Sanga retiring, where does he place?

[flibbertyjibber]

Personally think he should count as the same level as Tendulkar and Lara but I think he will always be ranked below them by the majority of people. Think he will go down alongside Kallis as the pair who were under rated the most as players of this generation. Maybe under rated is the wrong thing to say but certainly not getting the credit they deserve for their talents.

 

[Flem274*]

Yes, that must entirely explain.

i can edit quotes too

 

[G.I.Joe]

kohli playing 12 test series every 6 months against australia compared to sangakkara getting a one test series every 50 years might have something to do with that.

it's not just the number of tests overall - if you're playing a two test series away from home you have to come in ready and rolling and even if you do, you're going home in three weeks. if you're playing five tests you can get a roll on and if you're seeing it like a beach ball you can cause some pain.

of course the opposite is true too. if you're crap then in a two test series you can bail off home soon enough.

same goes for regularity - even though kohli flopped in england he'll get another extended crack in two minutes and he had a good look at english conditions through those 4 tests. if sanga sucked in a series he had a maximum of four knocks to look at where he went wrong. equally though if a player in an unfashionable country just can't get another country, they only have to go there once every five years and might play 6 tests in the bogey country in their entire career.

personally i suspect the most advantaged player is the one who at least has the chance to get lots of tests in a country regularly.

Yes, that must entirely explain 6 hundreds in 12 tests vs 1 hundred in 11 tests.

Happy now, flem?

 

[Black_Warrior]

Kohli has indeed already played as many matches against Australia as Sanga did in his entire career, but he's also scored 6 hundreds vs them against Sanga's 1, FTR.

Precisely my point. From the period of 2011-2014, he has played those test matches while Sanga did from 2004-2013. When you play so many games against one bowling attack in such short span of time, that is bound to give you an advantage over someone who hasn't. This is not an attempt to knock down Kohli, guy is amazing and love watching him play and hope he scores more hundreds but the point remains. Someone like a Warner or a Smith will have an advantage over a Sanga or a YK against England when they are playing for 5 test matches every 2 years.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Precisely my point. From the period of 2011-2014, he has played those test matches while Sanga did from 2004-2013. When you play so many games against one bowling attack in such short span of time, that is bound to give you an advantage over someone who hasn't. This is not an attempt to knock down Kohli, guy is amazing and love watching him play and hope he scores more hundreds but the point remains. Someone like a Warner or a Smith will have an advantage over a Sanga or a YK against England when they are playing for 5 test matches every 2 years.

At a certain point when the gulf becomes as wide as 5 centuries in 12 tests, you've got to entertain the thought that your theory does not explain away the difference completely.

 

[Flem274*]

having watched all the modern greats i think sangakkara is in the lara-ponting-sachin-dravid-kallis-chanders etc league. i suspect it's romanticism that's keeping him below the others, much like why people of a certain vintage think cricketers in the 70s/80s were the very very best that will ever live, because they were kids then.

i don't expect people to agree with me having the slower batsmen up there with the traditional glory boys but i'm not going to penalise a batsman for his role in the team. dravid, kallis and chanderpaul were the anchors their sides wanted and needed, but because they didn't score as fast as the others they always get ranked lower.

 

[Flem274*]

Yes, that must entirely explain 6 hundreds in 12 tests vs 1 hundred in 11 tests.

Happy now, flem?

it does if you read the rest of the post, or are you going to argue kohli is better than sangakkara?

 

[Black_Warrior]

My general thoughts on Sanga is that he started off as an above average player, and perhaps went unnoticed for the first 5 years of his career. I think this is one of the reasons why he is rated a tad lower than others or as some have said, he doesn't get enough credit. Lara pretty much shattered a lot of batting records during the first 5 years of his career.

I can speak for myself and I know that I did not rate Sanga very highly maybe not until the 192 in 2007 in Australia. Even then he was for me far below the likes of Dravid or Kallis.

