Sooda Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 No allrounder could make it into their teams as solely a batsman or a bowler. Thats the ideal I guess, but its never going to happen. Remove India (vs whom he scored 3 of his 6 tons) and NZ and Imrans average drops to 32 from 37. So slightly overrated maybe- but why do say 'massively' mr W? Dont know much about his career but his record is fantastic One thing about Kapil I have never got- people always point to how he bowled on Indian dustbeds and how took wickets despite that. Actually the not always even bounce in India helped him- he averags 26 at home with the ball as opp to 32 away. Average in Eng is 39 and in NZ is 42- two countries where youd expect it to be pretty good given the conditions and the not amazing opposition Hadlee is the other of course and he shouldnt even be an allrounder he was a great bowler who could bat a bit.
vvvslaxman Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 Kapil dev's achievement with ball is under-rated. During the peak period of West Indies Kapil Dev was the most successful bowler against them in terms of wickets much like VVS Laxman who is the highest run getter against Australia during their peak period. (1979 - 1995) 83 wickets 23 avge Strike rate 49. http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;opposition=4;spanmax1=01+Jan+1995;spanmin1=01+Jan+1979;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Jersey #10 Posted October 13, 2009 Posted October 13, 2009 I can almost admire him more than sachin tendulkar. Just look at the numbers. http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/45789.html He is not a typical all rounder who is either a batting all-rounder or bowling all rounder. He is literally two players combined in one! I rank him the best all rounder to ever play cricket just because I haven't seen sobers play nor read much about him.
Lord Posted October 13, 2009 Posted October 13, 2009 an article comparing the two http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/391570.html
champ Posted October 13, 2009 Posted October 13, 2009 i would say he was best all rounder few years back when he used to bowl fast and complete his full quota of overs .. batting was always good .. so now he is a average all rounder .. not highly consistent with bat and ball..
Brainfade Posted December 16, 2009 Posted December 16, 2009 Kallis meanwhile gets no hype. It because of his boring persona. He is never in controversey, never does anything silly and is clinically efficient when playing cricket, without the pleasing to the eye flourishes of other lesser players. This no thrills style but of course devestaingly effective means no hype. I mean Flintoff is talked of as the great all rounder in last few years and he is not fit to clean Kallis' shoes! You captured the issue with that one sentence. Kallis is not "explosive." He does not have a single double-century. He has never taken 10 wickets in a match. Yet he averages 54+ and 31. The result? He is seen as a dependable cricketer, not a match-winner. Every one of the other great all-rounders were/are flamboyant match-winners who could completely dominate on some days, and completely tank on others.
The Outsider Posted December 16, 2009 Posted December 16, 2009 It's very important to segregate bowling allrounders from batting allrounders when making these comparisons. It doesn't make sense to compare a bowling allrounder like Imran/Kapil with Sobers/Kallis.
Pak_Forever Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Never understood why he's not rated highly like several others. Avg. of almost 55 with the bat and 31 with he ball with 258 wickets is a top-notch stuff. Brilliant player. :hatsoff:
bharat297 Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 Agreed, he is not a match-winner, however he is an ultimate team player. Id still have him in my team for reliability. However, you would never see Kallis bowl a spell like Flintoff's one at Edgbaston, or the one he bowled to Kallis in 2008. Nor would you ever see Kallis take apart an attack the way someone like Botham or Kapil Dev did. In my opinion, after Sobers, Imran Khan is the next best all-rounder (because of the presence he had on the field) then Kallis.
King Tendulkar Posted December 25, 2013 Author Posted December 25, 2013 Maybe best ever? Sobers v Kallis
Marut Posted December 25, 2013 Posted December 25, 2013 Numbers aren't every thing. Kallis can neither demolish any opposition with his batting nor with his bowling. He is not in the league of classical all rounders. He is a very good batsman and a useful bowler though. But an all rounder must be able to win matches for his country, with his bat or with the ball - simple accumulation of numbers over 165 tests does not passeth. Kallis is a match winner with the bat all right ( though a shade below the best batsmen of his era), but is he one with the ball?
hhhhdmt Posted December 25, 2013 Posted December 25, 2013 Kallis and Sobers are the best batting all rounders. Imran, Pollock and Hadlee are the best bowling ones Kapil and Botham's abilities with the ball and bat are a bit more balanced. They weren't outstanding batsmen, nor bowlers but very good with both What is clear is that Kallis is easily the best all rounder of the last 20 years, with Shaun Pollock being his only serious competition. And ofcourse Kallis is one of the all time greats.
King Tendulkar Posted December 25, 2013 Author Posted December 25, 2013 Kallis and Sobers are the best batting all rounders. Imran, Pollock and Hadlee are the best bowling ones Kapil and Botham's abilities with the ball and bat are a bit more balanced. They weren't outstanding batsmen, nor bowlers but very good with both What is clear is that Kallis is easily the best all rounder of the last 20 years, with Shaun Pollock being his only serious competition. And ofcourse Kallis is one of the all time greats. Generally agree. Not sure Pollock is all rounder Keith Miller deserves mentioning
Lord Posted December 25, 2013 Posted December 25, 2013 Generally agree. Not sure Pollock is all rounder Keith Miller deserves mentioning why's that?
King Tendulkar Posted December 25, 2013 Author Posted December 25, 2013 Maybe being harsh on pollock. But never really rated his batting
Sachin=GOD Posted December 25, 2013 Posted December 25, 2013 why's that? his batting was considerably weaker than all the other "all rounders" we have on the list IMO.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now