Jacques Kallis

[Mint Condition]

I haven't implied he's an ineffective bowler...I've said the opposite. What I've said is that he hasn't contributed much with the ball, which is different. There's no way he'd be picked as a bowler in any side except for maybe the bottom 2 or 3 teams. His average and strike rate are likely better than they would be because he's spent his career bowling in partnerships with greats (when he has bowled).

Stats don't tell you everything...there's no way in the world that he's a frontline strike bowler you only have to watch him bowl to know that. He's an effective support bowler and toiler, but throughout his career he hasn't contributed hugely with the ball, as indicated by his less than 2 wickets per test. There's no way he compares to Imran Khan who, in his prime, was a genuine match winner with both bat and ball. Sobers is a closer comparison, but Sobers was a better batsmen, and a bigger contributor with the ball in terms of taking wickets and winning matches (plus one of the greatest fielders ever).

Btw, I'm not trying to diminish Kallis' achievements. He's obviously one of the greats. A brilliant batsmen, good slip catcher and an effective support bowler over a long period of time. His record is amazing. But as a contributing allrounder, I think there are 2 or 3 that are ahead of him...and only 2 or 3.

 

[breeno]

If you saw Kallis in his earlier years, he was an effective frontline bowler.

 

[Registered User]

New hair for Jaquey boy

 

[Ill Chicken]

If you were to pick a world 11 Kallis would barely get a bowl, so mainly it comes down to his batting.

If you had a bowling lineup of say, Steyn, Swann, Asif and an in form Mitchell Johnson, he'd get very few overs.

Or look at the attack from a few years ago - McGrath, Steyn, Murali, Warne , Flintoff. He wouldn't get a look in.

He'd get a bowl in any world class line up, not every test, but often enough, he is a batting all-rounder.

 

[sgnl00]

Easily up there with Tendulkar and Lara for the best modern batsmen. Those who say he is a flat track bully and gets his runs against minnows simply have not seen enough of him. Handy bowler who could extract some swing in good conditions and has a surprisingly mean bouncer. Definitely the best allrounder of the past 20 years and underrated by most Australian commentators, people, etc.

 

[mayhem20202]

If you were to pick a world 11 Kallis would barely get a bowl, so mainly it comes down to his batting.

If you had a bowling lineup of say, Steyn, Swann, Asif and an in form Mitchell Johnson, he'd get very few overs.

Or look at the attack from a few years ago - McGrath, Steyn, Murali, Warne , Flintoff. He wouldn't get a look in.

Flintoff would have never played in a world XI.

If you go,
Hayden
Sehwag/Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilly
Warne
Steyn
Murali
McGrath

where is the spot for Flintoff??? Had a couple of good series against Australia, but, realistically, his career was highly over rated. Batting average of 31, with 5 test 100s, bowling average of 32 with 5 5 wicket hauls. Who would he replace in that side? All the bowlers are terrible with the bat, so, you can't afford to have someone in the top 6 with an average of 31.

 

[Simmonds2Hislop]

Flintoff would have never played in a world XI.

If you go,
Hayden
Sehwag/Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilly
Warne
Steyn
Murali
McGrath

where is the spot for Flintoff??? Had a couple of good series against Australia, but, realistically, his career was highly over rated. Batting average of 31, with 5 test 100s, bowling average of 32 with 5 5 wicket hauls. Who would he replace in that side? All the bowlers are terrible with the bat, so, you can't afford to have someone in the top 6 with an average of 31.

I don't rate him either, but it seems others do. I included him because he made the ICC world 11 that took us on in 05.

 

[courtjester]

I rate Flintoff highly, for his destructive capabilities.

He could destroy bowling attacks at times.

And when he was fit and in his prime, I think he was the best fast bowler in the world (briefly).

 

[mayhem20202]

I don't rate him either, but it seems others do. I included him because he made the ICC world 11 that took us on in 05.

That was a make up of whoever was fit and available at the time, and also did not include any Australian players, obviously.

 

[mayhem20202]

I rate Flintoff highly, for his destructive capabilities.

He could destroy bowling attacks at times.

And when he was fit and in his prime, I think he was the best fast bowler in the world (briefly).

Andrew Symonds was 5 times as destructive with the bat, a better player, averaged 10 runs more, is probably in the top 5 fielders in history, could bowl a bit, and wouldn't have got anywhere near a world XI.

 

[iluvparis]

I rate Flintoff highly, for his destructive capabilities.

He could destroy bowling attacks at times.

And when he was fit and in his prime, I think he was the best fast bowler in the world (briefly).

Surely this guy's career is one of the biggest myth's in cricket history. Pulled two great Ashes series out of his a** against us but apart from that did sweet FA for the majority of his career.

 

[dan warna]

Surely this guy's career is one of the biggest myth's in cricket history. Pulled two great Ashes series out of his a** against us but apart from that did sweet FA for the majority of his career.

This

we remember him because he destroyed us. but also his showmanship in destroying us. He was like a talisman for the UK team.

Aside from that he's been ordinary.

A slightly better batting version of MJ, averaged 32 with the bat and 33 with the ball

 

[courtjester]

He didn't "pull them out of his arse", they were indicative of what he could do fit.

 

[Hu$tler]

He didn't "pull them out of his arse", they were indicative of what he could do fit.

This.

Suberb player when fit, that over he bowled against Ponting was fast bowling at it's brutal best.

Saw him commentating the darts the other day, lolz.

 

[SurfingTheVoid]

He didn't "pull them out of his arse", they were indicative of what he could do fit.

What a load of crap. He wasn't injured for the majority of his career, and the majority of his career was deeply mediocre.

He pulled them out of his ass. Most of the time he was a containing bowler and a ridiculously inconsistent batsman.

 

[BarneyBent]

Flintoff, if anything, was an overrated batsman and an underrated bowler. Johnson can destroy any attack when (mentally) fit. Flintoff when up and firing was a fantastic bowler, we didn't see it much, probably due to fitness, but while his bowling average blew out a bit due to leaking a few runs, especially when struggling with fitness, he was a genuine destroyer. Brett Lee is a bit the same, the bowling average doesn't reflect his true impact on a game.

I was never afraid of Flintoff as a batsman, and whenever he made runs I thought of it in a similar vein to when a Johnson makes runs, or a Vaas, etc. But he has always been a very dangerous bowler.

 

[SurfingTheVoid]

Lee is an even worse comparison: Lee's "real impact" was often cannon fodder in Tests. Never had a bowling brain, couldn't bowl to a plan...Flintoff may have been an overrated bowler, but to put him in Lee's bracket is harsh to Flintoff.

 

[breeno]

Really don't get all the hate for Lee on this board. Was a gun.

 

[dan warna]

Really don't get all the hate for Lee on this board. Was a gun.

In his first 18 months as a test player, after that he was cannon fodder.

That said, he is IMO one of our greats in the ODI arena.