Kumar Sangakarra

Remove this Banner Ad

Watson_my_mind said:
Can someone tell me, what are his stats as a specialist batsman, home and away, without zimbabwe and bangladesh in there?

All that criteria is needed please.
Click to expand...


just against the big 4 (Oz, ENg, India and South Africa) and not wicket keeping

Opposition team Australia or England or India or South Africa
Wicketkeeper not as wicketkeeper
Ordered by default (ascending)


................Span ........Mat Runs ..HS . Bat Av 100

unfiltered 2000-2015 130 12198 319 58.92 ... 38
filtered ... 2000-2014 .. 37 3804 287 58.52 ....11



home 2004-2014 20 2124 287 64.36
away 2000-2014 17 1680 192 52.50
 
Oaktree said:
What an innings by Sangakkara, absolute amazing!

The way he accelerated his innings after he got to 100 was elite level.
Click to expand...


He has done that before ya know haahaah
the purpose of this post was to provoke some discussion and the thread has gone down the road i knew it would hahaha secretly i was hoping Sanga would have a big innings to back up how good i think he is hahaa and it has come to fruition lol ( i realise this was a foxy thing to do but haha had to be done).

I do totally understand why people comment about how he has scored centuries on flat tracks but two points:

1) Other batsman obviously bat on these tracks too (21 of them in a test match) yet Sanga's record stands up the rest of them. One of the reasons Bradman is so good is his stats are so much higher than guys of his era. SO if Sanga has scored on such easy wickets, why havent other batsman????

2) Do we give more credit than to SL bowlers for bowling on flat tracks (the likes of Vaas, Murali, Herath etc) than we do say Mcgrath who played on wickets that helped seam bowlers. I know it may be another thread but what were Warne and Mcgraths records on the subcontinent compared to anywhere else?
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

SriLankanCat said:
I reckon Sanga is probably fourth or fifth best ever.
Click to expand...
I think it is impossible to make calls like this given all of the players we have never seen, not to mention the near limitless variables that carry over time.
 
SriLankanCat said:
I rate Lara and Tendulkar higher. Rate Ponting equal (although his record on the subcontinent isnt that great).

I reckon Sanga is probably fourth or fifth best ever.
Click to expand...
You can mount arguments for them all, but I rate Sanga higher.
 
thorne89 said:
I think it is impossible to make calls like this given all of the players we have never seen, not to mention the near limitless variables that carry over time.
Click to expand...
Yep. None of us saw Wally Hammond play (I assume :)) but everything I've read about him suggests that his name should be included among the all time greats.
 
evdo1706 said:
Sangakkara averages 42.6 in Australia, England, West Indies, New Zealand, South Africa. Definitely not ATG stats. It is true that he does not get to play a lot in those countries but the likes of Tendulkar and Lara started playing well immediately and in much difficult conditions of the 1990s. I am sure actually his overall averages would have come down a fair bit had he played more outside his comfort zone.
Click to expand...
It's interesting you group those five countries together.

You could have mentioned at least that in Australia he averages 60. And in NZ, prior to the current tour, he averaged 66 (he now averages 68).

So really, it's down to 3 countries:
WI - 34.00
SA - 35.75
Eng - 41.04

Interestingly, Ponting "only" averaged 41 in England as well. And a miserable 26 in India.

And interestingly again, Lara "only" averaged 41 in Australia (despite his 277). And 33 in India and 37 in New Zealand.

You can pick whatever holes you like, using stats, to basically suit your argument.
 
philreich said:
Yep. None of us saw Wally Hammond play (I assume :)) but everything I've read about him suggests that his name should be included among the all time greats.
Click to expand...
Wally Hammond is an integral part of a bit of trivia about the Don.

Any idea what that may be? :)
 
sherb said:
Wally Hammond is an integral part of a bit of trivia about the Don.

Any idea what that may be?
Click to expand...
At a guess, I'd say that Hammond (905) and Bradman (974) are the only two players to top 900 runs in a Test series. Making the feat even better was the fact that both players did it on foreign soil.
 
philreich said:
At a guess, I'd say that Hammond (905) and Bradman (974) are the only two players to top 900 runs in a Test series.
Click to expand...
There's probably a number of things.

But the one I was thinking of was that Hammond was one of Bradman's two test wickets. :)
 
sherb said:
There's probably a number of things.

But the one I was thinking of was that Hammond was one of Bradman's two test wickets. :)
Click to expand...
So Bradman only has 2 more Test wickets than me: I guess that means I'm a pretty good bowler :)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Likely the 2nd best specialist batsman post ww2, as much as I like Sachin, Lara, viv etc, Kumar is far more consistent and prolific a run-scorer (as clearly supported by stats).

When comparing against Hobbs, Hammond, Grace, G Headley etc then the argument moves into more subjective waters, owing to substantially different playing conditions.
 
thetank said:
Likely the 2nd best specialist batsman post ww2, as much as I like Sachin, Lara, viv etc, Kumar is far more consistent and prolific a run-scorer (as clearly supported by stats).

When comparing against Hobbs, Hammond, Grace, G Headley etc then the argument moves into more subjective waters, owing to substantially different playing conditions.
Click to expand...

