Jump to content

Sangakara V Gilchrist


MCGGG

Sangakara V Gilchrist  

  1. 1.

    • Sanga
      3
    • Gilly
      17


Recommended Posts

Posted

Sanga was never a Test regular keeper. His best years as a Test bat coincided with the time when he gave up gloves. In Tests, Gilly. In ODIs, Sanga was more versatile and could block, rotate the strike or even score quick. I'd go with Sanga in ODIs, batting-wise.

Posted
Sanga was never a Test regular keeper. His best years as a Test bat coincided with the time when he gave up gloves. In Tests, Gilly. In ODIs, Sanga was more versatile and could block, rotate the strike or even score quick. I'd go with Sanga in ODIs, batting-wise.
Yeah Gilly easily the better keeper, but as a pure batsman I'd have Gilly ahead of Sanga in ODIs and Sanga obviously the better test bat.
Posted
Gilly. No contest unless matches are happening at SSC.
Sour grapes. Gilly batted at 7 in a very strong lineup ; Sanga's avg outside SL is actually much higher than Gilly's entire test avg.
Posted
Sour grapes. Gilly batted at 7 in a very strong lineup ; Sanga's avg outside SL is actually much higher than Gilly's entire test avg.
That is because Gilly did not played much matches against Zim or BD
Posted

Gilly is my favourite player of all time, he was a true gentleman (as he was a walker), and he was the most destructive batsman of all time over both formats of the game. (I say both as he didn't play a lot of T20)

Posted
Gilly is my favourite player of all time' date=' he was a [b']true gentleman (as he was a walker), and he was the most destructive batsman of all time over both formats of the game. (I say both as he didn't play a lot of T20)
Yeah sometimes.
Posted

If Gilchrist played as a specialist bat he would have averaged 60+ too. There honestly isn't much between them, I'll pick Gilchrist purely as he could win a game in a session!

Posted
If Gilchrist played as a specialist bat he would have averaged 60+ too. There honestly isn't much between them' date=' I'll pick Gilchrist purely as he could win a game in a session![/quote'] True
Posted
If Gilchrist played as a specialist bat he would have averaged 60+ too. There honestly isn't much between them' date=' I'll pick Gilchrist purely as he could win a game in a session![/quote'] 60+ is a big call considering he wouldn't be batting at 6, it's hard to predict though, on the other hand he often had to throw his wkt away going after quick runs, but then again he was always in a hurry no matter the situation, the dude would go after his granny if she bowled to him in the backyard Christmas test, he just couldn't help himself.
Posted

Always wondered what Gilchrist avg would have been had he played purely as batsman. Could have been one of the best Aus bats of all time. Was definitely worth him trying at no. 5 position than Lehman Symonds etc.

Posted
Always wondered what Gilchrist avg would have been had he played purely as batsman. Could have been one of the best Aus bats of all time.
Yep, and when he did bat in the top order he was outstanding. I remember him batting aat 3 against SL (I think) over there and making a ton. People think he was just a dasher but jeez he had a great technique.:hatsoff:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...