Kumar Sangakkara versus Virat Kohli in the Test format

[Buffet]

This threas may look one sided due to,

Sanga career avg: 57
Kohli career avg: 48

That's what I see most posters quickly jumps to when comparing both. Such a huge gap. How can you even compare them, right?

I have never rated Sanga as high as most posters in PP. I am simply going to present why I don't rate Sanga that high to start with against Kohli despite career avg being 9 runs higher. I find comparing career average very lazy way to comapre players.

Kohli has played 70% of his game against SENA and Sanga has played 46% of his games against SENA.

Sanga career avg home and away against SENA: 44
Sanga also played 15 of his tests against club level BD and Zim in his era.

I will let you guess what happens to Sanga career avg if you had him play 70% of career agasint SENA and not give me 15% of career against club lev el BD/Zim of his time. Hint, it drops to at the same level as Kohli.


Kohli has only played against SENA + SL + WI. Yes, he has absolutely dominated Pakistan in limited overs, but he did not get oppurtunity to play test against Pakistan.

Career record of Kohli and Sanga against SENA+SL+Ind+WI




If anyone thinks that Sanga somehow faced a lot more difficult bowling compared to Kohli when facing SENA/Ind/WI,

Sanga and Jayawardene played at the same time and in the same team.

Jayawardene record against SENA/Ind/WI,




So entire fame of Sanga is scoring runs against Pak which Kohli did not get to play.

Sanga is clearly an inferior player than Kohli when you take Aus, SA, NZ, Eng, WI, Ind, SL. Kohli did not play Paksitan. We don't have to see SENA tons or big series in SAENA etc etc, Kohli will blow Sanga away in that. We can simply see home and away combined for oppositions both played.

After reading this how many of you still think that Sanga is far ahead of Kohli in the test format due to career avearge of Sanga being 57 and Kohli averages only 48? Keep in mind that Jayawardene played with Sanga in the same team and he averaged 50 plus against the same oppositions so quality of opposition can't be drastically hard for Sanga when comapred to Kohli. I will not get into quality of Pakistan here, but Kohli record in ODI suggest that he would have done more than fine against Pakistan. That's your entire non-minnows of test cricket.

I always felt that average without any context is meaningless. Some one averaging 60 is not necessarity better than some one averaging 50. Lots of poster are quick to say Sanga was ATG, but Kohli is very ordinary in test and had just couple of good years. I saw both players entire career and I did not feel the same way. Data simply shows the same thing.

Discuss!

Happy to hear any criticism. I will appreciate if posters who have nothing to add to discussion don't comment and we keep this thread on topic. Usual suspects normally come and derail the threads.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Do you think removal of tests as WK makes a fairer comparison of Sanga and Kohli? ( PS quickly applied filters on statsguru if incorrect will change it)

 

[atreus]

Oh this one is easy

Prime — Kohli

Overall career — Sangakkara

2018 Kohli is a better batter than Sangakkara ever was, England and South Africa prove that, he was Viv-esque in that year but outside that he either matched Sangakkara's output (2016-17 and 2019), was not consistent enough (2011-2015) or was just terrible (2020-2024)

 

[Ab Fan]

I already explained this in another forum where Sanga was compared with Kohli and Root was also included in this comparison.

Career stats can often be misleading. If someone tours Australia twice in his entire career then comparing him with another guy who toured Australia five times in his entire career becomes hard, especially if we are only looking at averages.

Sanga has 1 ton in Aus and it is a memorable one but he failed vs McGrath and Warne. He did well in 2007 vs weak bowling attacks. But then Kallis and Dravid have also failed vs McGrath and Warne?

Kohli did incredibly well on flat pitches in 2015 vs Starc and Hazelwood but was also good enough in other tours of Australia.

In Australia and South Africa, Kohli was quite comfortably better while Sanga was better in England and NZ. Sanga didn’t do well in India but Kohli did well in Sri Lanka. Kohli didn’t play vs Pakistan while Sanga was superb in Pakistan.

All in all, away from home there is not much to choose.

At home, Sanga was beast on flat decks but so was Kohli. There is really not much to choose between them in Test cricket.

Posters bring wicket keeping into discussion but wicket keeping on flat decks is not a big downgrade from being a specialist batsman. Wicket keeping is easy on flat pitches and batting is also easy on flat pitches and Sanga’s stats are inflated due to bashing Pakistan and Windies at home-like conditions on flat decks.

 

[Buffet]

Do you think removal of tests as WK makes a fairer comparison of Sanga and Kohli? ( PS quickly applied filters on statsguru if incorrect will change it)

One one hand , batting while keeping is hard but on other hand we normally take entire career of batsman if we are comparing batsmen. I am not sure if it makes a fairer comaparison. Sanga improved as a batsman so we shouldn't be taking only that phase.

Also, I do admit that it's not easy to keep and bat. But I will never say that, look Pant has the same number of away tons in Aus, SA, Eng and Ind as Root. Both average the same in away games in those places. So Pant is just another level to Root in those away venue due to getting brownie points of being a keeper. As far as I am concerned, thier output in those away games are in same range. Pant does not get to pull Keeper card when compring batting record.

 

[Varun]

Sangakkara by a country mile.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Sangakkara by a country mile.

Like Sarfaraz Ahmed, I will say same answer lol

 

[Buffet]

Oh this one is easy

Prime — Kohli

Overall career — Sangakkara

Prime Kohli is easy to see, but why over all Sanga?

If Prime Kohli has done so much that he is having a better career record than Sanga when you take Ind, Aus, SA, NZ, Eng, SL, WI home and away combined, then on what basis over all Sanga.

If we are considering Ind, Aus, SA, NZ, Eng, SL, WI home and away combined

• Over all output in entire career - Kohli takes it
• Peak - Kohli takes it
• Tough away series - Kohli takes it

We can't say that look Kohli is shadow of himself so we got to put him lower over all despite him doing more than Sanga in pretty much everything.

As far as I can see, Sanga scored lot of runs against Pakistan and Kohli did not play against Pakistan in the test fromat but he simply bashed Pakistan in limited overs. That's what we have when it comes to both players.

