CricketCountry is really garbage. Articles are very low quality and a lot of mistakes. Owned by an Indians.
Yes, looks like the article misquoted him. He was clearly talking about Sangakkara. I was shocked to think that someone who managed the national team could be so ignorant. Good to know this is a misquote :)
simply because playing just a few limited innings in domestic tournaments alone would be not sufficient to move those overall career averages etc, significantly in a career expanded over 278 innings.
UT in List A career stats: 278 in - 8869 r @ 33.46 Av - SR 75.45
As you can see, the boost achieved by UT in Av 63.75 & SR 111.84 (during that period in Domestic limited over tournament) in the few innings that he played is huge, compared to his overall List-A stats, yet that is not sufficient to make any significant change in overall stats due to the reason given above.
Mathematically, you need to play much more innings like the following to see a Noticeable change in his overall career stats spread over 278 ins. (The players who got ODI opportunities had played at least 50+ ODIs during that period & that was sufficient to make a significant change in their overall career stats).
Premier Limited Over Tournament, 2014/15
Tharanga : 5in - 255 r- 118* HS - 63.75 Av - 111.84 SR -1x 100- 2 x 50 (27x4s -11x6s)
and please inform ur buddies how stats WERE SKEWED in favor or UT (by mistake or otherwise), cus they still seem to be delusional :P
OK let's just say for the sake of argument, Tharanga wasn't given a proper go....at INTERNATIONAL level...
BUT he did play for NCC AFTER the new rules right? from 2012?? and those DID apply to the domestic matches? yes?
Have u seen his List A average? it is STILL 33.46 !!
Surely the "IMPROVEMENT DUE TO NEW RULES" had be shown in there right??
the selectors didn't STOP him from churning out loads and loads of runs for NCC?????
How come the List A averages still remains in 33??? with a S/R of 75??
PS: the days of picking the "MOST EXPERIENCED" are long gone.... if that's the case, India wud've picked Gautam Gambhir instead of Rohit Sharma who even had slightly better average and S/R too
mind u the guy has even won them a WC..
Great doco - its the full story.
Two things (1) Dont mess with the ICC and Srini, there is only one winner here (2) Know the correct legal position so we know where we stand.
to be fair, I don't think the stats were skewed any manner. if you follow the thread closely anyone can see that. the important thing is this thread had provided a timely insight to the current situation and past situations. the suggestions given for the future were quite appropriate and acceptable to me.
Stats may be skewed to favour UT but can't argue with the fact that he was not given a proper chance by SJ's Selection Committee.