Sangakkara is a legend

[putrevus]

Wow did not know that Sanga has scored over 2000 ODI runs in Australia and Sachin just has 1400 odd runs with just one hundred there.

[Muloghonto]

He keeps as well though' date=' making him more valuable than Sachin and co.[/quote'] Just because you can keep at an average level (which is what Sanga was- an average keeper. Definitely not in the better half of keepers going around) does not make you a better player than a significantly better batsman (sachin), who was also a very good utility bowler in the ODIs. Sachin's bowling = sanga's keeping.

[Marut]

He keeps as well though' date=' making him more valuable than Sachin and co.[/quote'] Sanga had some good years recently, and also cashed in on the new ODI rules that allow 300 scores regularly. But take their first decade of cricket- Sachin was a batsman averaging 45 at a S/R of 90 in the 90s (way above his peers) Sanga was a batsman averaging 35 odd at a S/R of 75 in the 00s (way below his peers) These two are batsmen with very different capabilities. Sanga's best could not match Sachin's worst under the old ODI rules.

[Marut]

Just because you can keep at an average level (which is what Sanga was- an average keeper. Definitely not in the better half of keepers going around) does not make you a better player than a significantly better batsman (sachin)' date=' who was also a very good utility bowler in the ODIs. Sachin's bowling = sanga's keeping.[/quote'] Sachin was one of the biggest turners of the ball I have ever seen. Even Warne would be proud of that. He lacked control, may be India under bowled him and caused him to regress as a bowler.

[Muloghonto]

No, Sachin himself curtailed his bowling after his shoulder/elbow injury in 2002. It is around the same time that Sehwag became a fixture in the team permanently and Sehwag offered the same role as Sachin (though he was nowhere as good as sachin at it): the part time bowler who could purchase a few wickets and keep overseas batsmen quiet on turners.

[cric_fan]

Sanga >>>>> Tendu Tendu was a runs accumulator. Sanga is a match winner.

[Cricket_Hacker]

Sanga >>>>> Tendu Tendu was a runs accumulator. Sanga is a match winner.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[riya]

After Lara,Ponting,Kallis,now its Sanga's time to get adopted..Nice!!! Sachin vs Lara Sachin Vs Ponting Sachin vs Kallis Sachin vs Sanga.. One side keeps on changing...other side never changes and rock solid.I think that settles the issue.

[riya]

Oh by the way.I respect Sanga without any Sanga (in malayalam it means doubt).He is a legend.I have repeatedly said that already in many threads. But sick of this Sachin comparison posts.

[Muloghonto]

Sanga >>>>> Tendu Tendu was a runs accumulator. Sanga is a match winner.

