-
easyrider
-
-
Visitor
-
09 Jan 2014 12:03 #172357
by easyrider
You would expect a great batsman like Sangakkara, to take advantage of weaker oppositions but he has failed against Bangladesh away, 41!!!!!!
However what is the affect on his overall performance if you exclude both Bangladesh and Zimbabwe?
Marginal. Overall average drops by a mere 3.68 to 53 from 57!
If you set a benchmark for a dominant average to be 60 and still excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.
Then ,away from home, Kumar Sangakkara has dominated Pakistan New Zealand and Australia. He has been poor against India, South Africa, West Indies and England with averages from 37-31.
He has dominated all but England, New Zealand and Australia at home. Against the last 3 his average is between 39-30.
It is clear his nemesis is England but to dominate Australia in Australia is the sign of a great batsman.
Therefore if you exclude the minnows, the effect on his overall performance is negligible so his figures will stand up to that accusation.Yes he would have 7 less centuries.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
-
Mail
-
-
Visitor
-
09 Jan 2014 12:11 #172366
by Mail
Rev,
[color=rgb(26, 26, 26)]49.38----He needs to get it back to 50.[/color]
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
-
Posts: 9703
-
Thank you received: 1
-
-
09 Jan 2014 12:22 #172373
by Kwami
I disagree with the premise that Sangakarra is a subcontinent minnow bully .
Numbers alone cannot tell the whole story of this man's genius.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
-
Posts: 2427
-
Thank you received: 0
-
-
-
easyrider
-
-
Visitor
-
09 Jan 2014 16:11 - 09 Jan 2014 16:25 #172450
by easyrider
The Rev,
I have outlined reasonable assumptions for domination and excluding what you call minnows. Even then KS' numbers are still exemplary and that is the issue here so do not ask stupid questions!
His average has not changed significantly whilst excluding the minnows so your argument is undermined as you have unfairly represented this man's career. If you are to do this then do the comparison for the top ten batsmen of his era and exclude what you wish consistently and see what the results are.
However based on assumptions no they are not in Australian conditions. You can lower the assumptions if you wish but you did mention dominate, did you not? 50 is great but not domination.
Therefore a baseline at 60 was set for domination.
You need to start associating numbers with other mitigating factors for them to make sense consistently.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
-
Posts: 2427
-
Thank you received: 0
-
-
09 Jan 2014 16:23 #172455
by Rev Al
* Sangakkara has played only 5 tests in Australia and averaged 60.
* Scoring 1 hundred and 5 fifties in 5 tests at a strike rate of 51----that is NOT domination.
* By the way, 5 tests is not good enough to establish domination ?
* Shame on you.
* The reality is Sangakkara has played in 11 tests against Australia----he has scored 878 runs at an average of 43.90 with 1 hundred and 7 fifties.
* Those are very good numbers----not great.
Rev
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
-
easyrider
-
-
Visitor
-
09 Jan 2014 16:37 #172462
by easyrider
The Rev,
We were talking about away records were we not?
Judging someone over a longer sample makes more numerical averaging sense as it incorporates consistency.
However you base your arguments purely on figures so KS has superior figures to Lara, Richards and Sir Garry.
Fact or not? The Numbers do not lie!!!!
Within numbers are variables which we need to associate, weight and normalise in arriving at results on a consistent and level playing field basis.
Use the top ten off KS' era and take out Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and you will find some interesting results.
Ponting might be better off.
Be consistent in your argument.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
-
Posts: 96864
-
Thank you received: 45
-
-
09 Jan 2014 16:44 #172463
by ketchim
C'mon thats mediocre ....forget comparisons as to how other retired greats did !
43.9 is mediocre in any analysis.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
-
Posts: 2427
-
Thank you received: 0
-
-
09 Jan 2014 16:45 #172465
by Rev Al
Easrrider:
* In the lead post the Rev acknowledges that Kumar Sangakkara has put up great numbers.
* A player must also be judged the by entirety of his career not via bits and pieces.
* But I made the observation that there was a great disparity in Sanga's performance against subcontinent teams plus 2 minnows(WI/Zim)---he averages 72 against these teams----while averaging only 42 against Aus/SA/ENG/NZ.
* We can go in circles arguing away stats or stats in Australia.
* The fact is Sangakkara is a great batsman---he has put up great numbers overall----but when one takes a close look at his numbers---one sees his shortcomings
he has not to date averaged 50+ against SA/AUS/ENG/NZ.
Rev
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
-
easyrider
-
-
Visitor
-
09 Jan 2014 16:48 #172467
by easyrider
Ketchim,
44 is a combined record and by no means is that poor.
However we were discussing away records.
You know numbers do not tell the full story although I am a numbers man as well.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
-
Forum
-
West Indies Cricket Fans Forum
-
THE PITCH
-
KUMAR SANGAKKARA: A Subcontinent and Minnow Bully
Time to create page: 0.245 seconds