Kumar Sangakarra: Could have been a great batsman? Is he a legend(merged)

[Taurus]

Bear with me here, because his Test average of 49.49 is by no means that of a great. However, when you look at his Test record solely as a batsman, it reflects very well upon him. In 16 matches, where he has batted in 26 innings, he averages 75.29. Admittedly, this is too small a sample to describe him as a great with, but just think of what could have been.

His average against Australia as a batsman is 70 - his lowest against any team is 30.5 against Pakistan.

Sangakarra has yet to play against England, Bangladesh or India as a batsman alone.

[Easa]

Sangakarra is a quality player. Good defense, has all the shots, and is a fantastic keeper too. One of my favorite players to watch, as well.

[Amoeba]

Originally Posted by Easa Sangakarra is a quality player. Good defense, has all the shots, and is a fantastic keeper too. One of my favorite players to watch, as well.

Have to agree with you here. I think Sanga is already a great player. Probably the best Keeper Batsman in the World. Silky and very graceful both in front of and behind the stumps.

[Daoud]

Originally Posted by Amoeba Have to agree with you here. I think Sanga is already a great player. Probably the best Keeper Batsman in the World. Silky and very graceful both in front of and behind the stumps.

Yeah, I must say I have to agree with you.

He is easily Sri Lanka's best batsman and the only one who consistently performs away from home

[UJ]

As a keeper, he is underrated. Keeping to Murali on big turners is not an easy job. He has been a vital part of the SL top order batting for many years now.

[Amoeba]

Originally Posted by UJ As a keeper, he is underrated. Keeping to Murali on big turners is not an easy job. He has been a vital part of the SL top order batting for many years now.

He is underrated because he makes it look so easy. The best always do. One of the most comical things in cricket recently was when Boucher had to keep to Murali for the ROW team.

[Osman]

Originally Posted by Amoeba He is underrated because he makes it look so easy. The best always do. One of the most comical things in cricket recently was when Boucher had to keep to Murali for the ROW team.

But Gilchrist made it look easy too ... and he is not underrated at all. Infact if you look on the cricinfo greatest all rounders section you will find his name there as one of the 20 nominees ... phenomenal acheivement for a wicketkeeper to be included in that elite group btw.

[Amoeba]

Originally Posted by Osman But Gilchrist made it look easy too ... and he is not underrated at all. Infact if you look on the cricinfo greatest all rounders section you will find his name there as one of the 20 nominees ... phenomenal acheivement for a wicketkeeper to be included in that elite group btw.

But that is because he plays for one of the big 3 (England, Aus or India).
Playing for SL means that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves.
It is made harder for a keeper because a good keeper, like a good goalkeeper, or good referee / umpire, is one that you don't notice.

Btw his keeping isn't all that great (in the true sense of the word). However his batting performances (upto last year) have earned him recognition.

[The Godfather]

class player

[PlanetPakistan]

bump...playing as a specialist batsman and piling it on!

Great cricketer.

[tmac4real]

I personally don't think so. He JUST made his first century against Aus, prior to that an average of 25. Alot of his centuries have come against minnows.

He's a great player no doubt about it, but I think he needs more to be known as a legend.
Planet Pakistan, our moderator though thinks different. Wanted to see what ppl thought about Sangakarra.

[kablooee87]

Kumar Sangakarra is proof that if you are a thinking cricketer, you multiply your talents many times over. You just know this guy goes out and plays cricket with the right mindset.

By far my favorite cricketer.

The legend status comes after a prolonged period of consistently excellent performance. If he plays like he's been playing for a few more years, he'll be there.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by UJ As a keeper, he is underrated. Keeping to Murali on big turners is not an easy job. He has been a vital part of the SL top order batting for many years now.

The prodigious turn and variation of Murali, the new ball swing and reverse swing of Vaas, the pace and awkward action of Malinga.

Sanga is definitely a keeper par excellence and a great batsman too. I think he'd make any world side purely as a batsman or a keeper except Australia

[PlanetPakistan]

Tmac4fake,

What you aren't realizing is that he is a very fine keeper . The mere fact that his batting record is even comparable to top class batsmen makes him a cricketing legend.

