What's new

Hashim Amla vs Kumar Sangakkara : Who is the better Test player?

S

SLcric123

Tape Ball Regular
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Runs
354
Both avgs 61 since 2010 which is the highest for any batsmen.

And although Sanga has retired with 12k runs in 134 tests, Amla is yet to reach the landmark of 100 tests.
 
Sanga:
S3R4tlf.png


Amla:
SnE5gVN.png


Both are legends of game and have performed everywhere.

Although, Amla bats at a tough position being an opener. Absolutely loved his 311* in England.

Since we haven't had any decent opener since Saeed Anwar, I'd choose Amla.
 
WhenSultansBowled said:
Sanga:
S3R4tlf.png


Amla:
SnE5gVN.png


Both are legends of game and have performed everywhere.

Although, Amla bats at a tough position being an opener. Absolutely loved his 311* in England.

Since we haven't had any decent opener since Saeed Anwar, I'd choose Amla.
Click to expand...

Amla doesn't open in Tests. He bats at #3 like Sangakkara.
 
Sangakkara is an all-time great but I am not sure about Amla.
 
Against better bowling units, I will take Amla .
 
Premature comparison.

Amla before his slump which started with the 2015 WC, was brilliant in Tests and I would've prefer him over Sangakkara but unfortunately, he still hasn't fully regained his form yet and is still rather on and off. If he manages to reach his 2010-2014 level again and maintains it for another 3-4 years playing 40 more Tests, I will rate him higher.
 
Asian find it tough outside Asia and vice versa is true for non-Asian.

Amla in Asia averages 50+
Sanga outside Asia averages 44.


SA, Aus, NZ, Pakistan & Eng have relatively better bowling units. SL, India & WI bowlers are very good in home conditions but not that effective outside of their conform zones.

Amla averages 50+ against Eng, Aus, Pakistan & NZ.
Sanga averages 50+ only against Pakistan.




Now SL, WI and Indian bowlers are good only in home conditions. We can look into that as well.

Amla averages 47 vs India,WI and SL in their home.
Sanga averages 35 vs India & WI in their home.


Clearly, when it comes to performance against tough bowling units(Aus,SA,Pakistan,NZ,Eng) or bowling units becoming much better in their homes conditions(India,SL & WI) - Amla has performed better.
 
I think Amla still needs longevity to surpass Sanga as Sanga had like 10 200s which shows that he has a knack of making big scores.
 
Haroon786 said:
Amla before his slump which started with the 2015 WC, was brilliant in Tests
Click to expand...

Amla averaged 65+ in recent series against England.

As far as his "slump" is concerned, it's primarily based on his failure in recent Indian series and if I may ask which batsman actually succeeded in that series? Averages would say Rahane who was only a one test wonder in a dead rubber match.

Amla only played 3 other innings against WI/ BD in 2015 where he averaged 50+

So i am not so convinced about his perceived decline
 
Last edited:
Amla should surpass Sanga quite conveniently in tests till he calls it off or I guess I should rather say he already has done so more or less.

He has performed in all the conditions and against all types of bowling and has played lots of match winning/ saving knocks.

Sanga was a great player but certainly not so good against greatest attacks and doesn't have all-round performance like Amla
with his stats being highly inflated by minnow bashing.

Its fair to say Amla is better.
 
Sangakara is one of the best cricketer let alone test player of our era.

He is one of the worlds best batsman for me.
 
Chrish said:
Amla averaged 65+ in recent series against England.

As far as his "slump" is concerned, it's primarily based on his failure in recent Indian series and if I may ask which batsman actually succeeded in that series? Averages would say Rahane who was only a one test wonder in a dead rubber match.

Amla only played 3 other innings against WI/ BD in 2015 where he averaged 50+

So i am not so convinced about his perceived decline
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he failed mostly in the first 3 Tests vs England and that he made hay when the pressure was off in the last Test. Also apart from AB, there wasn't another batsman in the Indian series at a similar level to Amla, while the overall averages may be low, for someone like Amla he should've done much better than what he averaged in thar series.