Spoken like a kid who barely understood cricket when Tendu first came on. When Sachin debuted, the world record for test runs was 10,000 & change, held by Gavankar and the world record for centuries were also Gavaskar at 34. In ODIs, the record was held by Haynes i believe (or Richards and Haynes inherited it shortly after), where the record stood at 18-19 centuries and 8K or so runs. In the 90s and early 2000s (until late 2002 i believe, when he had his first major elbow injury), there were only two batsmen who could crush ANY opposition, including some ATG ones on wickets where 90% of todays batsmen would soil themselves and do it at runs enough to be considered in the ATG category: Tendulkar and Lara. Of the two, the equation was simple: Lara would do nothing for a lot of the time and produce a stunning innings all by himself, a big score, that would take the weak WI batting to some sort of a total their gun bowlers could defend. Tendulkar on the other hand, would crush oppositions more often, his innings individually would be less stunning in general (in context of the match, because India's batting wasn't as fragile as the WI of the 90s) but in terms of technical proficiency and ability to crush bowling, he'd top Lara more frequently. Bear in mind, this is when 300-350 was considered a good first innings score in tests for most teams against most bowling and 250-275 was a matchwinning score more often than not, even for India. Tests would be scored at under 50% strike rate. During this period, Lara's big innings would go at high 60s strike rate in tests, Tendulkar's at high 70s, in ODIs, Tendulkar's strike rate was 95-100 or so, Lara's was 80-85 or so. By the time Tendulkar the accumulator arrived, around 2002 or so, Tendulkar had already blown away the ODI records by a light year, already amassing 35 or so tons, 12K or so runs with the next best active guy either being Mark Waugh/Lara at 12-15 centuries and 6K or so runs. in Tests, Tendulkar destroyed his way to around 30-31 tons and 10K or so runs, before injuries and evolving nature of the team, changed his role. I don't think it makes any sense to criticize Tendulkar for adopting a more circumspect batting approach (it didn't work a lot, Tendulkar was a destroyer, an attacking stroke player all his career till then, with no equal except Lara or Viv at his pomp). If you think about it, Tendulkar played in a team with Sehwag and Laxman, both of whom were excellent strikers of the ball when set- Sehwag especially so. Like, think of this for an instant- if you are batting with Sehwag. This is a man, who for the first time in HISTORY of test cricket has batted in the top six and scored at run-a-ball big scores and career strike rate in the high 70s while averaging over 40, never mind he actually averaged almost 50. In ODI cricket, he is again, the first player in history to bat in top six and strike at 100 or more with a 30 or more average. When you are batting with this man- why the feck would you want to match him stroke for stroke and not play 90% within yourself, safe and sound ??!? It is what ANY sensible player would do. Like duh- if your partner (bowling or batting) is having a sensational time, the first job you got to do is make sure you play smart, conservative cricket and don't bollox up. Because you bolloxing up may make your partner lose the plot (how many times a batsman butchering bowlers gets out after 2-3 quick wickets at the other end ? it messes with his plan/with his rhythm. same goes with bowlers- how many times do you see a bowler bowling fine and 'almost' getting a batsman for a few overs and then going nowhere because the bowler at the other end releases all the pressure by bowling pies ?) So Sachin played a bit more circumspect cricket. Good on him, his game evolved as many sensational players evolve too. But to say Sachin was an accumulator is to say Bradman scored centuries as a 40 year old. It only tells a very small part of the story. Sachin is one of the few, if not the only one who's gone from being a stunningly successful destroyer of bowling to a very successful and efficient accumulator of runs.

[Marut]

No, Sachin himself curtailed his bowling after his shoulder/elbow injury in 2002. It is around the same time that Sehwag became a fixture in the team permanently and Sehwag offered the same role as Sachin (though he was nowhere as good as sachin at it): the part time bowler who could purchase a few wickets and keep overseas batsmen quiet on turners.

Sachin bowled only 3.5 overs a match on average even before his injuries in 2002. That is not enough exposure for any bowler to perfect his bowling skills. Even a regular part time bowler usually averages between 5-6 overs per ODI match. The reason for Sachin's low overs rate is the fact that he did not bowl any overs in 30% of the matches he played prior to 2002. Even in the matches he bowled, he averages less than 5 overs/match.

[Marut]

I think Sachin had the ability to become a bowler in the mould of Jayasuriya, but India wasted his bowling skills.

[HyroProto]

loins would put sanga above don brad man if they could :hysterical:

No we wont... I still dont rate Sanga as a Good ODI batsmen... but for Tests..sure.. Sanga is the best test Wicket-keeper batsmen in the world.. I rate him over Gilly simply because of his consistency..

[Roshanrocks]

WHy does Sachin have to be dragged into every thread here.... ::P

[Muloghonto]

No we wont... I still dont rate Sanga as a Good ODI batsmen... but for Tests..sure.. Sanga is the best test Wicket-keeper batsmen in the world.. I rate him over Gilly simply because of his consistency..

Err, the term WIcketkeeper-batsman has wicket-keeper first, doesn't it ? Sanga is a decent wicketkeeper batsman. He was never tested as a keeper against quality fast bowling and against spinners, yes he kept to Murali but no real leg-spinner of note, who are actually harder to keep to against than most off spinners (because against leg spinners, the bulk majority of the balls are actually blocked from sight by batsmen;s body, due to a more middle-n-off vs off/outside off line). Overall, Sanga is an adequate keeper. But you are kidding yourself if you think any great bowler out there would feel completely thrilled with Sanga keeping to you in a way they would be with Gillchrist or Dhoni.