I consistently raised the point about career avg being useless to compare players. This thread is a prime example of that. One batsman has career avg of 57 and another has 48. Yet it's hard to make a case that 57 averaging batsman is ahead.

 

[kingusama92]

But can Kohli do it on a smoky morning in Lahore?

 

[Rajdeep]

I will take Kohli. There was something about him that Sanga lacked. Any any opposition, they feared Kohli...not so much for Sanga who was a brilliant batsman like Dravid but never had that aura.

 

[Buffet]

I already explained this in another forum where Sanga was compared with Kohli and Root was also included in this comparison.

Career stats can often be misleading. If someone tours Australia twice in his entire career then comparing him with another guy who toured Australia five times in his entire career becomes hard, especially if we are only looking at averages.

I think Sanga got shorter tours and less tests than Kohli in SENA, but there is nothing in his record to suggest that he would have done better agasint SENA with more tests. I think we don't have to go into this tour or that tour level. Kohli blows him away in that.

Entire career against Ind, SL, Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI:




Sanga's team mate against Ind, SL, Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI: [ just to show Sanga did not face out of the world bowlers ]

 

[FearlessRoar]

I am tired of people who still can't see the greatness of Sangakkara.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Let Virat retire first, he’s an active cricketer and fitness wise he can play 3-4 years of test cricket minimum if he keeps his place in the side.

If his decline continues he might be even dropped within a year, end up with a test average of 45-46 something my which would put him well behind Sangakkara.

If he turns it around, and plays 4 years of test cricket from here and retires with a batting average of 52+, then I will take Kohli over Sangakkara. He’s way more impactful and his SENA record is more impressive IMO.

 

[Buffet]

But can Kohli do it on a smoky morning in Lahore?

Comment cracked me up. That something Kohli has to live without ever doing.

 

[Buffet]

I am not saying that Kohli will end his career as a far better test batsman than Sanga.

I am simply asking for evidence that Sanga is a far better test batsman than Kohli right now. I hear that comment often due to decline of Kohli but what did actually Sanga has done which makes him far better despite Kohli declining. I meant at this moment we should be able to produce some evidecne to rate one batsman far above another.

We have a very large sample size to make any judgement.

 

[Buffet]

I am tired of people who still can't see the greatness of Sangakkara.

Why do you think comparing with Kohli means people don't see greatness of Sanga? Both of them are legends.

We are simply trying to see actual evidence of Sanga being far ahead of Kohli in test cricket.

 

[Rajdeep]

I am tired of people who still can't see the greatness of Sangakkara.

He was a FTB and anyone understands cricket rather than reading stats book will know this. He was never in the class of SRT, Lara or Punter.

Don't get me wrong, he was a brilliant batsman but a bit overhyped.

 

[Devadwal]

Kohli is way better than sangakara .if someone has been seen both of the career than even without looking at stats can say Kohli is way ahead of sangakara . Sangakara and Jayawardene were heavily scored runs against lower side's at home .

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Kohli is not even one of the Top 5 Indian batters of all-time. Comparing him to one of the greats of the game who has scored over 12,000 test runs is laughable to say the least.

Sanga also never went on anything close to Kohli's wretched 2020-present run. Kohli is not even in Younis Khan's league, let alone Sanga's.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Oh this one is easy

Prime — Kohli

Overall career — Sangakkara

2018 Kohli is a better batter than Sangakkara ever was, England and South Africa prove that, he was Viv-esque in that year but outside that he either matched Sangakkara's output (2016-17 and 2019), was not consistent enough (2011-2015) or was just terrible (2020-2024)

By this approximation, Vinod Kambli can be compared to Tendulkar because he had an incredible peak too. Too bad things in real life don’t work that way. When people look back at your career years later, nobody cares about or remembers a one-year period when you were the best player in the world.

 

[Buffet]

Kohli is not even one of the Top 5 Indian batters of all-time. Comparing him to one of the greats of the game who has scored over 12,000 test runs is laughable to say the least.

Why Kohli has to be top 5 Indian batsman.

We can simply comapare Sanga's and Kohli's record's directly. Let's keep "how dare anyone compares Sanga with Kohli" , "one of the greats", "12k runs", "laughable" etc aside for a minute.

Let's hear you present any actual evidence and it will help all if us to see whatever you see in Sanga to take offence in comparison with Kohli?

Sanga played 91 tests and Kohli played 111 tests against Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI, SL, Ind. Very large sample size.




Are you saying that Sanga is a drastically better test batsman than Kohli due to scoring runs against Pakistan, which Kohli did not play? Or there is some other reason?

 

[mb3407]

Why Kohli has to be top 5 Indian batsman.

We can simply comapare Sanga's and Kohli's record's directly. Let's keep "how dare anyone compares Sanga with Kohli" , "one of the greats", "12k runs", "laughable" etc aside for a minute.

Let's hear you present any actual evidence and it will help all if us to see whatever you see in Sanga to take offence in comparison with Kohli?

Sanga played 91 tests and Kohli played 111 tests against Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI, SL, Ind. Very large sample size.

View attachment 148264


Are you saying that Sanga is a drastically better test batsman than Kohli due to scoring runs against Pakistan, which Kohli did not play? Or there is some other reason?

We know Kohli actually bullies pakistan

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Why Kohli has to be top 5 Indian batsman.

We can simply comapare Sanga's and Kohli's record's directly. Let's keep "how dare anyone compares Sanga with Kohli" , "one of the greats", "12k runs", "laughable" etc aside for a minute.

Let's hear you present any actual evidence and it will help all if us to see whatever you see in Sanga to take offence in comparison with Kohli?

Sanga played 91 tests and Kohli played 111 tests against Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI, SL, Ind. Very large sample size.

View attachment 148264


Are you saying that Sanga is a drastically better test batsman than Kohli due to scoring runs against Pakistan, which Kohli did not play? Or there is some other reason?

I'm saying Sangakkara is a drastically better batter than Kohli because he scored far more runs for his country at a far better average over a 15 year career and 134 test matches. Kohli had like 7 years at the top and failed in epic fashion in the next four. You're happy and more than welcome to cut out specific years and frame this argument in a way that makes anyone think they are even comparable. But that won't make it so. Alot of players had golden periods in their careers. I care more about long-term consistency then "great periods."