I don't have the stats on me but the combined ODI/Test average for Amla from the WC onwards in 2015 should be well below par for what he has performed in the last few years.
 
Haroon786 said:
Pretty sure he failed mostly in the first 3 Tests vs England and that he made hay when the pressure was off in the last Test.
Click to expand...

Well he scored 201 in 2nd match so..

He should have done better in India but I personally don't consider that series as gold standard for judging considering even majority of Indian players failed there.

This thread is about test only and I don't see any particular decline or slump as you call it in that arena especially considering the most recent series
 
Buffet said:
Asian find it tough outside Asia and vice versa is true for non-Asian.

Amla in Asia averages 50+
Sanga outside Asia averages 44.


SA, Aus, NZ, Pakistan & Eng have relatively better bowling units. SL, India & WI bowlers are very good in home conditions but not that effective outside of their conform zones.

Amla averages 50+ against Eng, Aus, Pakistan & NZ.
Sanga averages 50+ only against Pakistan.




Now SL, WI and Indian bowlers are good only in home conditions. We can look into that as well.

Amla averages 47 vs India,WI and SL in their home.
Sanga averages 35 vs India & WI in their home.


Clearly, when it comes to performance against tough bowling units(Aus,SA,Pakistan,NZ,Eng) or bowling units becoming much better in their homes conditions(India,SL & WI) - Amla has performed better.
Click to expand...

There you go.Thank You for doing this for me.
 
This is a real tough one for me, hard to separate them. Going for Amla on gut feel and the fact he has played series defining innings in India, Australia and England.
 
I’ll take Sanga without the gloves any day of the week. It’s always the same people knowingly posting distorted numbers. He kept wickets for close to 50 Tests and batted up the order so his overall numbers while still very good have taken a hit. As just a batsman his numbers are right up there among the very best.


Link

4zz1qv.png



Anyway Sanga pretty much carried the brittle SL line-up batting at 3 for over a decade, especially away from home. Let’s wait and see how Amla fares with a not so strong SA batting line-up.
 
Its the same people coming out to defend Sanga by trying to manipulate his stats.By removing 50 odd tests from the start of his career the remove the formative years of him,the toughest years for any player when he is settling in the international arena.It also removes the transition era of early 2000s when conditions moved from bowling friendly 90s to batting friendly 2000s.

All this just to hype up Sanga,someone who avgd less than 40 in 3 of the seven top test nations.Someone who never completed a series in Australia in 15 years,for strange reasons.
 
sanga definitely the better test player. a batting comparison is a lot closer tho
 
cricketjoshila said:
Its the same people coming out to defend Sanga by trying to manipulate his stats.By removing 50 odd tests from the start of his career the remove the formative years of him,the toughest years for any player when he is settling in the international arena.It also removes the transition era of early 2000s when conditions moved from bowling friendly 90s to batting friendly 2000s.

All this just to hype up Sanga,someone who avgd less than 40 in 3 of the seven top test nations.Someone who never completed a series in Australia in 15 years,for strange reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s why even in his early days (2000-2004) when he was playing as a batsman alone he averaged close to 70 overall and around 60 against the top seven eh? Pretty much identical to his career averages as a specialist bat btw.

Link Link

Link Link

Since you seem kinda clueless, for a Test keeper averaging 40+ is a great achievement. Apart from Sanga only 4 other long-standing Test keepers have averaged over 40 in Test cricket history. And Sanga unlike the rest batted in the top order as well.

Link

Anyways people who know what they are talking about know what's what. So I'll just leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
cricketjoshila said:
Its the same people coming out to defend Sanga by trying to manipulate his stats.By removing 50 odd tests from the start of his career the remove the formative years of him,the toughest years for any player when he is settling in the international arena.It also removes the transition era of early 2000s when conditions moved from bowling friendly 90s to batting friendly 2000s.

