more regularly... not like we didn't know that already though. Personally I'd take the batsman who scores two centuries in two games over the one who gives you a double ton and then nothing every time but I can see the other side.

Yeah Sehwag 45 innings, Sanga 39

 

[Top_Cat]

Sangakkara looks fractionally more consistent there - more hundreds and more fifties at basically the same average despite scoring less runs (I'm going to assume a couple less innings). Sehwag evidently goes on with his hundreds a bit more while Sangakkara scores them a bit more regularly... not like we didn't know that already though. Personally I'd take the batsman who scores two centuries in two games over the one who gives you a double ton and then nothing every time but I can see the other side.

That more accurately describes Marc North, really. Sehwag has hardly been an all or nothing player since the last WC, wouldn't average 60+ otherwise. Worth noting the couple of 90's by Sehwag in there too and a couple of big unbeaten doubles against Bangers by Sangakkara.

Not to suggest they haven't both been really good but one of the more noteworthy aspects in Sehwag's game since he made the side again has been his consistency.

 

[Athlai]

That more accurately describes Marc North, really. Sehwag has hardly been an all or nothing player since the last WC, wouldn't average 60+ otherwise. Worth noting the couple of 90's by Sehwag in there too and a couple of big unbeaten doubles against Bangers by Sangakkara.

Not to suggest they haven't both been really good but the biggest change in Sehwag's game since he made the side again has been his consistency.

Sanga has had 2 not outs in that period and they were against Pakistan and his current innings against India.

His record against Bangers since the WC is 169 @ 42.25

 

[Top_Cat]

Sanga has had 2 not outs in that period and they were against Pakistan and his current innings against India.

His record against Bangers since the WC is 169 @ 42.25

Think you'll find Sanga scored those doubles post WC.

EDIT: Sure enough, WC was Mar-April '07;

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/47466-sehwag-vs-sangakkara-batsman-5.html#post2278352

Test series was in June;

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/293428.html

Nya.

 

[Athlai]

Think you'll find Sanga scored those doubles post WC.

Ah for some reason I thought it was in July-August.

Have been counting all my stats from 1st August.

If you go from 28 Apr 2007.

Sehwag stays the same and Sangakkara is 2718 @ 71.52 SR 57.71 with 2 more not outs and 11 100s and 10 50s.

 

[Top_Cat]

Ah for some reason I thought it was in July-August.

Have been counting all my stats from 1st August.

If you go from 28 Apr 2007.

Sehwag stays the same and Sangakkara is 2718 @ 71.52 SR 57.71 with 2 more not outs and 11 100s and 10 50s.

Tests against Bangladesh don't count! Haven't you read the CW forum rules?

 

[Athlai]

Tests against Bangladesh don't count! Haven't you read the CW forum rules?

71 is a pretty juicy average.

 

[Prince EWS]

That more accurately describes Marc North, really. Sehwag has hardly been an all or nothing player since the last WC, wouldn't average 60+ otherwise. Worth noting the couple of 90's by Sehwag in there too and a couple of big unbeaten doubles against Bangers by Sangakkara.

Not to suggest they haven't both been really good but one of the more noteworthy aspects in Sehwag's game since he made the side again has been his consistency.

Well it's just like a high-class example of the North debate though. Sangakarra gets to fifty and a hundred more often than Sehwag, so he's more consistent. That's not to say Sehwag is North, but in comparison to Sangakkara he falls behind in this area slightly, however he goes on with his tons a bit more.

 

[Top_Cat]

Well it's just like a high-class example of the North debate though. Sangakarra gets to fifty and a hundred more often than Sehwag, so he's more consistent. That's not to say Sehwag is North, but in comparison to Sangakkara he falls behind in this area slightly, however he goes on with his tons a bit more.

Don't think that's true at all in the period we're talking about, tbh. If there's much of a difference, I doubt it's significant. Prior to that and probably overall, sure.

Anyway we all know India's won a greater proportion of Tests in that period so Sehwag's knocks are more likely to win matches for his team.

Oh wait....

India: 36 matches, 15 wins, 41% wins
Sri lanka: 27 matches, 14 wins, 52% wins

Okay, let's try that again. Sangakkara's technical consistency means he has the better game for away matches, has scored more runs away and Sri Lanka have consequently won more games away.

Oh....