Their SENA averages are fairly comparable. And on the whole, Sanga has far better numbers, consistency, longevity. Sanga also never went on anything close to the kind of embarrassing run Kohli that has been on for the past four years. That has completely dismissed any talk of him being in any ATG list.

 

[mb3407]

Why Kohli has to be top 5 Indian batsman.

We can simply comapare Sanga's and Kohli's record's directly. Let's keep "how dare anyone compares Sanga with Kohli" , "one of the greats", "12k runs", "laughable" etc aside for a minute.

Let's hear you present any actual evidence and it will help all if us to see whatever you see in Sanga to take offence in comparison with Kohli?

Sanga played 91 tests and Kohli played 111 tests against Aus, Eng, SA, NZ, WI, SL, Ind. Very large sample size.

View attachment 148264


Are you saying that Sanga is a drastically better test batsman than Kohli due to scoring runs against Pakistan, which Kohli did not play? Or there is some other reason?

This is a very good analysis as the opposition is same for both and sample size is large too.

Not like short duration high peak as some are trying to portray

 

[Buffet]

I'm saying Sangakkara is a drastically better batter than Kohli because he scored far more runs for his country at a far better average over a 15 year career and 134 test matches. Kohli had like 7 years at the top and failed in epic fashion in the next four. You're happy and more than welcome to cut out specific years and frame this argument in a way that makes anyone think they are even comparable. But that won't make it so. Alot of players had golden periods in their careers. I care more about long-term consistency then "great periods."

I am not cutting and slicing any period. Neither I am taking peak or golden period or away or SENA etc.


I am taking their entire career, home and away, against Aus, SA, Aus, ENG, NZ, WI, SL

Sanga averages 46 with 19 tons and Kohli averages 48 with 28 tons.

Kohli did not play against Pakistan, but both played against these 7 teams. If Sanga was drastically higher in consistency then it should show up in numbers, right?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

I am not cutting and slicing any period. Neither I am taking peak or golden period or away or SENA etc.


I am taking their entire career, home and away, against Aus, SA, Aus, ENG, NZ, WI, SL

Sanga averages 46 with 19 tons and Kohli averages 48 with 28 tons.

Kohli did not play against Pakistan, but both played against these 7 teams. If Sanga was drastically higher in consistency then it should show up in numbers, right?

Sangakkara has played 134 test matches and scored over 12,000 runs over a 15 year career. Kohli doesn't even average 50 in test cricket and hasn't even scored 10,000 test runs. And by the looks of it, he probably won't either.

Also, your analysis is surface-level at best. Where is the depth? How many of these runs has Kohli scored in India as compared to overseas? Surely, there is a difference between scoring 186 against Australia on a pancake flat Ahmedabad surface and scoring 192 in a high-pressure run-chase against 2007 Australia. Anyone can put in a bunch of filters on Statsguru. You are the one who is presenting a contrarian view. And pointing to a marginally better average against certain teams and more centuries is not really enough to convince any rational cricket fan who has seen Sanga play that Kohli is better than him.

Sanga's longevity and long-terms success cancels out any advantage that Kohli has over him. Because I don't care how you choose to slice it, scoring 12K+ runs at an average of 57 is simply an astonishing achievement. Those are the numbers that I was talking about which Kohli will never have.

 

[Buffet]

Sangakkara has played 134 test matches and scored over 12,000 runs over a 15 year career.

All good points, but without context,

Sanga against Aus, NZ, Eng, SA, Ind,WI - Avg 46, 7K runs - 19 tons

Sanga agaisnt Pak/Zim/BD ,

Pak: 23 tests, avg 74 10 tons { Kohli palyed zero tests against Pakistan }
BD/Zim: 20 tests, avg 94 9 tons { 20% of Sanga's career runs came here }

You yourself are saying that all runs are not same and yet you are citing 12K runs when 20% Sanga's runs were against clubg level bowling.

 

[Buffet]

Also, your analysis is surface-level at best. Where is the depth? How many of these runs has Kohli scored in India as compared to overseas? Surely, there is a difference between scoring 186 against Australia on a pancake flat Ahmedabad surface and scoring 192 in a high-pressure run-chase against 2007 Australia.

Sure, you can see away games for both and do more in the depth. We can ignore all home runs for both.
Both have played 40-50 away games against Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ

Kohli away record in Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ: Avg 44 with 16 tons





Sanga Away record in Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ : Avg 43 with 8 tons

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

All good points, but without context,

Sanga against Aus, NZ, Eng, SA, Ind,WI - Avg 46, 7K runs - 19 tons

Sanga agaisnt Pak/Zim/BD ,

Pak: 23 tests, avg 74 10 tons { Kohli palyed zero tests against Pakistan }
BD/Zim: 20 tests, avg 94 9 tons { 20% of Sanga's career runs came here }

You yourself are saying that all runs are not same and yet you are citing 12K runs when 20% Sanga's runs were against clubg level bowling.

Yes it's Sanga's fault that he was born Sri Lankan, had to play Pakistan and didn't play 90% of his test matches against England and Australia. He feasted on minnows like any other great batter in history.

What are Kohli's numbers in England and New Zealand? Kohli has only two things he can truly lay claim to and that's doing really well in Australia and South Africa. What about the last four years?

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

@Buffet Kohli had higher Impact than Sangakkara in his peak years, he was also better at dominating attacks and playing on harder surfaces. So if we compare peak I will take Kohli.

Overall, Sangas tally against top teams is a bit inferior to Kohli but Sanga consistently delivered against them and at the least he never became a tailender, Kohlis peak is far greater against top teams but his tailenderesque performances from 2021-2023 (3 years) has made him look bad.

Kohli has higher crests but way lower troughs, the troughs were so bad that it tarnished his image to the point that people forgot that he can even bat.

Overall for consistency I pick Sanga but at his peak Kohli was better.

 

[jnaveen1980]

34% of Sangakkara's runs happened on two grounds SSC and Galle. Virat Kohli's maximum runs on a single ground is 531 at Arun Jaitley. 509 At Adelaide oval..