All this just to hype up Sanga,someone who avgd less than 40 in 3 of the seven top test nations.Someone who never completed a series in Australia in 15 years,for strange reasons.
Click to expand...
These are the same people who ONLY consider Sanga's first 50 test matches when assessing him as a keeper and say Dhoni is a better keeper batsman or Gilly is a better keeper batsman. If the same logic applied for the Sanga the keeper batsman, he would have easily surpassed Gilly's average, hence become the best keeper batsman. Insecurity.
 
Amla is better. He does it better it against better teams.
He had massive series in India, Australia and England which you cannot say for Sanga. Amla even played a heck of a knock to save a test in SL to win the series.
 
Sanga is better. He is one of the best test players ever averages over 57. Plus he was a joy to watch when batting one of my favorite players.
 
Buffet said:
Asian find it tough outside Asia and vice versa is true for non-Asian.

Amla in Asia averages 50+
Sanga outside Asia averages 44.


SA, Aus, NZ, Pakistan & Eng have relatively better bowling units. SL, India & WI bowlers are very good in home conditions but not that effective outside of their conform zones.

Amla averages 50+ against Eng, Aus, Pakistan & NZ.
Sanga averages 50+ only against Pakistan.




Now SL, WI and Indian bowlers are good only in home conditions. We can look into that as well.

Amla averages 47 vs India,WI and SL in their home.
Sanga averages 35 vs India & WI in their home.


Clearly, when it comes to performance against tough bowling units(Aus,SA,Pakistan,NZ,Eng) or bowling units becoming much better in their homes conditions(India,SL & WI) - Amla has performed better.
Click to expand...

Now :amla gets my vote, [MENTION=138379]#GreenRoars[/MENTION] ek poll ho jaye bhai?
 
Haroon786 said:
Pretty sure he failed mostly in the first 3 Tests vs England and that he made hay when the pressure was off in the last Test. Also apart from AB, there wasn't another batsman in the Indian series at a similar level to Amla, while the overall averages may be low, for someone like Amla he should've done much better than what he averaged in thar series.

I don't have the stats on me but the combined ODI/Test average for Amla from the WC onwards in 2015 should be well below par for what he has performed in the last few years.
Click to expand...

Combined Test ODI average, bhai Kohli ke fan ho kya? Aise combine nahi hota hai, else even :srt will average less than Kohli.
 
Chrish said:
Well he scored 201 in 2nd match so..

He should have done better in India but I personally don't consider that series as gold standard for judging considering even majority of Indian players failed there.

This thread is about test only and I don't see any particular decline or slump as you call it in that arena especially considering the most recent series
Click to expand...

Think he still failed mostly in the 7 matches from the 1st Indian to the 3rd English Test.

Don't rate any of the Indian players anywhere near Amla in Tests.
 
Adijazz1706 said:
Combined Test ODI average, bhai Kohli ke fan ho kya? Aise combine nahi hota hai, else even :srt will average less than Kohli.
Click to expand...

Read what I've said - his combined output for both formats for Amla from the WC onwards should be lower in 2015 for Amla than it has been in previous years, indicating that he has struggled.
 
SL_Fan said:
Yeah that’s why even in his early days (2000-2004) when he was playing as a batsman alone he averaged close to 70 overall and around 60 against the top seven eh? Pretty much identical to his career averages as a specialist bat btw.

Link Link

Link Link
Click to expand...

Yes lets pick out 12-13 matches out of 50 odd and make it a sample.Try again.

Since you seem kinda clueless, for a Test keeper averaging 40+ is a great achievement. Apart from Sanga only 4 other long-standing Test keepers have averaged over 40 in Test cricket history. And Sanga unlike the rest batted in the top order as well.

Link
Click to expand...

Is this Sanga the keeper vs Amla the non keeper?

And we know who is being clueless here,removing 50 matches,picking out 12-13 matches as samples.
Anyways people who know what they are talking about know what's what. So I'll just leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Yes so your stat manipulation wont work.You have tried it many many times in other threads.
 
