Sangakkara, the best batsman? Not yet. Sachin Tendulkar and 1990s greats are still unbeaten
In a recent article on the Cricket Australia website Sam Ferris suggested that, on the weight of his stats, Kumar Sangakkara now had a shot at being “The best batsman since Bradman”. See link.
Ferris said: “Statistically, Sangakkara is practically peerless (except for Bradman) and dominates the modern greats including Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis, Lara.”
Ferris has, rightly, considered some elements but with mixed results: Sangakkara’s role as ‘keeper’ made batting excellence tougher. He has “feasted on the bottom-ranked Test nations” and has been “ruthless against all opposition”.
But it’s dangerous to assess greatness merely on stats, especially if we end up drawing hasty inferences from a seductive batting average. The point isn’t so much about whether Sangakkara is better than Bradman. He probably is. The point is that he isn’t greater than batting greats from the 1990s.
It is possible to take Ricky Ponting and the other greats in turn, to show why Sangakkara was good but nowhere near as great as they were. For now, let’s consider one batsman – Sachin Tendulkar.
Percentages are a handy measure but they aren’t enough. Perspective is as, if not more, important. We often ignore the kind of opposition a batsman has faced and consistently defeated. Context is crucial.
So it isn’t enough to say that only 11% of Sachin’s Test runs came against relative weaklings, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe but as much as 21% of Sangakkara’s. We must go on to say that Sachin’s 11% is a far smaller piece of his mountain of nearly 16,000 runs. Sangakkara’s 21% is a massive chunk of his hill of over 11,000 runs. Sachin’s 11% came from 23 innings while Sangakkara’s 21% came from 27 innings.
It isn’t enough to say that like the great Sunil Gavaskar, Sachin dominated the most dominant team. We must go on to say that against Australia, Sachin has been unbeaten on 8 occasions; Sangakkara only once. Sachin’s 11 tons against a mighty Australia probably counts for a bit more than Sangakkara’s lone ton?
It isn’t enough to caution that Sangakkara’s Test strike-rate of 54 is not on par with Sachin’s 54. We must go on to explain that while Sangakkara has maintained his rate over about 21,000 deliveries, Sachin maintained his rate over nearly 30,000 deliveries. Sachin sustained his rate for 117 innings more than Sangakkara has.
Much is made of Sangakkara’s role as a keeper, implying that it made run-scoring tougher but we must be careful not to overstate that. Sangakkara pulled off 151 dismissals behind the stumps. Sachin has bowled 706 Test overs, taken 46 wickets as a bowler and 115 catches as a fielder. Forget about the unparalleled pressure that Sachin faced, he’s the one who should have struggled as a batsman - to get past 50 Tests, let alone 50 tons.
Sangakkara bloomed only in the early 2000s and was spared the strange downward pressure that 1990s Test bowling greats exerted on even the best scoring rates. They were in their prime when they tested the world’s greatest batsmen. Some of the world’s most prolific bowlers were fading by the time Sangakkara had gotten into stride and even those who were in their prime just didn’t see enough of Sangakkara. He saw little or almost nothing of Brett Lee, Waqar Younis, Allan Donald, Shoaib Akthar, Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne absolutely nothing of Courtney Walsh, Curtly Ambrose and obviously nothing of Muttiah Muralitharan. Sachin has seen and bettered them all.
Sangakkara is a very good batsman. He’s still young and may go on to prove himself even further. So far, he simply hasn’t been tested enough and consistently enough to be ranked with the 1990s greats. He’s a tantalising 500 or so runs short of Brian Lara’s Test tally but has he faced anywhere near the depth and ferocity of opposition that Lara did? Still, it is unfair to rank Sangakkara below anyone who has played fewer than 100 Tests, even if they are rightly admired players such as Bradman, Weekes, Sutcliffe or Barrington.
Sangakkara’s elegance is endearing, even if he does look out of place amidst 21st century aggression. He deserves every bit of credit that got his name so enviably etched on the Lord’s Honours Board. He is every bit the “graceful, silky, purposeful, unflappable” player that BBC Cricket Correspondent Jonathan Agnew says he is.
But it is a grave injustice to go on to say that “his career average of 58.53 is superior to any of his illustrious peers”. It isn’t. Not yet.
Rudolph Lambert Fernandez is the author of a new non-fiction book, ‘GREATER THAN BRADMAN: celebrating Sachin, the greatest batsman in cricket history’. www.greaterthanbradman.com