• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Stephen Fleming vs Arjuna Ranatunga

Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Ranatunga was a criminally underrated One Day Cricketer , he easily wins as far as One Day Goes.
.
Fleming in Tests though , was pretty gun there.
 
mr_mister

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johan said:
Ranatunga was a criminally underrated One Day Cricketer , he easily wins as far as One Day Goes.
.
Fleming in Tests though , was pretty gun there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Ranatunga actually has a considerably better World cup record than Aravinda

Nobody would guess that without looking
 
Zinzan

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
TheJediBrah said:
Nice bit of symmetry with this comparison

One's diameter is equal to the other's height
Click to expand...
It's a good comparison however in the respect they both have two of the worst 100 conversion rates in Test history given the number of games they played as specialist bats. And Ranatunga even worse than Fleming in that respect.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Fleming is all forms.

In ODIs Fleming made more meaningful scores, was very reliable for at least a start and was an extremely versatile batsman. He could be an aggressive opener, a #3 who bats through or even a middle order strike rotater.

Ranatunga was a face of a new chapter in cricket history so had more impact on the game, but Fleming was the better player.
 
Gob

Gob

International Coach
Flem274* said:
Fleming is all forms.

In ODIs Fleming made more meaningful scores, was very reliable for at least a start and was an extremely versatile batsman. He could be an aggressive opener, a #3 who bats through or even a middle order strike rotater.

Ranatunga was a face of a new chapter in cricket history so had more impact on the game, but Fleming was the better player.
Click to expand...
Yeah but who'd you rather have by your side if you are getting chased by a grizzly bear?
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
Flem274* said:
Fleming is all forms.

In ODIs Fleming made more meaningful scores, was very reliable for at least a start and was an extremely versatile batsman. He could be an aggressive opener, a #3 who bats through or even a middle order strike rotater.

Ranatunga was a face of a new chapter in cricket history so had more impact on the game, but Fleming was the better player.
Click to expand...
Ranatunga was a better ODI bat than Fleming by a country mile. Because his teammates sucked there are not much wins to show. But when a guy averages 37 at a SR of 77 playing in 84-00 period that is top quality.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Migara said:
Ranatunga was a better ODI bat than Fleming by a country mile. Because his teammates sucked there are not much wins to show. But when a guy averages 37 at a SR of 77 playing in 84-00 period that is top quality.
Click to expand...
he averaged 35. deep in the middle order too. or are we stats bending now? fleming had twice the number of tons too from a similar sample size.

this is like your maharoof thing. vintage migara.

ranatunga was a good player and i can understand voting for him but "country mile" is...an opinion.
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
Flem274* said:
he averaged 35. deep in the middle order too. or are we stats bending now? fleming had twice the number of tons too from a similar sample size.

this is like your maharoof thing. vintage migara.

ranatunga was a good player and i can understand voting for him but "country mile" is...an opinion.
Click to expand...
Ranatunga averages 36 with the bat with SR of 78, compared to Flrming averaging 32 with SR of 72, despite starting a decade later. Adjust it to the era, and Ranatunga would be 10 points clear of Fleming with a higher average.

During his 17 year career, Arjuna was the 5th highest scorer in ODIs. Fleming just scrapes in to top 10. 1982 - 1999, Arjuna was the highest averaging batsman in SL team. Other than for Aravinda and Marvan, all his support cast averaged sub 30. Fleming during his time had five batsmen averaging more than him. It shows who had more pressure to deal with. Arjuna average 50.4 against WI and 33.9 against Australia, which were the two best sides during his career other than for his own. Fleming averaged 29.5 against Australia and 18.7 against Sri Lanka who were the best sides during his career.

Finally to round off here are ICC ranking points graph to demonstrate the gulf between them.
1663303432754.png

Ranatunga belongs to the tier of Aravinda, Azhar, Salim Malik, Martin Crowe, Richie Richardson and Dean Jones, the tier of flawed geniuses in ODI cricket. Fleming is no where good as him.

Edit: And with all these limitations he wend on to win a World cup, irritated Aussies to the maximum possible and mouthed off and bashed Warne around. None of them Fleming could achieve. Not only ODI batsman, Ranatunga is a better ODI captain too than Fleming.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top