One of them is retired and the other is still somewhere near the peak of his career, in this format, so a few assumptions will have to be made.

I have huge respect for Sanga. No batsman from the last decade or so has owned the Pakistani attack like he has, in my opinion

Assuming that Amla doesn't have a really steep decline and continues to perform at a decent level until the end of his career, he will be rated higher than Sangakkara.

Amla has a much more balanced record than Sanga, has played more iconic innings all over the world and by virtue of playing his home matches in South Africa, at first drop no less, he gets extra points when compared to a batsman from the subcontinent.
 
Bilal7 said:
One of them is retired and the other is still somewhere near the peak of his career, in this format, so a few assumptions will have to be made.

I have huge respect for Sanga. No batsman from the last decade or so has owned the Pakistani attack like he has, in my opinion

Assuming that Amla doesn't have a really steep decline and continues to perform at a decent level until the end of his career, he will be rated higher than Sangakkara.

Amla has a much more balanced record than Sanga, has played more iconic innings all over the world and by virtue of playing his home matches in South Africa, at first drop no less, he gets extra points when compared to a batsman from the subcontinent.
Click to expand...

No he dosent
 
Bilal7 said:
What a strange comment. I rate batsmen from the subcontinent lower than those from England and South Africa, all other things being equal.
Click to expand...

Thats the stupidest thing I have ever heard .
No arguments with you Sir .
 
Bilal7 said:
What a strange comment. I rate batsmen from the subcontinent lower than those from England and South Africa, all other things being equal.
Click to expand...

Not really. The techniques of batsmen will get molded based on the place where they have been brought up playing.

Asian batsmen will be predominantly frontfoot players and better players of spin. While Australian and South African batsmen will be backfoot players and will be very strong square of the wicket and against pace. That is due to the adaptation in the techniques of batsmen as they grow up playing in the unique conditions of their respective countries. Subcontinent fans have this weird inferiority complex of downplaying the achievements of their batsmen because playing pace is considered superior to playing spin according to them.
 
Buffet said:
Asian find it tough outside Asia and vice versa is true for non-Asian.

Amla in Asia averages 50+
Sanga outside Asia averages 44.


SA, Aus, NZ, Pakistan & Eng have relatively better bowling units. SL, India & WI bowlers are very good in home conditions but not that effective outside of their conform zones.

Amla averages 50+ against Eng, Aus, Pakistan & NZ.
Sanga averages 50+ only against Pakistan.




Now SL, WI and Indian bowlers are good only in home conditions. We can look into that as well.

Amla averages 47 vs India,WI and SL in their home.
Sanga averages 35 vs India & WI in their home.


Clearly, when it comes to performance against tough bowling units(Aus,SA,Pakistan,NZ,Eng) or bowling units becoming much better in their homes conditions(India,SL & WI) - Amla has performed better.
Click to expand...

If you're not biased against Amla or South Africa (like some posters here are), then on pure cricketing terms and batting skill, you'd obviously choose Amla.

Sangakkara is good nonetheless, very good - but Amla is ATG-level specially in Tests. He has no weakness, has performed against every type of bowling in every country, every condition.

All this with a good sample size, too. He's perfection if you'd like to call it.

You need to set aside your personal issues with Amla or his looks, [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
 
street cricketer said:
Not really. The techniques of batsmen will get molded based on the place where they have been brought up playing.
Click to expand...

Forget all that.

Amla is a beast in every country, against every bowling, in every condition. You can't find any weakness against him, be it batting in Asia or in Australi, England or South Africa.

He's one of those anomalies in this era of batting where mostly people are able to perform dominantly in their familiar conditions.

Amla is the opposite. ATG stuff.
 
Hawkeye said:
Forget all that.

Amla is a beast in every country, against every bowling, in every condition. You can't find any weakness against him, be it batting in Asia or in Australi, England or South Africa.

He's one of those anomalies in this era of batting where mostly people are able to perform dominantly in their familiar conditions.

