Why Sangakkara is the best cricketer from the Asian subcontinent the game has ever seen

[vamos_rafa]

at this rate' date=' he will end with 30k runs in 17 years. If he plays 2 more yrs, he can break sachin record of 34 k runs. But yeah, he will retire before tht[/quote'] I am afraid such Maths does not work. Had it, Sachin would have ended up with 20k runs in tests alone.

[Muloghonto]

My subcontinental batsmen's rating since the 70s: (tests) 1. Sachin 2. Sunny 3. Dravid 4. Miandad 5. Sehwag 6. Inzamam 7. Sangakkara 8. Laxman 9. Younis khan 10. Azharuddin Sangakkara may have a better average but Sachin is easily better batsman. For one, Sachin scored runs throughout his career everywhere. Sanga has barely played in Australia, South Africa compared to Sachin. Ie, eh is more or less, unproven overseas. Furthermore, runs are not just runs. a 300 against Sakib and 3 other jokers is numerically greater than a 70 against Imran,Wasim,Waqar and Qadir but realistically, the latter feat is far harder and far more unlikely to happen. People have short memories but people these days do not realize how much harder batting was in the 90s. Take the two best attacks in world cricket today: Steyn, Morkel, Philander +someone and Harris, Johnson, Siddle, Lyon & twatto. well, in the 90s, there were 3 attacks that were easily better than the #2 attack ( Australia) : Australia, South Africa & Pakistan and one attack that was just as good (though less balanced): West Indies. Pretty much due to two ATG fast bowlers. Now, those attacks from the 90s existed for most of the 90s. ( South Africa, Pakistan & West Indies were amazing throughout the 90s, Australia were amazing since 94-95, when McWarne established themselves. ) But the current two attacks of 'compare' have existed for only 2 years max! England, the clear 'third attack', is really no better than the English attacks of the 90s. Broad, Anderson & Swann have played a lot more than the likes of Caddick, Tufnell, Fraser, Gough, Hoggard but none except Swann is clearly better from the 90s setup. So, it is pretty clear that Sachin scored a lot more runs over a lot longer against far superior attacks than Sanga has. If it is not clear, just consider this: Sachin debuted in 1989. In 1989, there were only *THREE* batsmen active with 50+ averages: Viv Richards, Alan border & Miandad. From 1989 to 2000 or so, only five batsmen played 5 or more years and managed to average 50+ in that span: Sachin, Lara, Dravid, Steve Waugh & Andy Flower. Viv, Miandad & border all retired by 1994 or so and didnt play more than 10-15 matches ( they survived on inertia and were not world-beater batsmen in the 90s). Gillchrist did average 50+ in the 90s but he barely started his career in the late 90s, when the vaunted 90s attacks were fading (except Australia). Ponting played five years in the 90s and didnt average 50+. Neither did Kallis. Compare that with post 2000s. Since 2000s, Sehwag, Sangakkara, jayawardene, Sachin, Lara, Dravid, Ponting, Kallis, Smith, Samaraweera, Chanderpaul, Hayden, Gillchrist, Clarke, Steve Waugh, Amla, ABDV, Pujara, Younis & Youhana have managed to average 50+. I am probably forgetting a few but thats easily 20 batsmen who've gone 4-10+ years, with 30-100+ matches in the span, averaging 50+. So yes, I expect Sanga's stats to end up better than Sachin's. But it easily may not. Those who compare Sachin's 53.78 to Sanga's 58+, just remember that Sachin averaged 57 after 14000 runs.

[Muloghonto]

what about viru?

Viru was easily a better bat than Sanga. Yes, he failed badly last time he was in England and Australia. But it's worth remembering that he absolutely creamed Australia in 2004 and even in 2007 when McGrath & Warne were around, he did exceptionally well in Australia. Better than Sanga did. same in England & South Africa. Sehwag prior to 2009 South Africa series, actually had a very decent overseas record. But he is worth mroe than his record, because even though he is less consistent, he is the quintessential X-factor opener who will not provide the standard 'fail less but grind more to security' starts. He'd provide 'fail more and put team in winning position by tea on day1' type.

[Cricket_Hacker]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/718821.html

[Cricket_Hacker]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/718821.html

[Cricket_Hacker]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/718821.html

[nanda14792]

Sangakkra great wkbat was he available in ipl auctions?

[SLICKR392]

Sangakkra great wkbat was he available in ipl auctions?

Opted himself out.

[thongale]

Viru was easily a better bat than Sanga. Yes, he failed badly last time he was in England and Australia. But it's worth remembering that he absolutely creamed Australia in 2004 and even in 2007 when McGrath & Warne were around, he did exceptionally well in Australia. Better than Sanga did. same in England & South Africa. Sehwag prior to 2009 South Africa series, actually had a very decent overseas record. But he is worth mroe than his record, because even though he is less consistent, he is the quintessential X-factor opener who will not provide the standard 'fail less but grind more to security' starts. He'd provide 'fail more and put team in winning position by tea on day1' type.