[DHONI183]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Tmac4fake,What you aren't realizing is that he is a very fine keeper . The mere fact that his batting record is even comparable to top class batsmen makes him a cricketing legend.

Oye!!!! It´s "REAL" !!!!!!

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by Amoeba He is underrated because he makes it look so easy. The best always do. One of the most comical things in cricket recently was when Boucher had to keep to Murali for the ROW team.

I don't think Bouch loses sleep over this. He has the keeping records that Sanga will never ever get. Life's a beech, eh?

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Tmac4fake, What you aren't realizing is that he is a very fine keeper . The mere fact that his batting record is even comparable to top class batsmen makes him a cricketing legend.

I don't really get where I called him bad? I simply said he's not a legend. And as a mod I don't think you should resort to name-calling. Not a very good example on your part.

If you feel that he deserves to be compared with Yousuf, Inzi, Sachin, at this point his career, fine.

[DHONI183]

Originally Posted by tmac4real And as a mod I don't think you should resort to name-calling. Not a very good example on your part.

Dude, he was just joking, I´m sure. I know PP very well and he respects everyone, he just meant it jokingly.

Don´t take it seriously .........

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by DHONI183 Dude, he was just joking, I´m sure. I know PP very well and he respects everyone, he just meant it jokingly. Don´t take it seriously .........

Really well I'm trying to PM him to sort this out but his inbox message is full!!!! Seems to be quite the controversial mod.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real Really well I'm trying to PM him to sort this out but his inbox message is full!!!! Seems to be quite the controversial mod.

haha...yeah it will all be sorted out at the basketball court today....we will see how the real Tmac is!

ok now back to Sangakara..

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real I don't really get where I called him bad? I simply said he's not a legend. .

What would it take for a quality keeper like him to achieve with the bat to be called a legend?

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real I personally don't think so. He JUST made his first century against Aus, prior to that an average of 25. Alot of his centuries have come against minnows. He's a great player no doubt about it, but I think he needs more to be known as a legend. Planet Pakistan, our moderator though thinks different. Wanted to see what ppl thought about Sangakarra.

The only legend thing is that he has scored a few double centuries, that
have helped his average, including against the minnows Bangladesh, Zim and Pakistan!

So lets give him a round of applause.

[kablooee87]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan The only legend thing is that he has scored a few double centuries, that have helped his average, including against the minnows Bangladesh, Zim and Pakistan! So lets give him a round of applause.

Seriously man, you're trying too hard.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan The only legend thing is that he has scored a few double centuries, that have helped his average, including against the minnows Bangladesh, Zim and Pakistan! So lets give him a round of applause.

Even if you exclude his runs against BAN and ZIM he would still have an average of 48. That's very good for a pure batsman and excellent for a keeper batsman.

[The Godfather]

i think now he should concertrate on his batting and let someone else to the wicket keeper job cos then he can get even more better of a batter

[Oxy]

Great batsman.

Great keeper.

Great representative of cricket.

The most eloquent cricketer BAR NONE.

[Gonzo]

A great batsmen, though I'm not sure if he's a great wicketkeeper batsmen on the level of Gilchrist. Average falls to 42.85 when he keeps wicket.

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan I don't think Bouch loses sleep over this. He has the keeping records that Sanga will never ever get. Life's a beech, eh?

Can't be that hard when you're keeping to a whole lot of medium pace trundlers who all bowl quite similiarly?

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan The only legend thing is that he has scored a few double centuries, that have helped his average, including against the minnows Bangladesh, Zim and Pakistan! So lets give him a round of applause.

Remind me the opposition against which Mark Boucher's first ODI hundred was?

[Neighbourhood policewala]

Just watched some of the Aus / SL test where they showed his test match average at 54 overall. I think worthy of note is his conversion rate too, approximately 25 fifties and more than half in hundreds. Lets not make any doubt that Kumar is a world class keeper, thinking cricketer and fantastic batsman who has all the shots....Must admit his driving straight is a pleasure to watch as he is so punchy and has natural timing. To the doubters I must ask how many keepers do you see batting in the top 4 of a quality team. If he was Pakistani we would have him and not have to endure the ever inconsistent Kamran.