Amla is the opposite. ATG stuff.
Click to expand...

I don't deny any of that. Amla is a champion Test batsman and I've always maintained that. Just not agreeing with Bilal's argument there that non-sc batsmen are inherently superior to Asian batsmen.

Btw Amla is a bit suspect against the short ball.
 
I would go with Sangakkara. While Amla did it against better attacks, Sanga scored a lot of runs singlehandedly for his side. Also, keep in mind he did a good portion of it while keeping as well. Also Sanga did average better than Amla, hope that help my case.

Amla as a ODI batsman is above Sanga though Sanga in his latter years was a different beast altogether. Also, Sanga was a big match player. Wonderful record in ICC tournaments.
 
Haroon786 said:
Think he still failed mostly in the 7 matches from the 1st Indian to the 3rd English Test.
.
Click to expand...

DUDE how can anyone fail after scoring a double? LOL

This ain't about the original topic anymore
 
SLcric123 said:
Both avgs 61 since 2010 which is the highest for any batsmen.

And although Sanga has retired with 12k runs in 134 tests, Amla is yet to reach the landmark of 100 tests.
Click to expand...

If a comparison seems necessary, maybe it's best to wait where Amla ends up.

I deeply admire both batsmen, and have seen some terrific innings by both.

Other than a number of innings by Lara, I think Sanga's 192 in Hobart is the best innings I've ever seen. And I can easily think some exceptional knocks by Ponting, Dravid, Sehwag, Inzi, and Gilchrist.

Amla could end up with better or the same averages, and could play some stunning innings in what remains of his career.

And I hope he can match Sanga's hobart knock.

But as it stands, personally I can't say I've ever seen anyone other than Lara just single handedly take the best team in the world apart.

And it wasn't just Koertzen shocker to give him out but there were a couple of close decisions that really could've been one of the greatest victories by an Asian team in Australia.
 
Executioner said:
Also Sanga did average better than Amla, hope that help my case.
Click to expand...

Only 3 players in history of word cricket have 1+ runs against BD. All 3 are SLcan with Sanga topping the chart . Not everyone gets to play BD consistently and I am surprised that you brought up average argument despite being from BD.

It's not that Sanga has a bad average if you don't count BD. He may still be 1-2 run higher, but difference of 5-6 runs in average over many other batsmen for Sanga is mainly due to playing frequently against BD. Higher average is not a strong argument in favor of Sanga. I will say carrying SL batting , specially outside SL , was his main strength. Also making big scores when he was set. So he had many things going for him.

Anyway, one batsman has retired and one is still playing.
 
Hawkeye said:
If you're not biased against Amla or South Africa (like some posters here are), then on pure cricketing terms and batting skill, you'd obviously choose Amla.

Sangakkara is good nonetheless, very good - but Amla is ATG-level specially in Tests. He has no weakness, has performed against every type of bowling in every country, every condition.

All this with a good sample size, too. He's perfection if you'd like to call it.

You need to set aside your personal issues with Amla or his looks, [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
Click to expand...

Sangakkara had a much weaker bowling attack and inferior support compared to Amla.

Amla is a great Test batsman but Sangakkara is the ultimate Test batsman. Only Bradman has scored more double-hundreds than him.

Without question, comfortably the best Test batsman of this millennium.
 
Mamoon said:
Sangakkara had a much weaker bowling attack and inferior support compared to Amla.

Amla is a great Test batsman but Sangakkara is the ultimate Test batsman. Only Bradman has scored more double-hundreds than him.

Without question, comfortably the best Test batsman of this millennium.
Click to expand...

You aren't expected to be objective regarding Amla, and for good reason :amla :moali :tahir
 
Lefthanded said:
If a comparison seems necessary, maybe it's best to wait where Amla ends up.

I deeply admire both batsmen, and have seen some terrific innings by both.

Other than a number of innings by Lara, I think Sanga's 192 in Hobart is the best innings I've ever seen. And I can easily think some exceptional knocks by Ponting, Dravid, Sehwag, Inzi, and Gilchrist.