If you look at Sangakkara

2312 runs at SSC
1921 runs at Galle
1126 runs at Kandy
905 runs at Sara oval

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Yes it's Sanga's fault that he was born Sri Lankan, had to play Pakistan and didn't play 90% of his test matches against England and Australia. He feasted on minnows like any other great batter in history.

What are Kohli's numbers in England and New Zealand? Kohli has only two things he can truly lay claim to and that's doing really well in Australia and South Africa. What about the last four years?

The second paragraph is actually wrong

He can claim of bullying big teams in India with multiple big scoring series.

Similarly he has scored runs in SriLanka against Herath when Sanga was there and actually won a series there too.

He has scored runs in West Indies, SouthAfrica and Australia too.

So if you are talking about performance away from home than Kohli at the very least is as good as Sangakkara.

He has never been able to do any sort of minnow bashing though, if he did that his career average would still be above 50, also he plays half his matches in the most difficult conditions in the world.

The only reason I rate Sanga a bit higher is because he never had a tailenderesque period.

 

[Buffet]

Yes it's Sanga's fault that he was born Sri Lankan, had to play Pakistan and didn't play 90% of his test matches against England and Australia. He feasted on minnows like any other great batter in history.

Absolutely not his fault that he played lots of games against any team or feasted on minnows. No one is blaming him for that. We are simply trying to find any evidence to suggest that Sanga is far ahead in the test format than Kohli as of now based on common teams they played. 90-100 tests are huge number of tests.


Both have played 90-100 tests against Aus, Ind, SA, NZ, WI, SL, Eng. with following outputs,

Kohli : Avg 48 with 28 tons
Sanga Avg 46 with 19 tons

You raised the issue of about Kohli's home runs, I agree. Away is harder for most batsmen.
I will point it out that Sanga played majority of games against these coutries at home. Kohli played majority of games against these countries away.

 

[Buffet]

34% of Sangakkara's runs happened on two grounds SSC and Galle. Virat Kohli's maximum runs on a single ground is 531 at Arun Jaitley. 509 At Adelaide oval..

If you look at Sangakkara

2312 runs at SSC
1921 runs at Galle
1126 runs at Kandy
905 runs at Sara oval

It's fine, SL is small country with less number of grounds. Gives advanatge to players if they happen to play lots of cricket just in 2-3 grounds. Having said that, Sanga has not done better than Kohli in his home record as well against Aus, SA, Eng, Ind, SL, WI, NZ


Home record for Sanga and Kohli against Aus, SA, Eng, Ind, SL, WI, NZ

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Sure, you can see away games for both and do more in the depth. We can ignore all home runs for both.
Both have played 40-50 away games against Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ

Kohli away record in Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ: Avg 44 with 16 tons

View attachment 148269



Sanga Away record in Aus, SA, Eng, SL, Ind, WI, NZ : Avg 43 with 8 tons

View attachment 148270

You say Sanga away record and Kohli away record while including Sri Lanka with Sanga and India with Kohli. Think you need to sort out the selecting filters bit because you are clearly getting it wrong.

Since Asian batters are especially judged for their performances in SENA, I'll make it very simple for you:

Kohli in SENA: 44 Tests, 3696 runs @ 44 with 12 centuries.
Sanga in SENA: 30 Tests, 2526 runs @ 45.92 with 7 centuries.

So statistically speaking, Sanga has done better than Kohli in SENA. Despite not getting the opportunity to play as many tests in Australia where he flourished against one of the very best bowling attacks of this millennium.

If you take out his numbers against minnows Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, he still averages 52.84 with 9873 runs. Thereby proving that he is and always will be a better player than Kohli.

Also, did I mention that Sanga never went on a four year run where he batted like an absolute tailender? I think I did but it probably bears repetition.

 

[Buffet]

So far in detailed analysis against Aus, NZ, Eng, Ind, SL, SA, WI

Kohli ahead home in runs/tons/avg
Kohli ahead away in runs/tons/avg
Kohli ahead over all in runs/tons/avg

 

[Buffet]

You say Sanga away record and Kohli away record while including Sri Lanka with Sanga and India with Kohli. Think you need to sort out the selecting filters bit because you are clearly getting it wrong.

Nah, filter is fine. I simply wrote all countries. Kohli will have zero away games in India, similarly Sanga will have zero away games in SL. Writing both there does not change the result of filter.

Since you have doubt, here is screens shots and it will show the same reults.

Sanga away from home against Aus, Ind, Eng, NZ, WI, SA



Kohli away from home against Aus, SL, Eng, NZ, WI, SA

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

The second paragraph is actually wrong

He can claim of bullying big teams in India with multiple big scoring series.

Similarly he has scored runs in SriLanka against Herath when Sanga was there and actually won a series there too.

He has scored runs in West Indies, SouthAfrica and Australia too.

So if you are talking about performance away from home than Kohli at the very least is as good as Sangakkara.

He has never been able to do any sort of minnow bashing though, if he did that his career average would still be above 50, also he plays half his matches in the most difficult conditions in the world.

The only reason I rate Sanga a bit higher is because he never had a tailenderesque period.

I should have clarified that I was talking about performing in SENA.

For which the numbers are as follows:

Kohli in SENA: 44 Tests, 3696 runs @ 44 with 12 centuries.
Sanga in SENA: 30 Tests, 2526 runs @ 45.92 with 7 centuries.

Even if you take out Sanga's minnow bashing against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, he still averages 52.6 with 10048 runs.

 

[Ab Fan]

@Buffet, I think it is unfair to exclude Pakistan from the discussion here.

Sanga has 10 tons vs Pakistan and no reason we should exclude it unless they were minnows like Windies or BD.

There are players like KP, Clarke and Root/Smith who have or may not have done that well vs Pakistan.

Kohli hasn’t played vs Pakistan but that doesn’t mean when we compare, we leave out Pakistan for someone else because that could be the team they did really well and it was the case with Sanga.

Tomorrow, we may compare Ambrose vs McGrath and should we remove India ? Or Kohli vs Sehwag and should we remove Pakistan?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Nah, filter is fine. I simply wrote all countries. Kohli will have zero away games in India, similarly Sanga will have zero away games in SL. Writing both there does not change the result of filter.

Since you have doubt, here is screens shots and it will show the same reults.