[Hooker]

top class, best keeper in the world and top ten bat in the world, potential to be great captain aswell still young will get better. That knock against oz was quality against a very good attack lets not forget.

[iZeeshan]

Pakistan should kill to get a character like Sangakarra. He is a gentleman, a terrific keeper, an amazing batsman, and a good captain as well.

[Indiafan]

Now you guys would understand why Sachin's so called losing knocks were celebrated so much by Indians. Most of the time it was the only saving grace for indian team with no one else contributing :roll:

[Cryin Out Loud]

He is best in class in more ways than one. Any country would be proud to have him.

[aussiecricketer]

Confused by the title of this thread. Hes still young. He will most likely go down as a legend. When Ponting retires he will be the premier batsmen.

He was given out from an absolutely terrible call today. Everyone appreciated his innings, all the aussies. It was a treat to watch. He never looked in trouble.

And then bang. Malinga can hit a long ball. This is so fun to watch today. I wish SL were here for 5 tests.

[Easa]

Originally Posted by Easa Sangakarra is a quality player. Good defense, has all the shots, and is a fantastic keeper too. One of my favorite players to watch, as well.

My sentiments remain the same, he's just a quality batsman who will continue to score runs against top class opposition.

As for his keeping, there should be no discussion on it. I don't think I've seen him make a mistake for a long, long time. He's possibly my favorite non-Pakistani player and has been for a long time.

[jackal786]

He is an impetus player. That is why he never had a consistent run. He hasn't had a great record against ozzies. Now he got it against them as well. Pakistan fans must be having fond memories of him ! Averaging 82 against pakistan !

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by zaf1986 Can't be that hard when you're keeping to a whole lot of medium pace trundlers who all bowl quite similiarly?

In his day, Bouch has faced more then the average "medium pacer".

That is why he has over 400 catches ... in 50 years time people will look at the records and see Bouch, not Sanga. Sanga can only be a batsmen.

[Momo]

Oxford Concise Dictionary

legend: an extremely famous or notorious person: a screen legend

Most cricketers are legends.

[volcyz]

LOL Boucher is not in the same class as Sangakkara, especially in batting.

[JustAnotherFan]

Originally Posted by volcyz LOL Boucher is not in the same class as Sangakkara, especially in batting.

In ODI batting I'd say he is above Sanga.

[zaf1986]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFan In his day, Bouch has faced more then the average "medium pacer". That is why he has over 400 catches ... in 50 years time people will look at the records and see Bouch, not Sanga. Sanga can only be a batsmen.

He's never kept to a high quality spinner (no the frog blender doesn't count)- while Sangakarra has kept to the greatest spinner of the day.

And in batting (if we're going on statistics)- Tests (55.73 vs 30.09) and ODIs (35.60 vs 28.18) - Sanga is head and shoulders above Boucher.
And the reason why he has 384 catches (not over 400 - check the stats next time) is because he's played about 40 more tests than Sanga.

[Taurus]

I'd have to say I'm more sceptical about my assessment now than before. Is it coincidence that Sangakarra has finally scored a hundred against Australia after the departures of Warne and McGrath?

I know it's harsh to judge on playing against two bowlers, but very few batsman around the world have been able to score consistently against those two, and they really were the acid test.

[Amjid Javed]

Sanga is a brilliant cricketer full stop, superb keeper and top notch batsmen. Hes great to watch in full flow and has performed pretty well against all nations. His inns off 192 last nite was simply sublime.

[DHONI183]

He may not be as dashing as Mahendra Singh Dhoni, he may not have the powers of Adam Gilchrist, he may not have as many fan as few others have, he is probably one of the best in terms of class. He will surely end up as a legend. I always liked him for his abilities to perform under-pressure, in all conditions and against any bowling attacks. Technique-wise he might be the best Sri Lankan batsman. His shot selection was a problem for earlier part of his career but has corrected that extremely well.