Amla could end up with better or the same averages, and could play some stunning innings in what remains of his career.

And I hope he can match Sanga's hobart knock.

But as it stands, personally I can't say I've ever seen anyone other than Lara just single handedly take the best team in the world apart.

And it wasn't just Koertzen shocker to give him out but there were a couple of close decisions that really could've been one of the greatest victories by an Asian team in Australia.
Click to expand...

Check out his 250-odd in India or his 2 100s in a Test on the same tour. Or his 196 vs Aus in Aus with the 100 coming at ~120 SR or his 311 vs Eng in Eng.
 
In Test probably a tie (or may be Amla marginally), but in other formats Sanga.

Sanga's stats are a bit mis leading because he batted at No. 3 & kept for better balance of his team. Sanga as non WK was a far better player than Sanga as WK.

Sanga as a pure batsman was probably a better player statically & definitely aesthetically. Both players played in similar time, so if someone can put respective stats against PAK, IND, WI, AUS, NZ & ENG - home & away; we can check the numbers again. Also, the numbers for Sanga as pure batsman.
 
street cricketer said:
Not really. The techniques of batsmen will get molded based on the place where they have been brought up playing.

Asian batsmen will be predominantly frontfoot players and better players of spin. While Australian and South African batsmen will be backfoot players and will be very strong square of the wicket and against pace. That is due to the adaptation in the techniques of batsmen as they grow up playing in the unique conditions of their respective countries. Subcontinent fans have this weird inferiority complex of downplaying the achievements of their batsmen because playing pace is considered superior to playing spin according to them.
Click to expand...

Pitches in Sri Lanka are easier to bat on than pitches in South Africa. Check the overall batting averages in each country as well as the number of 500+ scores.
 
Last edited:
Adijazz1706 said:
Check out his 250-odd in India or his 2 100s in a Test on the same tour. Or his 196 vs Aus in Aus with the 100 coming at ~120 SR or his 311 vs Eng in Eng.
Click to expand...


I saw all of those except for one of those 100s in the India test, and I remember his 311 the best of those.

I do think, it's left-hander preference but after Dravid, Amla is easily my second favourite right-handed batsmen from the last 20 years.

And thanks for reminding me, I'll watch them on Youtube.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Yes lets pick out 12-13 matches out of 50 odd and make it a sample.Try again.
Click to expand...

Here you are talking about sample size yet still go on about 40 average nonsense which is what a massive 1% of runs out of a 12.5k run Test career? Oh the irony!

The whole point of a statistical sample is to make inferences about a population. Since you didn’t get it the first time around here I’ll put it in simple terms for you. Those numbers from his early years without the gloves actually matches up very well with his career numbers as a pure bat. So in other words all this small sample size stuff holds no water whatsoever. In fact the average breakdowns are pretty much identical.

Overall without the gloves - 1.4k runs @ 68 first few years (2000-2004) vs 9.3k career runs @ 67
Link Link

Against top seven without the gloves - 1k runs @ 59 first few years (2000-2004) vs 7.4k career runs @ 60
Link Link

Also during the same period (2000-2004) as a wk/bat:

2k runs @ 42 overall (vs 1.4k runs @ 68 when not keeping) Link

1.7k runs @ just under 40 against top seven (vs 1k runs @ 59 when not keeping) Link

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that even during his early years he was a totally different beast with the bat when he didn’t have to keep wickets as well. Hardly a surprise either it’s a massive workload to keep and bat in the top order.


Is this Sanga the keeper vs Amla the non keeper?

And we know who is being clueless here,removing 50 matches,picking out 12-13 matches as samples.
Click to expand...

You tell me. I’m definitely comparing apples with apples here I can say that much. You and a few others tho clearly not.


Yes so your stat manipulation wont work.You have tried it many many times in other threads.
Click to expand...

