Props to Jacques Kallis

[strung_out7]

him and sangakarra are massively underated. I'm actually enjoying their test series more than ours at the moment

 

[Kong]

Greatest all rounder of all time.

 

[iDon]

Greatest all rounder of all time.

Disagree.

He is a batsman now and has hardly been damaging with the ball in years.

Greatest all-rounder is between Sobers, Hadlee and Khan I'd say.

 

[The Passenger]

He is a batsman now and has hardly been damaging with the ball in years.

since 08/09 back to back series between australia and south africa he has only taken two wickets in an innings once.

13 wickets at ~65 since then.

 

[Kong]

And yet he still has nearly 300 wickets at 30.

 

[iDon]

And yet he still has nearly 300 wickets at 30.

270 wickets at 32.

He has 17 wickets @ 14 vs Bangledesh. and 21 wickets @14.71 at Zimbabwe.

Thats a few wickets at a short average.

Like B_T said he hasn't taken a multi wicket game in 4 years and just isn't used as a reliable bowling option. Age, form or concentration on batting take it what you will but he isn't an allrounder anymore.

 

[Upgrayedd]

I would also rank him as the greatest all rounder ever

 

[Tazwegian]

You can't judge a batsmen by looking at averages alone. Kallis has his rightful place being considered below Lara, Ponting, and Tendulkar. Tendulkar's record murders Kallis on closer inspection. He strikes at 15 per 100 less than Ponting and Lara and about 10 less than Tendulkar (if anyone can find Tendulkar's career strike rate in tests, let me know). That is actually an important figure, there are many times in tests where you need fast runs, Kallis does not score quickly at all. His stats are inflated against minnows compared to at least Ponting, but both are not as bad as in this regard as Tendulkar. Also, there is simply batsmen that are good to watch, and Kallis is probably the least interesting or entertaining batsmen going around. It is unfair, but this also effects people's perception of him.

Although in terms of pure averages, he is the best batsmen of the current era.

 

[glenferry23]

correct. as great a player as kallis has been (and undoubtedly he's one of the greatest all rounders we've seen), looking at his record as a batsman against the best opponent of his time (australia) is not as great as say tendulkar's or lara's.

if anything, it makes me respect sachin more - he's maintained it over 20+ years and has played against a variety of our teams and attacks, and still averages close to 60. phenomenal stuff

 

[Tazwegian]

I saw an interesting article that excluded performances against Bangas and Zimbabwe in the period from 1999-2011, and Kallis had the best average at 59, Ponting was next at 55, Tendulkar was actually a fair way down the list at 52. Funnily though, Tendulkar (whose average in that period jumps to 58 when those minnows are included) and Sangakarra were both above Ponting when you include averages vs Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Tendulka has really benefited from cashing in against the minnows. However, to be fair to Tendulka, her averages roughly the same away from home as he does at home. You can't say he has unfairly reaped the benefits of the flat tracks in India.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/495719.html

 

[Stig O'Hara]

The most technically correct batsman I've seen since Greg Chappell.

Only hits balls in his hitting zone and a huge percentage of his runs come from boundaries. Some would say that's boring, but his scoring is from pure cricket shots.

Not a bad bowler, and pretty good in slips.

Utterly no doubt, one of the greatest cricketers of all time.

 

[crowsarethebest]

He's one of the best of all time for sure. His batting is ridiculously good- IMO he's on the same peg as Ponting but Kallis has the bowling to go with it. He's still a rung below Lara and Tendulkar (in terms of batting) for mine though. Why? He just lacks the X factor with his batting, the match winning ability that those 2 and even Ponting had. He lacks gears compared to them, can't really increase his scoring rate at will. He's still a mighty damn good batsman though, and as a overall package he'll go down as one of the greats.

 

[Kong]

"Isn't an all rounder anymore" means he can't be the greatest all rounder of all time?

So we have to just ignore the previous 12 or 13 years?

 

[alfy!]

"Isn't an all rounder anymore" means he can't be the greatest all rounder of all time?

So we have to just ignore the previous 12 or 13 years?

Exactly, I don't get that reasoning. He has clearly focussed on his batting in his last patch in the game, and now averages a ridiculous number.

But that doesn't exclude how good of a bowler he was earlier. It's like Gary Ablett moving to the forward line in the twilight of his career; doesn't mean he can't be considered one of the better wing position players of all time too.

 

[glenferry23]

"Isn't an all rounder anymore" means he can't be the greatest all rounder of all time?

So we have to just ignore the previous 12 or 13 years?

agreed. its a very one dimensional viewpoint only focusing on his last couple of years as a bowler

 

[Del35196]

Im one who hasent rated him as highly as I should have, this is probably due to everytime I watch him he looks shaky and does bugger all. Just going through his stats though, absolutely amazing, it's one thing to average 56, but to also back it up with the ball is remarkable.

