Has Samaraveera gotten rid of the FTB tag?

[Arachnodouche]

Your post makes no sense.

You're an England cricket fan, what's with the condescension?

 

[Black_Warrior]

In Aus - 136 @ 22.26
In Bang - 326 @ 54.33
In Eng - 219 @ 27.37
In India - 193 @ 24.12
In NZ - 178 @ 59.33
In Pak - 633 @ 90.42
In SA - 339 @ 67.80
In SL - 2762 @ 60.04
In WI - 198 @ 49.50
In Zim - 38 @ 38

So basically your assertion that being gun in SL while being below average in 5 other major test playing nations isn't true. He's done poorly in Aus, Eng and India as far as I can see, (which make up 26/114 of his innings) while being pretty damn good at home and countries like Pakistan and now more recently SA .

He's been really valuable to the SL side afaik.

My point was not about Samaraweera in particular. The discussion was..if someone is poor outside the subcontinent, he is not considered great..and Migara's argument was Pietersen is poor in SL and people still consider him great. My point was..oustide SL comprises of 5 test playing nations whereas Sri Lanka is just one country.

 

[Athlai]

I reckon Samaraweera has enough to him to do well anywhere besides in England against this English attack. That said I don't think any batsman in the world shouldn't expect to average too much there.

 

[Nomanculture]

The reason for that is outside SC is 5 major test playing nations..

Sri Lanka is one nation.

Being average in 1 nation > being average in 5 (this will change now with his performances in South Africa)

I count three and a half

My point was not about Samaraweera in particular. The discussion was..if someone is poor outside the subcontinent, he is not considered great..and Migara's argument was Pietersen is poor in SL and people still consider him great. My point was..oustide SL comprises of 5 test playing nations whereas Sri Lanka is just one country.

Migara's argument was KP has been poor in the Sub Continent, not only in SL. That's what Daemon has pointed out (I think) by saying the SC has 3.5 Test countries, not just one. 3.5 is roughly comparable to 5. Hence Migara's argument still stands IMO.

 

[Nomanculture]

I reckon Samaraweera has enough to him to do well anywhere besides in England against this English attack. That said I don't think any batsman in the world shouldn't expect to average too much there.

No matter what anyone says about how he played, Samaraweera has an average of 50.50 against this English attack in England.

 

[Nomanculture]

If Samaraweera is a flat track bully, then so is Jayawardene.. he is at least better than Jayawardene overseas. Why was he dropped for the Pakistan series despite scoring an unbeaten 87 in England in the final test?

Jayawardene has always been a flat track bully, but with the recent series in UAE where he couldn't do anything, I think he's now reduced to a home track bully.

SL had a series v AUS in between ENG and PAK series, where Samaraweera couldn't do much. In fact he wasn't in the XI for the third Test v AUS.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Migara's argument was KP has been poor in the Sub Continent, not only in SL. That's what Daemon has pointed out (I think) by saying the SC has 3.5 Test countries, not just one. 3.5 is roughly comparable to 5. Hence Migara's argument still stands IMO.

Could be. I was not trying to defend Pietesen..nor was I trying to compare Pietersen with Samaraweera.. My point merely was..that if A is poor in one country and B is poor in 5 countries, A>B. Whether Pietersen and Samaraweera fit A and B or not is a different matter. I haven't checked Pietersen's record in the sub continent. From the posts, I gathered that Pietersen has had a poor record in Sri Lanka while Samaraweera had a poor record outside of subcontinent, hence I was referring to that.

Update: I just had a look at Pietersen's record and it seems he has a below average record in Sri Lanka and India from 6 test matches, a good record in India and Bangladesh..that's not exactly 'poor' in the subcontinent.

 

[Athlai]

No matter what anyone says about how he played, Samaraweera has an average of 50.50 against this English attack in England.

It's not that I think he can't succeed in England. It's just that I think the swinging ball and good bowlers should undo just about anyone.

 

[Migara]

Could be. I was not trying to defend Pietesen..nor was I trying to compare Pietersen with Samaraweera.. My point merely was..that if A is poor in one country and B is poor in 5 countries, A>B. Whether Pietersen and Samaraweera fit A and B or not is a different matter. I haven't checked Pietersen's record in the sub continent. From the posts, I gathered that Pietersen has had a poor record in Sri Lanka while Samaraweera had a poor record outside of subcontinent, hence I was referring to that.