If you didn’t know especially in Tests keepers are generally considered as all-rounders. The only one knowingly posting misleading figures here is Buffet you know the guy who you replied to with “thanks for doing this for me” few posts back lol. For a supposed South African I wonder why he’s there in pretty much every Sanga and Sachin thread manipulating stats. Too funny!
 
SL_Fan said:
Here you are talking about sample size yet still go on about 40 average nonsense which is what a massive 1% of runs out of a 12.5k run Test career? Oh the irony!

The whole point of a statistical sample is to make inferences about a population. Since you didn’t get it the first time around here I’ll put it in simple terms for you. Those numbers from his early years without the gloves actually matches up very well with his career numbers as a pure bat. So in other words all this small sample size stuff holds no water whatsoever. In fact the average breakdowns are pretty much identical.

Overall without the gloves - 1.4k runs @ 68 first few years (2000-2004) vs 9.3k career runs @ 67
Link Link

Against top seven without the gloves - 1k runs @ 59 first few years (2000-2004) vs 7.4k career runs @ 60
Link Link

Also during the same period (2000-2004) as a wk/bat:

2k runs @ 42 overall (vs 1.4k runs @ 68 when not keeping) Link

1.7k runs @ just under 40 against top seven (vs 1k runs @ 59 when not keeping) Link

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that even during his early years he was a totally different beast with the bat when he didn’t have to keep wickets as well. Hardly a surprise either it’s a massive workload to keep and bat in the top order.




You tell me. I’m definitely comparing apples with apples here I can say that much. You and a few others tho clearly not.




If you didn’t know especially in Tests keepers are generally considered as all-rounders. The only one knowingly posting misleading figures here is Buffet you know the guy who you replied to with “thanks for doing this for me” few posts back lol. For a supposed South African I wonder why he’s there in pretty much every Sanga and Sachin thread manipulating stats. Too funny!
Click to expand...

Just for my interest, can you post the same data for 2004 on wards period till Sanga retired? Amla debuted in mid of 2004, so it would be fair comparison. As said, I put Amla may be 1st name of the two in a single line, but not sure now without looking at the data.

Only thing that first striked my mind was his 319 against us & 287 against Zimboks, so I didn't analyze the data much. Take out encounters (SRL-SAF matches), take out minnows (BD, ZIM) - still there should be enough sample (at least 50 Tests) to analyze.

Sanga as a pure batsman actually has better stats than any Asian batsman by some margin, that including/excluding minnows for all (so YK's both double against us & Zimboks are out as well).
 
MMHS said:
Just for my interest, can you post the same data for 2004 on wards period till Sanga retired? Amla debuted in mid of 2004, so it would be fair comparison. As said, I put Amla may be 1st name of the two in a single line, but not sure now without looking at the data.

Only thing that first striked my mind was his 319 against us & 287 against Zimboks, so I didn't analyze the data much. Take out encounters (SRL-SAF matches), take out minnows (BD, ZIM) - still there should be enough sample (at least 50 Tests) to analyze.

Sanga as a pure batsman actually has better stats than any Asian batsman by some margin, that including/excluding minnows for all (so YK's both double against us & Zimboks are out as well).
Click to expand...

Sure chief. Amla made his Test debut around Dec 2004 btw.

Link

7.3k runs @ 56 overall vs top seven - 900 runs @ 40 when keeping and 6.4k runs @ 60 as a batsman alone
 
Lefthanded said:
If a comparison seems necessary, maybe it's best to wait where Amla ends up.

I deeply admire both batsmen, and have seen some terrific innings by both.

Other than a number of innings by Lara, I think Sanga's 192 in Hobart is the best innings I've ever seen. And I can easily think some exceptional knocks by Ponting, Dravid, Sehwag, Inzi, and Gilchrist.

Amla could end up with better or the same averages, and could play some stunning innings in what remains of his career.

And I hope he can match Sanga's hobart knock.

But as it stands, personally I can't say I've ever seen anyone other than Lara just single handedly take the best team in the world apart.