Sanga away from home against Aus, Ind, Eng, NZ, WI, SA
View attachment 148274


Kohli away from home against Aus, SL, Eng, NZ, WI, SA
View attachment 148275

Kohli in SENA: 44 Tests, 3696 runs @ 44 with 12 centuries.
Sanga in SENA: 30 Tests, 2526 runs @ 45.92 with 7 centuries.


Sanga record (minus minnows Zimbabwe and Bangladesh): 114 matches, 10048 runs @ 52.6.
Kohli record (minus minnows Bangladesh since he never played Zimbabwe): 111 matches, 8649 runs @ 48.09.


Anything else to add?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

@Buffet, I think it is unfair to exclude Pakistan from the discussion here.

Sanga has 10 tons vs Pakistan and no reason we should exclude it unless they were minnows like Windies or BD.

There are players like KP, Clarke and Root/Smith who have or may not have done that well vs Pakistan.

Kohli hasn’t played vs Pakistan but that doesn’t mean when we compare, we leave out Pakistan for someone else because that could be the team they did really well and it was the case with Sanga.

Tomorrow, we may compare Ambrose vs McGrath and should we remove India ? Or Kohli vs Sehwag and should we remove Pakistan?

OP is doing a very selective comparison where he has decided to pick and choose a number of variables that suit his argument.

- Kohli has not played against Pakistan.
- Kohli never played enough matches against minnows.
- Adding Sri Lanka and West Indies to the overseas comparison eventhough we all know that SENA is kind of the standard bearer when talking about Asian batters' overseas record.
- Downplaying Sanga's 12K+ runs which is something that only 6 other batters in the history of test cricket have managed to surpass him at.

If Sanga was such a minnow-basher he wouldn't still average 52.6 with 10K+ runs even if you took out his runs against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Maybe Kohli should have played more matches against minnows.

Maybe then he might have reached 10K runs and cracked an average of 50 in test cricket.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Maybe Kohli should have played more matches against minnows.

Maybe then he might have reached 10K runs and cracked an average of 50 in test cricket.

I think one of the main reason is Indian pitches became one of the hardest to score runs in the last few years or so. KOhli's last 5 years home average is only 29.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Indian batsmen at home, last 5 years. only Pant and Jaiswal average above 50. Sundar averages 60. But played too less.


Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
RG Sharma	2021-2024	20	35	1	1210	161	35.58	1942	62.30	4	3	1	146	22
Shubman Gill	2021-2024	17	31	3	1177	128	42.03	1970	59.74	4	5	5	119	25
YBK Jaiswal	2024-2024	10	19	1	1091	214*	60.61	1430	76.29	2	7	0	123	32
RR Pant	2021-2024	11	19	2	877	109	51.58	963	91.06	2	7	1	105	28
RA Jadeja	2021-2024	16	24	1	817	175*	35.52	1644	49.69	2	4	2	74	14
V Kohli	2021-2024	16	27	1	778	186	29.92	1471	52.88	1	3	4	77	3
R Ashwin	2021-2024	22	32	0	713	113	22.28	1355	52.61	2	1	3	83	6
AR Patel	2021-2024	12	19	4	594	84	39.60	1129	52.61	0	4	1	63	18
SS Iyer	2021-2024	9	15	0	534	105	35.60	837	63.79	1	3	1	59	13
SN Khan	2024-2024	6	11	1	371	150	37.10	495	74.94	1	3	3	44	8
CA Pujara	2021-2023	10	16	1	368	73	24.53	917	40.13	0	2	3	40	2
MA Agarwal	2021-2022	4	7	0	301	150	43.00	590	51.01	1	1	0	42	5
Washington Sundar	2021-2024	5	8	4	270	96*	67.50	458	58.95	0	2	2	30	6
KL Rahul	2023-2024	6	10	1	264	86	29.33	422	62.55	0	2	1	26	5
KS Bharat	2023-2024	6	10	1	193	44	21.44	361	53.46	0	0	0	17	6
DC Jurel	2024-2024	3	4	1	190	90	63.33	354	53.67	0	1	0	12	7
AM Rahane	2021-2021	5	8	0	151	67	18.87	320	47.18	0	1	1	23	0

 

[Buffet]

@Buffet, I think it is unfair to exclude Pakistan from the discussion here.

Sanga has 10 tons vs Pakistan and no reason we should exclude it unless they were minnows like Windies or BD.

There are players like KP, Clarke and Root/Smith who have or may not have done that well vs Pakistan.

Kohli hasn’t played vs Pakistan but that doesn’t mean when we compare, we leave out Pakistan for someone else because that could be the team they did really well and it was the case with Sanga.

Tomorrow, we may compare Ambrose vs McGrath and should we remove India ? Or Kohli vs Sehwag and should we remove Pakistan?

I will off course not exclude runs against Pakistan when considering Sanga's over all stature. I am not removing Pakistan due to being a poor team. Since Kohli did not play any tests against Pakistan and both played 90-110 tests against others, I am trying to see if there is any evidence to say that Sanga was far ahead than Kohli in the test format based on common oppositions.

If Sanga is really a far better test batsman then it would have shown up in 90-110 sample size of both players. It does not show up in home, away or over all. We can drill down more and I suspect we won't find evidecne of Sanga being far better.

I have seen both players entire career. I just wanted to hear what's argument for anyone saying that Sanga is far ahead of Virat in the test format. Virat has superior record home, away and over all against 6 test nations taken together despite Sanga debuting and playing majority of his career in 00s( 13 batsmen with 50 plus avg in 00s as opposed to 3 in 90s and 4 in 2010s)

If argument is solely based on Pakistan with Virat having zero tests against Pakistan then I have to politely disagree with the conclusion that Sanga is far better in the test format.

Just to make it clear, I don't rate Virat far ahead of Sanga either.

 

[ElRaja]

why remove pakistan, sanga dominated a pak side which was pretty good in the UAE.

sanga was a master player of spin, peak kohli was a better player of pace.

sanga never had a lean patch like kohli afaik.

sangas record is over rated cos he minnow bashed a lot, but over a career he was better than kohli.

no body would be afforded the lean patch kohli had, not even any other indian player, but his brand and limited overs performances carried him through.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

In red ball cricket i will go with Sanga and in white ball its one and only Virat Kohli

 

[Buffet]

Kohli in SENA: 44 Tests, 3696 runs @ 44.70 with 12 centuries.
Sanga in SENA: 30 Tests, 2526 runs @ 45.92 with 7 centuries.