Update: I just had a look at Pietersen's record and it seems he has a below average record in Sri Lanka and India from 6 test matches, a good record in India and Bangladesh..that's not exactly 'poor' in the subcontinent.

Suddenely stats in Bangladesh becomes important?

And out of SC Sam has bad record against 2/5 non-SC countries (And in ENG he averaged 50 last time) (non minnows) where as KP has 1/2 bad records (non minnow) on SC. Now which becomes more important?

Note: KP has not played in Pakistan IIRC.

 

[smash84]

didn't KP come to Pakistan in 2006 when England lost?

 

[Spikey]

The Numbers Game: Samaraweera proves an overseas point | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

Rajesh strikes again

 

[Howe_zat]

Tbf that one's probably a coincidence.

Comment:

"This guy is way under-rated and should be spoken of in the same breath as Sangakkara, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene, Pietersen, Bell, de Villiers, Younis Khan etc"

Sizeable breath, that.

 

[Prince EWS]

No matter what anyone says about how he played, Samaraweera has an average of 50.50 against this English attack in England.

Haha yeah indeed. Bloke just can't help but maintain a high average no matter what. WAG.

 

[Daemon]

No doubt he's under rated though.

 

[Migara]

didn't KP come to Pakistan in 2006 when England lost?

He did, and was ordinary there too. so 2/3 or 2/4 (or 3.5) if a minnow is counted. Sam has 2/5 in bad performances. Still his stats look better than KP's who's regarded class to FTB.

 

[L Trumper]

He did, and was ordinary there too. so 2/3 or 2/4 (or 3.5) if a minnow is counted. Sam has 2/5 in bad performances. Still his stats look better than KP's who's regarded class to FTB.

KP was poor in SL. In pakistan he was not as poor as you suggest.

Anyway if you want to rate Samaraveera ahead of KP by all means you can, no one here stopping you.

 

[Jacknife]

KP was poor in SL. In pakistan he was not as poor as you suggest.

Anyway if you want to rate Samaraveera ahead of KP by all means you can, no one here stopping you.

No he wasn't as bad as being made out in Pakistan, got a nice ton out there and made some runs here and there just a got a few single number scores as well, I also wouldn't say averaging 41 in India is failing either, funnily enough it's far better than Samaraweera's 24 there. If someone wants to take issue with the 6 tests he's played in SL and Pakistan, more power to them.

 

[Migara]

KP was poor in SL. In pakistan he was not as poor as you suggest.

Anyway if you want to rate Samaraveera ahead of KP by all means you can, no one here stopping you.

No one rates Sam over KP from SL. But it's the otherway round, that KP is rated miles better than Sam, when they both have comparable records. One becomes a FTB/HTB and another becames a great. The voice was against these different standards.

 

[smash84]

No one rates Sam over KP from SL. But it's the otherway round, that KP is rated miles better than Sam, when they both have comparable records. One becomes a FTB/HTB and another becames a great. The voice was against these different standards.

There was a discussion over it some time back over why this happened in the ESPN ATXI thread. Also in the Lillee vs Imran thread I think.

SL isn't a cricketing powerhouse (in terms of being a lucrative market or being a power center) hence its cricketers probably do not get as much recognition as they should. Sad but true.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Suddenely stats in Bangladesh becomes important?

And out of SC Sam has bad record against 2/5 non-SC countries (And in ENG he averaged 50 last time) (non minnows) where as KP has 1/2 bad records (non minnow) on SC. Now which becomes more important?

Note: KP has not played in Pakistan IIRC.

Ok you are assuming a few things about me number one being that I am one of those who as a blanket rule considers stats against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe irrelevant. I don't.

Secondly, my argument was that KP has a good record in 2 countries in the subcontinent and below average in 2 countries..that is not equivalent to being 'poor' in the subcontinent.

And I was not making this argument in relation to Pietersen vs Samaraweera. This was independent of that and simply a point on Pietersen.

To go back to the original question of the topic, yes I no longer consider Samaraweera a flat track bully especially after he outscored two of Sri Lanka's more accomplished batsmen (and dare I say a certain overrated batsman).

The reason KP is rated higher than Samaraweera despite having similar holes in their stats is that KP has dominated some of the best bowlers of his time such as Warne, McGrath and Muralitharan. That makes many people consider him great.