And it wasn't just Koertzen shocker to give him out but there were a couple of close decisions that really could've been one of the greatest victories by an Asian team in Australia.
Click to expand...

That Sanga knock was no where near the Amla 196 he got the last time around in Australia. SL already lost the match and Sanga threw his bat around just like Astle did against England in early 00s. Amla's innings in the 3rd innings was more meaningful and was stunning. Pinting was left speechess and he described that as the best innings played against them.
 
I think the real test for Amla starts now. No more Smith and Kallis around him at the top to share the load. Sanga was pretty much an opening bat for SL. The average opening stand for SL during his time was in the low 30s and around half the time came in with less than 20 on the board Link. Add to that Mahela at four wasn’t much help away either. So let’s see how Amla copes with a dodgy top order only time will tell.
 
SL_Fan said:
I think the real test for Amla starts now. No more Smith and Kallis around him at the top to share the load. Sanga was pretty much an opening bat for SL. The average opening stand for SL during his time was in the low 30s and around half the time came in with less than 20 on the board Link. Add to that Mahela at four wasn’t much help away either. So let’s see how Amla copes with a dodgy top order only time will tell.
Click to expand...

You do know the opener for SA was Petersen who isn't too good. I remember Mahela supporting Sangakarra like Smith and Kallis supported Amla. Or do you think Mahela isn't good either?
 
Amla for me. Sanga's average in Ind/SA/Eng are just pathetic, he inflated his career stats by minnow bashing teams like Pakistan and Bangla. But I have yo say that he has been really good at the end of his career.
 
Adijazz1706 said:
You do know the opener for SA was Petersen who isn't too good. I remember Mahela supporting Sangakarra like Smith and Kallis supported Amla. Or do you think Mahela isn't good either?
Click to expand...

Not sure how to find out the average for opening stands etc but during Sanga’s time SL openers averaged around 34 overall against top seven teams (home 34 and away bit over 33). Numbers 4 and 5 on the other hand averaged a bit over 42 overall (home just under 50 and away 35). As for Mahela he was brilliant in SL but poor away averaged in the mid 30s.

Overall openers Link

Home Link

Away Link

Numbers 4-5 overall Link

Home Link

Away Link

In comparison during Amla’s time SA openers averaged a bit over 37 overall against top seven teams (home 32 and away 43). Numbers 4-5 on the other hand averaged 50 overall (home around 51 and away around 49).

Overall openers Link

Home Link

Away Link

Numbers 4-5 overall Link

Home Link

Away Link
 
So in general Amla has had great support from those around him. Smith didn’t do too well in SA so Amla would have had to pick up some of the slack there but he still had plenty of support at home from guys like Kallis and AB at 4 and 5. So all in all pretty much everyone was doing their bit both at home and away.

On the whole Sanga however only had solid support at home from guys like Mahela and Samaraweera at 4 and 5. Apart from that not a lot of support from those around him. In general the openers didn’t do too well at home or away and numbers 4 and 5 didn’t help much outside SL.
 
Last edited:
Sangakkara hands down in all formats. No second thoughts here.

This guy was one of the most consistent batsmen ever. Rarely saw him not performing.
 
Amla isn't good enough to be compared with Sanga. There should be a Sangakara vs Sachin thread.

Sanga wins this hands down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

atreus
  • Poll Poll
Ricky Ponting vs Hashim Amla – Who was the superior Test batter?
Replies
39
Views
2K
atreus
atreus
Buffet
Joe Root versus Hashim Amla in the Test format
2
Replies
158
Views
8K
atreus
atreus
Buffet
Kumar Sangakkara versus Virat Kohli in the Test format
2 3
Replies
186
Views
9K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
T
Imran Khan vs Curtly Ambrose vs Dale Steyn vs Wasim Akram – Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
20
Views
2K
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
MenInG
Beyond the Boundary: Pakistan vs South Africa – Can the Spin to Win formula defeat the World Test Champions?
Replies
11
Views
301
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Back
Top