The only thing is this same argument does not count when Viv Richards is compared to Tendulkar. :finger:

[The Outsider]

The only thing is this same argument does not count when Viv Richards is compared to Tendulkar. :finger:

It does. Many people, and Indians, rate Richards a better batsman than Tendulkar specially in ODIs.

[Muloghonto]

The only thing is this same argument does not count when Viv Richards is compared to Tendulkar. :finger:

Yep and as it should be. The 'more bang for your buck/psycho aggression paying off less often being as useful as dogged run-scoring more often' is an argument that is valid mosty for openers and lower order batsmen ( #7s/#8s). It has little or no value for middle order bats. The entire point, of going for an opener who blitzes hundreds one every 6-7 innings as opposed to going for one who grinds out hundreds every 4-5 innings or so is because of the 'before you can blink, there are 100 runs on board, the match has barely started but the middle order has 100+ runs to play, so much less pressure on middle order, much more pressure on bowling attack' factor. Same argument can be made in a different setting for lower order bats: whats the point of a guy who can grind out 50s more often as a #7 bat, since he will inevitably run out of partners before getting to the 50s- be consistently stranded for a very dogged, safe and grinding '25 not out'. A guy who can score 50s less often but does it at great speed can put runs on the board before runnign out of partners more often due to his blitzkreig batting. But for middle order, the job is simple- runs, more runs, more consistently. Either build on the blitz provided by the openers instead of squandering it or consolidate and score while not losing any more wickets if the openers have gone cheaply. In test cricket, strike rate matters the least for positions #3 to 6 due to this.

[Vijy]

It does. Many people' date=' and Indians, rate Richards a better batsman than Tendulkar specially in ODIs.[/quote'] Count me amongst them. Sir Viv, Bevan and Dhobi are the finest players for me. Of course, there are plenty of close competitors - ABdV will become one of them, and Kohli might too.

[Vijy]

Sanga is a great. Period. He's improved tremendously and that's what greats do - reinvent themselves.

[Gollum]

May not be the greatest but certainly top 5 from SC ever.

[Vijy]

Top 3 for sure. From India, we have Sunny, SRT and Dravid. From SL, we have Sanga. And from Pak, we have Miandad, Inzi, Yousuf and Younis as contenders. Would have Sanga in the top 3.

[Gollum]

Top 3 for sure. From India' date=' we have Sunny, SRT and Dravid. From SL, we have Sanga. And from Pak, we have Miandad, Inzi, Yousuf and Younis as contenders. Would have Sanga in the top 3.[/quote'] The Pakistanis you mentioned aren't in the same league as the other 4. Evem Sehwag is better than them.

[Vijy]

The Pakistanis you mentioned aren't in the same league as the other 4. Evem Sehwag is better than them.

Do you know the era that Miandad played in? He averaged around 52.5, and he was definitely an ATG. I would not rate Yousuf or Younis that highly since they scored a lot in easier conditions, but Miandad (and perhaps Inzi) was better than Sehwag.

[Gollum]

Do you know the era that Miandad played in? He averaged around 52.5' date=' and he was definitely an ATG. I would not rate Yousuf or Younis that highly since they scored a lot in easier conditions, but Miandad (and perhaps Inzi) was better than Sehwag.[/quote'] Inzi averages 28 against RSA and Aus the 2 best bowling units of his time with 1 100 in both tests and ODIs combined. :giggle: Miandad Bhai was a huge benefactor of home umpiring , was never once given lbw in Pakistan in his whole career. His averages against WI and Aus away from home were 20eish. was scared of fast bowling.

[thongale]

Do you back Sehwag to score as freely as today on wickets and against bowlers that Miandad faced? Face it, he played West Indian machine, he played Hadlee, he played Lillee and Thommo and he masacarred Kapil and spin quartret. Shewag only played few good bowlers. McGrath, Gillespie, Shoaib, Bond and Steyn. I am not sure whether he played Donald, Pollock, Ambrose or Walsh. And Miandad's era was downright dangerous due to **** pitches and lack of pprotective equipment.

[Trichromatic]

Do you back Sehwag to score as freely as today on wickets and against bowlers that Miandad faced? Face it, he played West Indian machine, he played Hadlee, he played Lillee and Thommo and he masacarred Kapil and spin quartret. Shewag only played few good bowlers. McGrath, Gillespie, Shoaib, Bond and Steyn. I am not sure whether he played Donald, Pollock, Ambrose or Walsh. And Miandad's era was downright dangerous due to **** pitches and lack of pprotective equipment.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63502.html On these pitches where Imran and Hadlee got 2 wickets in 70 odd overs. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63501.html Imran and Hadllee had to bowl 100 overs in first 2 innings. How many fast bowlers have to bowl those many overs these days? Spinners do bowl that much. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63358.html Lillee bowled 50 overs. Can't recall the last time when I watched a genuine fast bowler bowing those many overs in an inning. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63264.html Scores of 600 and 400. Lillee didn't get any in 21 overs. Sarfaraz bowled 49 overs.