Kudos to Kumar ! Unlucky you were but move on, mate, you still have time to come for Innings´ where you will finish it off for Sri Lanka.

[DHONI183]

Originally Posted by tmac4real Really well I'm trying to PM him to sort this out but his inbox message is full!!!! Seems to be quite the controversial mod.

Nah nah!!! He is very calm and stays away from controversies, I can assure you of that.

[Saj]

He is one of my current favourite batsmen. I just love watching him bat.

The thing that I like most about him is that he keeps things very simple when he's batting. Nice high right elbow, minimal movement before the ball is bowled and a lovely straight bat showing the bowler the makers name.

Averages over 50 I believe.

[PlanetPakistan]

Kumar continues to march on

IMO he is as good a cricketers as i have ever seen(on par with the likes of wasim, Sachin, Lara, Warne etc)

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Kumar continues to march on IMO he is as good a cricketers as i have ever seen(on par with the likes of wasim, Sachin, Lara, Warne etc)

wow that's going quite far...

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real wow that's going quite far...

Easily the best batsman in the world today.

Overall one of the best keepers in the world.

Overall one of the biggest match winning batsman ever. Averages around 90 in games won.

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Easily the best batsman in the world today. Overall one of the best keepers in the world. Overall one of the biggest match winning batsman ever. Averages around 90 in games won.

and he is on par with someone like Wasim?

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real and he is on par with someone like Wasim?

as a cricketer yes.

[Indiafan]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Easily the best batsman in the world today. Overall one of the best keepers in the world. Overall one of the biggest match winning batsman ever. Averages around 90 in games won.

A lot of that has to do with the Murali factor, Murali is a match winner if he runs to defend. Sanga has a long long way to go, perform consistently for at least 6-7 more years to be in theclass of the players you mentioned.

[switchblade]

The title of the post is kinda preposterous. Kumar Sangakkara is already a great player. Whether he is a legend or not depends on whether he is able to maintain his current form over the next 3-4 years.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by Indiafan A lot of that has to do with the Murali factor, Murali is a match winner if he runs to defend. Sanga has a long long way to go, perform consistently for at least 6-7 more years to be in theclass of the players you mentioned.

Ponting has better bowlers on his team than Kumar yet he isn't up there.

6-7 years is too much, i think he performs well for 3 -4years(which he should) then he will be up there with the other legends of this era.

[squarecut]

Sangakkara finally scored a century against Australia when Warne and McGrath had retired ( as pointed out in this thread). He has big scores against opposition like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

But it must be said in his favour that he at least capitalised when the two Australian bowling legends ( and also Langer and Martyn) retired. When Sri Lanka toured Australia- it was a test series between Sri Lankan all time strongest team vs an Australian team missing four recently retired greats. Still, Sri Lankans were made to look like minnows in the test series.

In my book, a great player is one who performs consistently against the greatest opponents of his time. And in case of modern day cricket, Australia happens to be that team. When you are looking for greatness in a modern day batsman, find out how many runs and centuries a batsman has scored against Australia ( including in Australia).Sangakkara's name will be way behind in the list of such batsmen.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by squarecut Sangakkara finally scored a century against Australia when Warne and McGrath had retired ( as pointed out in this thread). He has big scores against opposition like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. But it must be said in his favour that he at least capitalised when the two Australian bowling legends ( and also Langer and Martyn) retired. When Sri Lanka toured Australia- it was a test series between Sri Lankan all time strongest team vs an Australian team missing four recently retired greats. Still, Sri Lankans were made to look like minnows in the test series. In my book, a great player is one who performs consistently against the greatest opponents of his time. And in case of modern day cricket, Australia happens to be that team. When you are looking for greatness in a modern day batsman, find out how many runs and centuries a batsman has scored agaionst Australia ( including in Australia).Sangakkara's name will be way behind in the list of such batsmen.

People like Ijaz Ahmed, Saleem Malik, VVS Laxman have hammered AUS yet none of the three can be called great batsmen.