Could you argue the greatest cricketer ever, based on his all round stats?

 

[iDon]

Exactly, I don't get that reasoning. He has clearly focussed on his batting in his last patch in the game, and now averages a ridiculous number.

But that doesn't exclude how good of a bowler he was earlier. It's like Gary Ablett moving to the forward line in the twilight of his career; doesn't mean he can't be considered one of the better wing position players of all time too.

But he was a solid bowler at best, nothing exceptional or awesome about it. He averages nearly 36 when the minnows are filtered out and has only taken 3 5-fa's. He wasn't one to come out and win the game with the ball for the South Africans. He has done it with the bat a few times but even then he is highly criticised for his slow batting or his selfish batting. How can a bloke who is so highly criticised by people be regarded as the greatest?

He has also played for a long time in an era of cricket that has been dominated by batsman. Props to him though for having a successful career.

How do you define an all-rounder? As the bigfooty boys are so keen on statistics, what should the parameters be for an all-rounder?

For me there are and always will be two all-rounders, batting and bowling. Until someone comes along and redefines these categories (averages 45+ bat and <25 ball) there will always be two categories.

Batting all-rounder

>45 with bat and <35 with ball?

Bowling all-rounder

>30 with bat and <25 with ball?

Im not sure where you set the parameters for each. how high or low you go?

This thread has seen me view some of the games great all-rounders and my gosh some of them had tremendous statistics. Reading further into the bio's and remembering what they did on the field they were all full of character and at times their countries best players.

Kallis - 54.41 (bat) and 35.64 (ball)
Sobers - 57.78 (bat) and 34.03 (ball)
Khan - 37.69 (bat) and 22.81 (ball)
Hadlee - 27.16 (bat) and 22.29 (ball)
Botham - 33.54 (bat) and 28.49 (ball)
Miller - 36.97 (bat) and 22.97 (ball)

All exceptional numbers in their own rights. For greatest batting all-rounder you can't go past Sobers. To average so high on uncovered pitches against the best players in the world is phenomonal. Unreal. There were some serious bowling all rounders but you can't look past a bloke like Khan. Playing a lot of his games on dust bowls and still to average just under 23 with the ball is some serious effort. He could win games with bat or ball and was a weapon the Pakistan team could not do without.

I seemed to have waffled on and gone slightly offtopic.

 

[Kong]

You've also altered Kallis' bowling average.

 

[Kong]

You've also got:

Shaun Pollock - 32.31 (bat) and 23.11 (bowl)
Kapil Dev - 31.05 (bat) and 29.64 (bowl)

 

[lewigie]

Better average than tendulkar..

 

[Dixie Flatline]

I saw an interesting article that excluded performances against Bangas and Zimbabwe in the period from 1999-2011, and Kallis had the best average at 59, Ponting was next at 55, Tendulkar was actually a fair way down the list at 52. Funnily though, Tendulkar (whose average in that period jumps to 58 when those minnows are included) and Sangakarra were both above Ponting when you include averages vs Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Tendulka has really benefited from cashing in against the minnows. However, to be fair to Tendulka, her averages roughly the same away from home as he does at home. You can't say he has unfairly reaped the benefits of the flat tracks in India.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/495719.html

I wonder if anyone on ICF is prepared to post a link to that Cricinfo article on that terrible Bradman v Tendulkar thread they've got going over there.

 

[iDon]

You've also altered Kallis' bowling average.

rightly so when you remove Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Can you please put forward your reason as to why Kallis is the GREATEST? thanks Kong.

 

[CHIEF SMACKAHOE]

Disagree.

He is a batsman now and has hardly been damaging with the ball in years.

Greatest all-rounder is between Sobers, Hadlee and Khan I'd say.

sobers wasn't much of a bowler and hadlee wasn't much of a batsman. maybe khan.

 

[iDon]

sobers wasn't much of a bowler and hadlee wasn't much of a batsman. maybe khan.

Sobers had variety: medium fast, wrist spin and finger spin. To think that the captain could turn to Sir Garfield and have so many options is amazing. According to the records, articles and documentaries that I've seen/read he was the classiest fieldsman of his time.

 

[Butts_JZZ30]

I think Kallis is treated unfairly by many. I dont really by into him as a selfish or boring player. He scores bulk runs and as far as I'm concerned that makes him a vital asset. He never ever throws his wicket away or goes cheaply. He is technically a superb batsmen. He is a good slips fielder and although he rarely bowls now, he was a genuinely good bowler in his prime. If you look at the decline/increasing rarity in his bowling in the later stages of his career it is remarkable that he has averaged 32 with the ball and taken 270test wickets!!!! He was no mug with the ball.

An all time great without a doubt.

I think Australias junior batsman could learn a lot from studying the way Kallis bats.