[HyroProto]

Err, the term WIcketkeeper-batsman has wicket-keeper first, doesn't it ? Sanga is a decent wicketkeeper batsman. He was never tested as a keeper against quality fast bowling and against spinners, yes he kept to Murali but no real leg-spinner of note, who are actually harder to keep to against than most off spinners (because against leg spinners, the bulk majority of the balls are actually blocked from sight by batsmen;s body, due to a more middle-n-off vs off/outside off line). Overall, Sanga is an adequate keeper. But you are kidding yourself if you think any great bowler out there would feel completely thrilled with Sanga keeping to you in a way they would be with Gillchrist or Dhoni.

I put Wicketkeeper first because thats how everybody says it... Its wiecketkeeper-batsmen & not Batsmen-Wicketkeeper...It doesnt mean that his strongest suite was wicketkeeping I also put Gily & Dhoni way above Sanga as wicketkepers... Sanga himself said that he was not meant to be a wicketkeeper.. But in order to get more chances to be seleceted for A-Team & the National side he wanted to keep so that it wil open up more opertunities than being a pure batsmen....so I dont think he himslf belive that he is a natural nor a very good keeper Also Sanga clearly said in a local interview that he is not naturally talented.. he had to work so hard to get where he is as a batsmen..For example he changed his bating grip numerous times where as Mahela bats with the same grip he had when he was playing for school So compared to Sachin who was naturally talented & made the best of his talent unlike our IDIOT Mahela...I admire Sanga's hard work, work etic & the sheer determination more than any other cricketer

[Marut]

I put Wicketkeeper first because thats how everybody says it... Its wiecketkeeper-batsmen & not Batsmen-Wicketkeeper...It doesnt mean that his strongest suite was wicketkeeping I also put Gily & Dhoni way above Sanga as wicketkepers... Sanga himself said that he was not meant to be a wicketkeeper.. But in order to get more chances to be seleceted for A-Team & the National side he wanted to keep so that it wil open up more opertunities than being a pure batsmen....so I dont think he himslf belive that he is a natural nor a very good keeper Also Sanga clearly said in a local interview that he is not naturally talented.. he had to work so hard to get where he is as a batsmen..For example he changed his bating grip numerous times where as Mahela bats with the same grip he had when he was playing for school So compared to Sachin who was naturally talented & made the best of his talent unlike our IDIOT Mahela...I admire Sanga's hard work, work etic & the sheer determination more than any other cricketer

Really? I thought I read some where that Sangakkara was multi-talented and won many awards (best allround student etc) before he came into the international scene.

[cricketfan28]

no comparision with sachin .. sanga still is a legend what a player

[thongale]

Err, the term WIcketkeeper-batsman has wicket-keeper first, doesn't it ? Sanga is a decent wicketkeeper batsman. He was never tested as a keeper against quality fast bowling and against spinners, yes he kept to Murali but no real leg-spinner of note, who are actually harder to keep to against than most off spinners (because against leg spinners, the bulk majority of the balls are actually blocked from sight by batsmen;s body, due to a more middle-n-off vs off/outside off line). Overall, Sanga is an adequate keeper. But you are kidding yourself if you think any great bowler out there would feel completely thrilled with Sanga keeping to you in a way they would be with Gillchrist or Dhoni.

As usual Mugalhonto posts trash. He don't realize off break bowlers bowlinbg to left handers gives the same challnge. It is well known that picking doosra is difficult than picking googly because the release changes very little. Keeping to quality fast bowling is ALWAYS easy than keeping fast wayward bowling, or fast un orthodox bowling, which SL had quite a bit. As usual cannot expect anything other than drivel from you.

[thongale]

Really? I thought I read some where that Sangakkara was multi-talented and won many awards (best allround student etc) before he came into the international scene.

He is brainy guy of course. Many cannot get in to Cricket First XI and Faculty of Law, University of Colombo at the same time.