[Foozee]

he's second to gilchrist, but no gilly has retired so sanga is the best keeper batsmen in the world...dhoni aint bad either

[switchblade]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan People like Ijaz Ahmed, Saleem Malik, VVS Laxman have hammered AUS yet none of the three can be called great batsmen.

Laxman is.. Sehwag, Yuvraj and even Dravid, Ganguly are over-rated IMHO.

[squarecut]

Laxman may not be great or a legend, but his batting against Australia has become the stuff of legends.

Scoring runs against the greatest bowling attack of the day should count for something. People who scored runs against Australia in last 10 years and those who scored runs against West Indies in 1970-80 were greater batsmen in my opinion than those who filled their boots against lesser opponents, but came up cropper against the best bowling attack of their days.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by squarecut Laxman may not be great or a legend, but his batting against Australia has become the stuff of legends. Scoring runs against the greatest bowling attack of the day should count for something. People who scored runs against Australia in last 10 years and those who scored runs against West Indies in 1970-80 were greater batsmen in my opinion than those who filled their boots against lesser opponents, but came up cropper against the best bowling attack of their days.

So you would rate Ijaz Ahmed higher than Inzamam?

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by switchblade Laxman is.. Sehwag, Yuvraj and even Dravid, Ganguly are over-rated IMHO.

Yeah i see where you are coming from, Laxman as a test player is on par with M Yousuf but i think neither Laxman nor Yousuf can be considered a great batsman. People like Dravid and Inzi barely qualify as 'greats'.

Other than Bradman there is no batsman who doesn't have holes in his record.

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Yeah i see where you are coming from, Laxman as a test player is on par with M Yousuf but i think neither Laxman nor Yousuf can be considered a great batsman. People like Dravid and Inzi barely qualify as 'greats'. Other than Bradman there is no batsman who doesn't have holes in his record.

it's hard to find holes in a record when you only played against England. Imagine Younis only playing against India, Waqar and Shoaib against NZ...

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real it's hard to find holes in a record when you only played against England. Imagine Younis only playing against India, Waqar and Shoaib against NZ...

a) He didn't just play against ENG.
b) Would Younis be able to average around 100 for 40 test matches against India? There is something called form which all other batsmen lost but Bradman didn't.

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan a) He didn't just play against ENG. b) Would Younis be able to average around 100 for 40 test matches against India? There is something called form which all other batsmen lost but Bradman didn't.

a. I know he didn't, but 70% of his matches were against one team
b. I'm not disputing that Bradman wasn't a legend or isn't the greatest of alltime, what I am saying is that you can't Bradman is an isolation with himself, you can't compare him to batsman today because no batsman plays that much of his career against one team.

[sgt.pepper]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan People like Ijaz Ahmed, Saleem Malik, VVS Laxman have hammered AUS yet none of the three can be called great batsmen.

Salim Malik has hammered australia? really? all of two centuries in 15 tests against them and and none in australia where he averages a paltry 38. Even ijaz ahmed, arguably the most successful pakistani bat against australia, has a barely respectable average of 41 against australia in australia.

This, my friend, is not what you call "hammering".

[sgt.pepper]

on to the topic, i must say, sanga is doing what sachin did throughout the 90's. i'd club him with sachin if he carries this form for the next 5 years.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by sgt.pepper Salim Malik has hammered australia? really? all of two centuries in 15 tests against them and and none in australia where he averages a paltry 38. Even ijaz ahmed, arguably the most successful pakistani bat against australia, has a barely respectable average of 41 against australia in australia. This, my friend, is not what you call "hammering".

Good point, i should have clarified that.

AUS didn't have a great attack in the mid to late 80s so if we are talking about the 'best' or one of the best then we must look at the AUS bowling attack of the 90s(and 00s) against whom Malik scored close to 750 runs at an average of 58. Ijaz on the other hand averaged 47 against the similar AUS bowling attack.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real a. I know he didn't, but 70% of his matches were against one team b. I'm not disputing that Bradman wasn't a legend or isn't the greatest of alltime, what I am saying is that you can't Bradman is an isolation with himself, you can't compare him to batsman today because no batsman plays that much of his career against one team.