I have found my opinion on Sanga evolve as I have seen the player evolve. What I gathered from reading his interviews, here was a man was an excellent student of the game, always looking to improve, which is why his batting transformed so much over the course of his career. His record from 2009-2014 is phenomenal, and once he gave up keeping, he totally focused on being the best batsman that he could be.

Let's look at it this way, every time he toured England, South Africa, New Zealand in the last 5 years, he has performed well and scored at least 1 hundred, sometimes even better, this while considering the fact that he gets 2 tests in England compared to India's 4 and Australia's 5.

If he had gotten as many opportunities against these teams in the last 5 years as some of the Big 3 do, then his record would also be something like 6 centuries in 12 tests.

 

[Flem274*]

he was such a fast learner too, like last summer. he went from boult's bunny to impossible to get out in the 3 day or whatever it was gap between tests. if his bowling attack were any good at finishing games off he would have starred in a test win.

 

[Black_Warrior]

he was such a fast learner too, like last summer. he went from boult's bunny to impossible to get out in the 3 day or whatever it was gap between tests. if his bowling attack were any good at finishing games off he would have starred in a test win.

He gave an interview during the world cup where he talked in detail about his batting. A great reflection of an intelligent mind constantly studying the game and looking to improve.
Kumar Sangakkara: 'A lot has gone out of the game with two new balls' | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[G.I.Joe]

it does if you read the rest of the post, or are you going to argue kohli is better than sangakkara?

Kohli has been better than Sangakkara against Australia, yes. That is a reasonable conclusion to draw from the data presented having also taken the big 3 factor into account. I have time for the big 3 theory when the difference between the players is a couple of hundreds over a dozen tests. I cannot accept that theory as the major explanation when the gulf is 5 centuries over 12 tests. That's stretching it too far.

There might likely be other factors like pitch conditions and bowling attacks to suggest that Kohli has had an easier time against Australia than Sangakkara has, but those were not introduced in evidence. Perhaps those arguments should be made rather than the big 3 theory one if the intention is to compare Kohli and Sanga's Australian records.

 

[Black_Warrior]

For me, he is still a tad, only a tad below Tendulkar and Lara, but just to counter attack the Sachin fan boys who would vote against him, I voted same level.

Poll needs a "well below Tendulkar and Lara" option.

 

[Flem274*]

Kohli has been better than Sangakkara against Australia, yes. That is a reasonable conclusion to draw from the data presented having also taken the big 3 factor into account. I have time for the big 3 theory when the difference between the players is a couple of hundreds over a dozen tests. I cannot accept that theory as the major explanation when the gulf is 5 centuries over 12 tests. That's stretching it too far.

There might likely be other factors like pitch conditions and bowling attacks to suggest that Kohli has had an easier time against Australia than Sangakkara has, but those were not introduced in evidence.

i've got no issues with bowling attacks. i cbf looking up who sangakkara faced because im sick and i cbf anyway but kohli doing what he did in the wake of 5-0 ashes is the goods. if i was going to hammer on kohli i'd choose his english series and point out his nz 100 was pointless and in a relatively easy situation.

someone with more ability to care to look up how often sangakkara had the gloves while facing aussie.

i would still argue the big three thing makes the gap a lot wider than it seems (kohli's hot streak down under being a case in point of getting a roll on - sangakkara may have scored multiple tons as well if his hobart knock was in a 4-5 test series) but kohli being a better player of pure pace and bounce (not movement) is a decent argument. not one that im yet convinced by but now we've stopped being ****s to each other i may be willing to meet you in the middle. 51-49 to me

 

[OverratedSanity]

My general thoughts on Sanga is that he started off as an above average player, and perhaps went unnoticed for the first 5 years of his career. I think this is one of the reasons why he is rated a tad lower than others or as some have said, he doesn't get enough credit. Lara pretty much shattered a lot of batting records during the first 5 years of his career.

I can speak for myself and I know that I did not rate Sanga very highly maybe not until the 192 in 2007 in Australia. Even then he was for me far below the likes of Dravid or Kallis.