India: 19 matches, 7 wins, 36% wins
Sri Lanka: 11 matches, 3 wins, 27% wins

Sehwag away: 12 matches, 1063 runs, 3 tons, 1 double, avg 56
Sangakkara away: 10 matches, 993 runs, 3 tons, 1 double (noone dare argue it wasn't), avg 55.

Ah.

 

[Spudsy2061]

Sanga right now without question. He's wrecking India by himself in these tests and looks superb.

 

[vcs]

There's absolutely nothing separating these two and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. Both would make a World XI comfortably.

 

[honestbharani]

Not necessarily, given how good Sehwag is against spin.

why is he being punished for being good against spin though? Is that not part of batsmanship?

 

[Migara]

why is he being punished for being good against spin though? Is that not part of batsmanship?

That would count if he was playing for England of 1990s where his fellow batsmen were having no idea of spinners. But he plays for the best spin playing team of the world. India can manages spinners even if Sehwag is not around. On contrary Sachin or dravid is an real asset because their ability to play pace for the Indian team on foreign conditions.

Sanga's vulnerability against spin is covered up by other SL batsmen who are ****ing good against spin. But he is the one who carries all burden when playing on foreign soil. Get Sachin and Dravid our of the Indian team, and put Sanga in there. Now imagine who would be the more valuable batsman for India.

 

[honestbharani]

That would count if he was playing for England of 1990s where his fellow batsmen were having no idea of spinners. But he plays for the best spin playing team of the world. India can manages spinners even if Sehwag is not around. On contrary Sachin or dravid is an real asset because their ability to play pace for the Indian team on foreign conditions.

Sanga's vulnerability against spin is covered up by other SL batsmen who are ****ing good against spin. But he is the one who carries all burden when playing on foreign soil. Get Sachin and Dravid our of the Indian team, and put Sanga in there. Now imagine who would be the more valuable batsman for India.

If they were that good against spin, they will have better records in SL, don't you think? And that is the point that is being originally discussed here, Sehwag's average in SL under difficult conditions when no one else of this famed middle order or Gambhir managed anything close.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Not necessarily, given how good Sehwag is against spin.

Why would you penalise him for being good insanely awesome against spin? It's like saying Sidhu was a better batsman than Aravinda because Aravinda was better against pace.

 

[Migara]

If they were that good against spin, they will have better records in SL, don't you think? And that is the point that is being originally discussed here, Sehwag's average in SL under difficult conditions when no one else of this famed middle order or Gambhir managed anything close.

Just have a look at Indian performances in pre - Murali era, and early - Murali era. Kambli was hitting tons, so was Tendulkar, even Manoj Prabhakar scored well. Then came Murali, and Vaas. Things did change after that.

 

[honestbharani]

Just have a look at Indian performances in pre - Murali era, and early - Murali era. Kambli was hitting tons, so was Tendulkar, even Manoj Prabhakar scored well. Then came Murali, and Vaas. Things did change after that.

Yeah and Sehwag came after Murali and Vaas.. Your point?

 

[Migara]

Why would you penalise him for being good insanely awesome against spin? It's like saying Sidhu was a better batsman than Aravinda because Aravinda was better against pace.

Aravinda was definitely better than Sidhu even if their averages looks same. Sidhu was a magnificent player on his home conditions against spin. And it was not only Sidhu , his fellow batsmen also were magnificient even it was not to the same degree. De Silva was equally good as his compatriots against spin, but miles ahead when playing pace, which is the precious talent that SL side possessed. That is the very reason Laxman is a better player than Sidhu despite of an average in lower 40s. Laxman is OK with home conditions, but leaps and bounds ahead on foreign conditions than an ordinary Indian batsman. Same analogy for Sehwag / Sanga. You can find good spin players almost matching ability of Sehwag from India. (Ex Raina). But you'd hardly find that of quality of Laxman / Dravid / SRT against pace from India. We can find 10 batsmen who can paly spin better than Sanga, but we struggle to pick a better player of pace than him. Switch him over to India, and still you'd find no one better than him against pace with possible exception of SRT and Dravid.

 

[Migara]

Yeah and Sehwag came after Murali and Vaas.. Your point?

What's your point? Sehwag came when Vaas was gone. Incidentally it was the pace bowler who is gone. Not the spinner.