Yes but the point about form is still there. It is almost impossible for batsman to not lose a bit of form even after 15-20 test matches but Bradman never even came close to losing form.

[Indiafan]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Yes but the point about form is still there. It is almost impossible for batsman to not lose a bit of form even after 15-20 test matches but Bradman never even came close to losing form.

I believe Salman Butt can achieve the same if he plays only against India


jk


About Sangakarra, there have been many batsmen who have achieved greatness for a few years. Most of them were compared with Sachin/Lara over the ages.

I remember Aravinda, Mark Waugh, Anwar, etc being compared after having greta years. Ponting is one of the mordern ones. But over a long period (10 yrs or more) their records averaged out.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by Indiafan I believe Salman Butt can achieve the same if he plays only against India jk.

Those 2 letters saved me from writing a 4 paragraph post on this issue.

Originally Posted by Indiafan About Sangakarra, there have been many batsmen who have achieved greatness for a few years. Most of them were compared with Sachin/Lara over the ages. I remember Aravinda, Mark Waugh, Anwar, etc being compared after having greta years. Ponting is one of the mordern ones. But over a long period (10 yrs or more) their records averaged out.

You are missing one point.
Aravinda, Mark Waugh, Anwar etc were all batsmen Kumar is not just a batsman he is(was) a fantastic keeper who also happens to be the best batsman in the world today. So as a player he has a very good chance to be on par with the ultimate greats like the Sachins and Laras.

[Indiafan]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan Those 2 letters saved me from writing a 4 paragraph post on this issue. You are missing one point. Aravinda, Mark Waugh, Anwar etc were all batsmen Kumar is not just a batsman he is(was) a fantastic keeper who also happens to be the best batsman in the world today. So as a player he has a very good chance to be on par with the ultimate greats like the Sachins and Laras.

You are right, I did miss the point as I was only discussing him as a pure batsman. As a player, with a few more consistent years, he is right there. But its to be seen how much his keeping is going to take a toll on his batting in the long run.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by Indiafan You are right, I did miss the point as I was only discussing him as a pure batsman. As a player, with a few more consistent years, he is right there. But its to be seen how much his keeping is going to take a toll on his batting in the long run.

Yeah this is where i feel some one like Kallis is also very underrated in fact even i have been guilty of severely underrating him in the past. IMO Kallis is as good a batsman as some one like Inzi and also gets crucial wickets for the team so he too should be given more credit.

[Easa]

What more can be said about him, then already hasn't been said in this thread. People said that he would eventually go into a rut, but that hasn't happened. People said he didn't win matches on his own but thats a myth as well, because according to mod bhai, he averages 90 in games won. On the field, off the field, everywhere he is the epitome of a quality person/cricketer.

Plus, he's actualy an attractivfe batsman to watch when on form. I think he's a great batsman, if he is A great is yet to be seen, but he certainly is a great player. Kudos to him. He carries Sri Lanka.

[tmac4real]

KC Is certainly a class player, however don't add that little "Not only is he a pure batsman, he's a keeper too!"

Because with the gloves he only averages 41. Without the gloves though, he is absolutely, positively INSANE. 90 average ever since he dropped the gloves! This will probably go down, but props to him.

Wanted to make that distinction though.

[PlanetPakistan]

Originally Posted by tmac4real KC Is certainly a class player, however don't add that little "Not only is he a pure batsman, he's a keeper too!" Because with the gloves he only averages 41. Without the gloves though, he is absolutely, positively INSANE. 90 average ever since he dropped the gloves! This will probably go down, but props to him. Wanted to make that distinction though.

That merely indicates that he would have averaged a lot higher than 56 had he always played as a pure batsman.

[tmac4real]

Originally Posted by PlanetPakistan That merely indicates that he would have averaged a lot higher than 56 had he always played as a pure batsman.

yeah because 24 matches automatically = whole career correct?