I have found my opinion on Sanga evolve as I have seen the player evolve. What I gathered from reading his interviews, here was a man was an excellent student of the game, always looking to improve, which is why his batting transformed so much over the course of his career. His record from 2009-2014 is phenomenal, and once he gave up keeping, he totally focused on being the best batsman that he could be.

Let's look at it this way, every time he toured England, South Africa, New Zealand in the last 5 years, he has performed well and scored at least 1 hundred, sometimes even better, this while considering the fact that he gets 2 tests in England compared to India's 4 and Australia's 5.

If he had gotten as many opportunities against these teams in the last 5 years as some of the Big 3 do, then his record would also be something like 6 centuries in 12 tests.

I agree mostly but the bolded is a bit disingenuous imo. Sanga in the 2011 eng tour and SA tour was pretty disappointing for me. He did ****all in England all series and only woke up when the series was gone. And in SA, he had one excellent hundred and nothing else.

I do agree that him getting fewer chances to show his class overseas is a shame because he absolutely showed he could be awesome in any conditions, his 3 hundred in NZ for example are all classics. But you really can't attribute Sanga's slightly worse overseas average compared to the others solely on the basis of lack of opportunity. That argument just doesn't hold water to me considering Tendulkar had 7 full years pass between his first and second tours of Australia (92 and 99) and England (89 and 96). It's not something unique to Sangakkata. Just sounds like an excuse to me.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

having watched all the modern greats i think sangakkara is in the lara-ponting-sachin-dravid-kallis-chanders etc league. i suspect it's romanticism that's keeping him below the others, much like why people of a certain vintage think cricketers in the 70s/80s were the very very best that will ever live, because they were kids then.

i don't expect people to agree with me having the slower batsmen up there with the traditional glory boys but i'm not going to penalise a batsman for his role in the team. dravid, kallis and chanderpaul were the anchors their sides wanted and needed, but because they didn't score as fast as the others they always get ranked lower.

That was the role they adopted because they were more naturally limited in their stroke play. If they were capable of scoring at the same rate as the "glory boys" they would have.

 

[OverratedSanity]

he was such a fast learner too, like last summer. he went from boult's bunny to impossible to get out in the 3 day or whatever it was gap between tests. if his bowling attack were any good at finishing games off he would have starred in a test win.

Yeah this was amazing. Got owned by Boult several times in similar fashion and people started saying he was his bunny. Next match, boom.

 

[Flem274*]

That was the role they adopted because they were more naturally limited in their stroke play. If they were capable of scoring at the same rate as the "glory boys" they would have.

you clearly haven't watched enough cricket outside of whining about england to see when chanderpaul for one goes randomly *******. im surprised you didn't hear his gearbox clunk over the drizzle hitting your window panes you stare through from your mouldy maroon armchair.

 

[OverratedSanity]

you clearly haven't watched enough cricket outside of whining about england to see when chanderpaul for one goes randomly *******. im surprised you didn't hear his gearbox clunk over the drizzle hitting your window panes you stare through from your mouldy maroon armchair.

Do you honestly believe Chanders is at Ponting-Tendulkar-Ponting level? Kallis, Dravid, Sanga etc. I can absolutely agree and understand but Chanders?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

you clearly haven't watched enough cricket outside of whining about england to see when chanderpaul for one goes randomly *******. im surprised you didn't hear his gearbox clunk over the drizzle hitting your window panes you stare through from your mouldy maroon armchair.

Okay. Well if you seriously think Chanderpaul's a Lara in waiting who was asked to reign himself in to anchor the innings, carry on.

 

[Flem274*]

Do you honestly believe Chanders is at Ponting-Tendulkar-Ponting level? Kallis, Dravid, Sanga etc. I can absolutely agree and understand but Chanders?

yup. you may as well focus on the other end when he's batting. he's terrible with the tail and lives in his own little world at the crease (which is both perfect and bothersome) so maybe he's last by a smidge but saying they're all in the same ballpark is a lot easier than painstakingly ranking them.