And you think this makes the case of Sanga being far better than Kohli when he is lagging in runs, tons and avg in home, away and overall for 6 test nations they played?

 

[Buffet]

why remove pakistan, sanga dominated a pak side which was pretty good in the UAE.

sanga was a master player of spin, peak kohli was a better player of pace.

sanga never had a lean patch like kohli afaik.

That's why I see him as great and scoring heavily agaisnt Pakistan goes to improve his stature. I put both of them in the same tier in the test format. No issue with you or anyone saying that you rate Sanga higher than Virat. Personal preference for dominating spin vs pace.

I see lots of posters rating Sanga as far greater test player. I took out Pakistan to see if there is any evidence to suggest Sanga being far better against common 6 teams both played with sample size of 90-110 tests. We found none.

That leaves,

Pakistan: Sanga played really well against Pakistan and Virat has zero tests against Pakistan. I think some posters may use this to put Sanga in different tier, but based on all evidence of Sanga's performance against other teams, I won't put him in a differnet tier.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

And you think this makes the case of Sanga being far better than Kohli when he is lagging in runs, tons and avg in home, away and overall for 6 test nations they played?

Who has the better batting average?

First you were holding on to the 'he is a minnow-basher' argument. Now that, that has been proven completely wrong you are trying to hold on to this. Talk about crutching at straws.

Fact remains the same, if Kohli played for any other country in the world his test career would have been over long ago. He wouldn't even have crawled to 9K test runs.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

And you think this makes the case of Sanga being far better than Kohli when he is lagging in runs, tons and avg in home, away and overall for 6 test nations they played?

Sanga:

• More runs than Kohli
• Better average than Kohli
• Better average in SENA countries than Kohli
• More runs and a better average than Kohli when excluding runs scored against minnows
• Greater longevity and sustained success than Kohli
• Zero tailenderesque periods with the bat

And yet, somehow, Kohli is better than Sangakkara. Okay.

 

[Buffet]

Who has the better batting average?

Career avg - It's Sanga.

That's stated in the first two lines of OP. Not sure what's your point is to be honest asking about who has better career average.

 

[Buffet]

Sanga:

• More runs than Kohli
• Better average than Kohli
• Better average in SENA countries than Kohli
• More runs and a better average than Kohli when excluding runs scored against minnows
• Greater longevity and sustained success than Kohli
• Zero tailenderesque periods with the bat

And yet, somehow, Kohli is better than Sangakkara. Okay.

Flip side is,

Both played 90-110 tests against common top 6 sides and Sanga has,

• Less avg home
• Less avg away
• Less avg over all
• Less ton over all
• Less ton home
• Less ton away

When all said and done, Sanga deepsite playing majority of games at home against those sides ( 59 homes vs 40 away ) , has over all avg 46.

And yet, some how Sanga is so far above in tier that it's insulting and laghable to comapre those two because ...

 

[kron]

Virat easily

Don't need stats for this comparison

Stats can be easily padded

Virat faces much better bowlers. Played in 3 formats more often. On much harder pitches.

And performed well vs top sides.

Sanga is a stat padder. Failed against 3 top teams. Australia's pitched were flatter than Taylor swifts butt when sanga scored runs and not once did he perform in a match winning or even match saving cause.

 

[kron]

No one will say omg look it's sanaga. We should be scared of him. He was never regarded as the best batsman. Virat was at one point.

 

[kron]

I should have clarified that I was talking about performing in SENA.

For which the numbers are as follows:

Kohli in SENA: 44 Tests, 3696 runs @ 44 with 12 centuries.
Sanga in SENA: 30 Tests, 2526 runs @ 45.92 with 7 centuries.

Even if you take out Sanga's minnow bashing against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, he still averages 52.6 with 10048 runs.

Edit

 

[Buffet]

Virat faces much better bowlers. Played in 3 formats more often. On much harder pitches.

And performed well vs top sides.

Sanga is a stat padder. Failed against 3 top teams. Australia's pitched were flatter than Taylor swifts butt when sanga scored runs and not once did he perform in a match winning or even match saving cause.

Did he really stats pad and fail?

Top 3 teams during Sanga's career: Aus, SA and Eng





Sanga's performance against the top 3 teams of his era: home and away combined.



I wouldn't call avg 43 as failing, but sure went missing given it was against home and away combined with only 7 tons in 50 tests.

Intersting thing jumps out here. Another SL in this list, Jayawardene actually stepped up against the top 3 sides of Sanga's era. He averaged 51 with 16 tons when Sanga could do only avg 43 with 7 tons. Both played from 2000 to 2015 period for SL so it's apple to apple comparison in same conditions, same oppositions and same series.

Sanga's record is boosted by scoring heavily against the 6th best team of his era(Pakistan) and two club level teams of his era BD/Zim. So yes, he did stats pad.

Sanga is a fantastic player, but Sanga is massively over rated in PP. Otherwise I don't see why anyone will take offence in comparing Sanga and Kohli. I am not sure if all of us watched the same Sanga.

I suspect Sanga thrashing Pakistan regularly have inflated the impression of Sanga for many Pakistani fans. It's natural to be honest, but Pakistan was 6th best team during his career. I think posters forget that and rate Sanga so high that some may fiund it offensive to even compare him with Kohli. Evidence does not point to Sanga being a tier above at all.

 

[chinaman00]

Pound for pound, Kohli is the best batsman of his generation. It’s not surprising that his numbers match and exceed Sangargara, who himself is an all time great.

Just goes to cement the greatness of Virat Kohli, who’s unquestionably the greatest batsman India has ever produced.

 

[kron]

Did he really stats pad and fail?

Top 3 teams during Sanga's career: Aus, SA and Eng

View attachment 148287



Sanga's performance against the top 3 teams of his era: home and away combined.

View attachment 148288

I wouldn't call avg 43 as failing, but sure went missing given it was against home and away combined with only 7 tons in 50 tests.