Agree with this post. I dont know if we can say Sanga has been more consistent than Tendulkar, Tendulkar played for nearly 25 years?????????????????
 
Sangakarra is the best batsman I've seen play. I wish we could see him in Australia more though
 
sherb said:
It's interesting you group those five countries together.

You could have mentioned at least that in Australia he averages 60. And in NZ, prior to the current tour, he averaged 66 (he now averages 68).

So really, it's down to 3 countries:
WI - 34.00
SA - 35.75
Eng - 41.04

Interestingly, Ponting "only" averaged 41 in England as well. And a miserable 26 in India.

And interestingly again, Lara "only" averaged 41 in Australia (despite his 277). And 33 in India and 37 in New Zealand.

You can pick whatever holes you like, using stats, to basically suit your argument.
Click to expand...

There was no hidden agenda behind clubbing those countries together. Those countries present the most alien conditions to the players from the subcontinent. That was the reason why I clubbed them together. Also individually he has played very few matches in each of these countries. So at times stats can be misleading. It is a routine practice. Sangakkara also averages low in India for some reason. Sangakkara is without doubt a modern day great but I do feel that his stats are somewhat inflated due to a number of reasons.

Talking about low averages in foreign countries, every player has a few of them except Tendulkar who averages 45+ in all the major cricket playing countries except in Pakistan where his average is 40. I think that is quite remarkable after playing for so long.
 
Last edited:
Caesar said:
He is a very, very good player.

Whether he deserves to be ranked with Tendulkar, Lara and Ponting is an interesting one. In some ways it is difficult to compare statistics directly because the schedules of the small Test nations are so different to the big ones. For example, Sangakkara has played 20% of his matches against either Zimbabwe or Bangladesh - for the other three the number is more like 3-7%. Take out all his matches against those countries and his average drops about 6 points - for the other three it doesn't make much of a difference.

I generally look at where players struggled to score runs. Sangakkara averages less than 40 in three places - India, South Africa and the West Indies. In contrast, Tendulkar averages over 40 everywhere. Ponting averages over 40 everywhere except India. Lara averages over 40 everywhere except India and NZ, but IMO he also played in tougher batting conditions than the other three given the slight generational difference.

Given all that I'd put Sangakkara a bit below the other three, but not by much.
Click to expand...
ok, how many times has he handled the gloves when he has averaged below 40 v SA, India, and WI.

I think we need someone like Gilchrist to tell us what the true toll would have been had Gilchrist had to bat at 3. was he batting at 5 or 6 with the gloves?
Sangakkara handed over his wicket-keeping duty to Prasanna Jayawardene in Tests cricket in 2009
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
sherb said:
Geez, you could argue the fors and againsts ad finitum.

So I will throw in a couple of "fors" for Sanga.

1. TEST RECORD AS A BATSMAN ONLY (IE WHEN NOT DESIGNATED KEEPER)
81 matches, 141 innings, 13 not out, 8877 runs at 69.35 - 30 hundreds and 40 fifties

So apart from the remarkable batting average, he is scoring at least 50 on average every second innings.

I'll do the other "for" a bit later when I can be bothered to look up the info.
Click to expand...
thnx for this sherb.
 
SriLankanCat said:
I would like to mention Brendan Mcullum and Andy Flower as example of non- fashionable players who played for low profile teams whos records are wonderful and deserve to be up there!
Click to expand...

can i add Craig McMillan to those also. only cos he got up the aussies nose like ranatunga and virat kohli is now. that alone should be worth +15 on their batting average
 
great player, nice stats.

but i think ill stop reading this thread now that 5 pages in some are calling him the second best batsman of all time.
 
evdo1706 said:
There was no hidden agenda behind clubbing those countries together. Those countries present the most alien conditions to the players from the subcontinent. That was the reason why I clubbed them together. Also individually he has played very few matches in each of these countries. So at times stats can be misleading. It is a routine practice. Sangakkara also averages low in India for some reason. Sangakkara is without doubt a modern day great but I do feel that his stats are somewhat inflated due to a number of reasons.

Talking about low averages in foreign countries, every player has a few of them except Tendulkar who averages 45+ in all the major cricket playing countries except in Pakistan where his average is 40. I think that is quite remarkable after playing for so long.
Click to expand...
By creating an "alien conditions" stat, you come up with a misleading result - either deliberately or otherwise.

Anyone reading it would reasonably conclude that Sangakkara's record in all five venues was well below his normally high standards.

Further to that, they would also reasonably conclude that he could not perform to his career standard outside of sub-continental conditions.

Neither is true. Because in both Australia and New Zealand his record is outstanding. And it is telling that is those two venues, because I have seen both are used as markers for sub-continental batsmen - Australia because of our attack and bouncier pitches and New Zealand because of their seaming pitches.

It's a classic example of what I was talking about. Massaging the stats to support an argument. In this case, an outstanding record in two countries being hidden in a wider statistic.

By all means, present such a statistic, but at least provide a further breakdown to show that it isn't as negative as it would appear.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Kumar Sangakarra

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top