Intersting thing jumps out here. Another SL in this list, Jayawardene actually stepped up against the top 3 sides of Sanga's era. He averaged 51 with 16 tons when Sanga could do only avg 43 with 7 tons. Both played from 2000 to 2015 period for SL so it's apple to apple comparison in same conditions, same oppositions and same series.

Sanga's record is boosted by scoring heavily against the 6th best team of his era(Pakistan) and two club level teams of his era BD/Zim. So yes, he did stats pad.

Sanga is a fantastic player, but Sanga is massively over rated in PP. Otherwise I don't see why anyone will take offence in comparing Sanga and Kohli. I am not sure if all of us watched the same Sanga.

I suspect Sanga thrashing Pakistan regularly have inflated the impression of Sanga for many Pakistani fans. It's natural to be honest, but Pakistan was 6th best team during his career. I think posters forget that and rate Sanga so high that some may fiund it offensive to even compare him with Kohli. Evidence does not point to Sanga being a tier above at all.

Failed vs india away. Tough team

Failed vs SA tough team away

Pretty average performance in losing cause vs aus on ultra flat pitches. Match was already over most of the time and he just stat padded his way to average 60.

Also Failed vs SA

 

[atreus]

Pound for pound, Kohli is the best batsman of his generation. It’s not surprising that his numbers match and exceed Sangargara, who himself is an all time great.

Just goes to cement the greatness of Virat Kohli, who’s unquestionably the greatest batsman India has ever produced.

Sachin Tendulkar, Sunil Gavaskar and Rahul Dravid are all way clear of Kohli

 

[Hitman]

Used to be a massive, massive fan of Kohli before his ridiculous lean phase. I still like him a lot, but I'll take Sanga as a Test batsman ahead of him.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Lol at all these new comparisons coming up. These comparisons mean nothing. Literally they have no end.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Few more suggestion

Ian Bell vs Younis Khan
Michael vaughan vs Mudassar Nazar

 

[Hyder]

Kohli has some aura that his contemporaries lack but that being said if i were to make an all time xi tests kohli ll miss out but sanga might be in contention for wk spot with gilly

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Flip side is,

Both played 90-110 tests against common top 6 sides and Sanga has,

• Less avg home
• Less avg away
• Less avg over all
• Less ton over all
• Less ton home
• Less ton away

When all said and done, Sanga deepsite playing majority of games at home against those sides ( 59 homes vs 40 away ) , has over all avg 46.

And yet, some how Sanga is so far above in tier that it's insulting and laghable to comapre those two because ...

How does Sanga have less avg overall? I just told you that he has a higher career average, higher average in SENA and higher average excluding runs scored against minnows.

Kohli doesn't even have a better average or more tons than Sangakkara at home. You are completely wrong there. He hasn't even scored more runs than him at home.

Here are their stats at home excluding runs scored against minnows (Bangladesh, Zimbabwe).

Sanga: 63 tests, 5542 runs @ 55.42 with 16 centuries
Kohli: 50 tests, 3859 runs @ 54.35 with 12 centuries

 

[Romali_rotti]

I feel Sanga and Kohli are greater than any Pakistani batsmen past, present or future players to come.

 

[Ab Fan]

How does Sanga have less avg overall? I just told you that he has a higher career average, higher average in SENA and higher average excluding runs scored against minnows.

Kohli doesn't even have a better average or more tons than Sangakkara at home. You are completely wrong there. He hasn't even scored more runs than him at home.

Here are their stats at home excluding runs scored against minnows (Bangladesh, Zimbabwe).

Sanga: 63 tests, 5542 runs @ 55.42 with 16 centuries
Kohli: 50 tests, 3859 runs @ 54.35 with 12 centuries

The averages are same mostly. No difference really. This proves that Kohli and Sanga are at same level especially when you consider the pitches on which Kohli has played both home and away and the pitches that Sanga got.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

One one hand , batting while keeping is hard but on other hand we normally take entire career of batsman if we are comparing batsmen. I am not sure if it makes a fairer comaparison. Sanga improved as a batsman so we shouldn't be taking only that phase.

Also, I do admit that it's not easy to keep and bat. But I will never say that, look Pant has the same number of away tons in Aus, SA, Eng and Ind as Root. Both average the same in away games in those places. So Pant is just another level to Root in those away venue due to getting brownie points of being a keeper. As far as I am concerned, thier output in those away games are in same range. Pant does not get to pull Keeper card when compring batting record.

I think it is vitally important. There are very few batsmen who keep wicket and have high number of centuries, runs, like a specialist batsman in the history of the game. Perhaps only 2 or 3 in the history of the game. This is a big handicap for Sanga in this discussion.

For example, in your subsequent list, where you show the comparison between Kohli and Sangka against top 3 teams of the era Sanga is at the bottom of the list with average 43 but he and AB are the only one in that list to have kept wicket during those matches.

Remove the WK era and his average shoots to the image below


We have already removed his batting against Pakistan in your first filter in the interest of fair comparison. I still do believe it is fair for an overall batting comparison to also remove this filter. Across Sanga career it made a big difference, across the history of the game it makes a big difference too as very few WK Bats have the types of runs, average, centuries that you are seeking to compare.

WRT to Pant - if we gets to a stage of career he plays only as specialist bat i will be favour of filtering his stats also in the same way. As he hasn't got to that stage we can't give him any bump or leeway baseed on speculation. In Sanga case we have the data so can split it, and he fits the general trend where the output is less from glovesman.

 

[Mamoon]

Virat easily

Don't need stats for this comparison

Stats can be easily padded

Virat faces much better bowlers. Played in 3 formats more often. On much harder pitches.

And performed well vs top sides.

Sanga is a stat padder. Failed against 3 top teams. Australia's pitched were flatter than Taylor swifts butt when sanga scored runs and not once did he perform in a match winning or even match saving cause.

Sangakkara’s 192 in Hobart in 2007 is better than any innings that Kohli has played in Australia.

 

[Mamoon]

No one will say omg look it's sanaga. We should be scared of him. He was never regarded as the best batsman. Virat was at one point.

That has a lot to do with playing for India, where you have billions of fans running your propaganda and the media also creatives fake narratives.

This is why a bang average cricketer like Dhoni became a legendary wicket-keeper batsman and an inconsistent batsman like Laxman was romanticized as a man of crisis etc.

Swap Kohli and Sangakkara’s nationalities with the same record and personality and it will be a completely different outlook.

If Sangakkara was Indian, his stature would have been on par with Gavaskar and Tendulkar.

 

[Mamoon]

Kohli has been a mediocre Test batsman for about 75% of his career. 2011-2014 nothing special. 2020-2024 circus clown.

He had a top run from 2015-2019, and no doubt he is a world class Test batsman because of that peak, but an overall average of 48 and less then 10k runs by the age of 36 completely eliminates him from the category of legendary Test batsmen.

Kohli’s Test career is a story of one of the most brutal downfalls ever. In the space of 4-5 years, he went from a level where he was on his way to finish his career in the league of Tendulkar, Lara etc. to a level where he is more comparable to the likes of Inzamam, Yousuf, Clarke, Amla etc.

Sangakkara, after Lara, is the best left-handed batsman I have seen in Test cricket. A majestic batsman who was brilliant throughout his career with no major lean patches.

In fact, he averaged 59 in the last two years of his career and also scored 4 consecutive ODI hundreds in his last World Cup.

He could have easily played for 2 more years and remained an elite batsman. He is severely underrated because he played for Sri Lanka. I would definitely rank him above Kohli, Dravid, Miandad, Younis, Inzamam, Yousuf, Laxman, Vishwanath etc.

I would rank him slightly below Gavaskar (GOAT Asian Test batsman) and the only thing there separates him from Tendulkar is that he played 66 less Test matches.

 

[Hitman]

I would rank him slightly below Gavaskar (GOAT Asian Test batsman) and the only thing there separates him from Tendulkar is that he played 66 less Test matches.

Not their SENA records?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

The averages are same mostly. No difference really. This proves that Kohli and Sanga are at same level especially when you consider the pitches on which Kohli has played both home and away and the pitches that Sanga got.

Sanga:

• More runs than Kohli
• Higher average than Kohli
• Higher average in SENA countries than Kohli
• Higher average away from home than Kohli (including or excluding minnow nations)
• More runs and a higher average than Kohli excluding runs scored against minnows
• More runs and a higher average at home than Kohli
• Greater longevity and sustained success than Kohli
• Zero tailenderesque periods with the bat

Don't really think they are on the same level in any way.

 

[Ab Fan]

Sanga:

• More runs than Kohli- due to more matches
• Higher average than Kohli - difference in avg of 1.
• Higher average in SENA countries than Kohli - Sanga failed vs Ambrose Walsh in WI early 2000s. Count SWENA? Also, pitches in consideration. Who has more runs there
• Higher average away from home than Kohli (including or excluding minnow nations)- it is same as per your stats
• More runs and a higher average than Kohli excluding runs scored against minnows
• More runs and a higher average at home than Kohli
• Greater longevity and sustained success than Kohli
• Zero tailenderesque periods with the bat

Don't really think they are on the same level in any way.

All in all, everything is same but Kohli played on tough pitches and tough conditions than Sanga.

 

[kron]

Sangakkara’s 192 in Hobart in 2007 is better than any innings that Kohli has played in Australia.

In a losing cause.
Sure

 

[kron]

Kohli has been a mediocre Test batsman for about 75% of his career. 2011-2014 nothing special. 2020-2024 circus clown.

He had a top run from 2015-2019, and no doubt he is a world class Test batsman because of that peak, but an overall average of 48 and less then 10k runs by the age of 36 completely eliminates him from the category of legendary Test batsmen.

Kohli’s Test career is a story of one of the most brutal downfalls ever. In the space of 4-5 years, he went from a level where he was on his way to finish his career in the league of Tendulkar, Lara etc. to a level where he is more comparable to the likes of Inzamam, Yousuf, Clarke, Amla etc.

Sangakkara, after Lara, is the best left-handed batsman I have seen in Test cricket. A majestic batsman who was brilliant throughout his career with no major lean patches.

In fact, he averaged 59 in the last two years of his career and also scored 4 consecutive ODI hundreds in his last World Cup.

He could have easily played for 2 more years and remained an elite batsman. He is severely underrated because he played for Sri Lanka. I would definitely rank him above Kohli, Dravid, Miandad, Younis, Inzamam, Yousuf, Laxman, Vishwanath etc.

I would rank him slightly below Gavaskar (GOAT Asian Test batsman) and the only thing there separates him from Tendulkar is that he played 66 less Test matches.

He was good at smashing pakistan

That's about it

Crap vs india
Crap vs south africa

Master of soft runs stat padding loser. That's what he did vs aus in losing cause.

That's his level. I don't even rate or like kohli.

 

[kron]

All in all, everything is same but Kohli played on tough pitches and tough conditions than Sanga.

And against far better bowlers

Sanga couldn't even handle praveen kummaaar level fodders

 

[Ab Fan]

He was good at smashing pakistan

That's about it

Crap vs india
Crap vs south africa

Master of soft runs stat padding loser. That's what he did vs aus in losing cause.

That's his level. I don't even rate or like kohli.

Yes India and South Africa are venues which challenge you the most and Sanga failed both places.

 

[Mamoon]

In a losing cause.
Sure

All of Kohli’s centuries in Australia prior to his stat padding innings last week were “match losing”, yet it didn’t stop Indian fans from creaming themselves.

If you score 192 in Australia in the fourth innings and still lose, it says more about your teammates than it does about you. That innings is better than any innings Kohli has played in Australia.

 

[Mamoon]

He was good at smashing pakistan

That's about it

Crap vs india
Crap vs south africa

Master of soft runs stat padding loser. That's what he did vs aus in losing cause.

That's his level. I don't even rate or like kohli.

I wouldn’t sleep over his record vs Pakistan. He dominated Pakistan in the 2000s, same Pakistan against whom Tendulkar couldn’t do jack against and was carried by Sehwag and Dravid. Also, his record is respectable in South Africa, not terrible.

Furthermore, he was miles better in England and New Zealand than Kohli.