Kallis best all rounder EVER!

[Muloghonto]

Jacques Kallis against West Indies before 1 June 2001 No code has to be inserted here.

I meant with the bat. In the first half of his career, till 2006, in 14 series vs Aus, Pak, England and WI (pre 2002), Kallis averaged 50+ with the bat only 4 times, which includes a one-off test against Pakistan in the mid 90s. What seperates the likes of Kallis, Dravid & Ponting from the likes of Tendulkar and Lara, despite being alltime great bats, is that against the best of the best attacks, its the latter two that consistently dominated & piled on the runs, while the former group had significant dip in performance against top notch attacks and piled on the runs against lesser oppositions. I am not saying the likes of Kallis, Dravid & Ponting never did anything against top quality attacks- they did, they are/were too good to fail everytime. But they performed once in a blue moon against top notch attacks and as such, they are not in the same class as Sobers, Kanhai, Viv, Lara, Tendulkar,Greg Chappell, Gavaskar, etc- the rare batsmen who dominated consistently against the top notch attacks. Most 'alltime great' batsmen, for eg, Inzamam, Miandad, Dravid, Kallis, Ponting, Border, Weeks, Barrington, etc. show a consistent pattern- they beat good (but not great) & mediocre attacks to a pulp while they do 'above average' against quality attacks consistently over their careers. Kallis falls into this class, Sobers on the other hand, definitely has more clutch innings than Sachin himself and is second only to perhaps Lara & Tendy in playing so many amazing knocks against quality opposition.

[Muloghonto]

:agree: murali too had this suspicious action but srt did not have any prob facing him

He didn't have many problems against Murali but he didn't dominate Murali either. Correction- Sachin dominated/annihilated Murali version-1. which was circa 1997 or so. Then Murali exploded onto the scene with 10-fers every 2 games or so and from then onwards, Sachin has managed to do well against Murali but not dominant against him. The only person to've dominated Murali in Murali's amazing period is Lara. But then again, Lara never dominated Warne like Sachin did either. This, IMO has more to do with how Murali & warne match up to rightie-lefties than inherent quality of those players IMO. Against exemplary players of spin, the slip cordon is not a huge threat, because they pick the line and length so well that they hardly ever edge anything. This is why, IMO, Lara has dominated Murali far more than Warne and vice versa is true for Sachin- they both dominated the bowlers who took the ball away from them, while doing significantly worse (ie, not as imperious by their standards) against the bowler who brought the ball back in to them.

[JaFanatic]

He didn't have many problems against Murali but he didn't dominate Murali either. Correction- Sachin dominated/annihilated Murali version-1. which was circa 1997 or so. Then Murali exploded onto the scene with 10-fers every 2 games or so and from then onwards, Sachin has managed to do well against Murali but not dominant against him. The only person to've dominated Murali in Murali's amazing period is Lara. But then again, Lara never dominated Warne like Sachin did either. This, IMO has more to do with how Murali & warne match up to rightie-lefties than inherent quality of those players IMO. Against exemplary players of spin, the slip cordon is not a huge threat, because they pick the line and length so well that they hardly ever edge anything. This is why, IMO, Lara has dominated Murali far more than Warne and vice versa is true for Sachin- they both dominated the bowlers who took the ball away from them, while doing significantly worse (ie, not as imperious by their standards) against the bowler who brought the ball back in to them.

it shows the quality of the batters more than the bowlers IMO. to dominate an offie for a leftie and leggie for a rightie you need tremendous hand-eye coordination which is a gifted talent for these two!

[Marut]

Kallis can't be the greatest all rounder, because he has rarely won matches for his team with his bowling. If you view his bowling stats as if you would view a batsman, he is the type who would usually score a decent 30 runs in every innings, and average 30 after 160 tests with 10000 runs. 10000 runs may appear to be a lot at a first glance, until you dissect and find that the batsman has hardly hit any centuries or fifties but has been scoring a steady 30 every time he goes to bat. That is the way he bowls. A steady accumulator of wickets but rarely a threatening or match winning bowler.

[Trichromatic]

If you view his bowling stats as if you would view a batsman' date=' he is the type who would usually score a decent 30 runs in every innings, and average 30 after 160 tests with 10000 runs. 10000 runs may appear to be a lot at a first glance, until you dissect and find that the batsman has hardly hit any centuries or fifties but has been scoring a steady 30 every time he goes to bat. That is the way he bowls. A steady accumulator of wickets but rarely a threatening or match winning bowler.[/quote'] You can't compare bowling with batting like that. A batsman can score a hundred irrespective of what other batsmen have done. But there are only 10 wickets to take when you're bowling. There is no limit on number of runs while you're batting. South Africa always had bowlers who were far superior than Kallis and even best pacers in the world. So, he always had to share wickets with them. If anytime Kallis had to pick 5 wickets then in those conditions Donlad, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn would pick more wickets quickly. While during batting all time great batsmen can fail even on flat tracks, all time great bowlers rarely fail on favorable conditions.

[Marut]

You can't compare bowling with batting like that. A batsman can score a hundred irrespective of what other batsmen have done. But there are only 10 wickets to take when you're bowling. There is no limit on number of runs while you're batting. South Africa always had bowlers who were far superior than Kallis and even best pacers in the world. So, he always had to share wickets with them. If anytime Kallis had to pick 5 wickets then in those conditions Donlad, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn would pick more wickets quickly. While during batting all time great batsmen can fail even on flat tracks, all time great bowlers rarely fail on favorable conditions.

South Africa has one of the most bowler friendly wickets in the world. The best all rounder in the world would have made much better use of the conditions even if there were better bowlers in his side. Actually, the fact that Kallis often bowled along side very good bowlers helped him to get many wickets because the opponent is always on the backfoot against SA bowlers. Batsmen are very wary facing Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Philander etc, and tend to relax against Kallis and this has often helped Kallis get wickets even with less fire in his bowling.

[Crookbond]

South Africa has one of the most bowler friendly wickets in the world. The best all rounder in the world would have made much better use of the conditions even if there were better bowlers in his side. Actually' date=' the fact that Kallis often bowled along side very good bowlers helped him to get many wickets because the opponent is always on the backfoot against SA bowlers. Batsmen are very wary facing Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Philander etc, and tend to relax against Kallis and this has often helped Kallis get wickets even with less fire in his bowling.[/quote'] Hence, proved - he is a decent enough bowler. All the things you mention (and the counter arguments) even out in the end.

[Vanarp22]

Admit it, they are just as good...this has become a useless argument I've only seen Kallis but Sobers's stats are amazing. Let's settle it there.

[Marut]

Hence' date=' proved - he is a decent enough bowler. All the things you mention (and the counter arguments) even out in the end.[/quote'] Yes, he is a decent bowler. He could be the one of the frontline bowlers of a team like India. The question is whether he is the best all rounder for being a decent bowler who cannot tear into batting line ups. A top all rounder has the ability to win or turn around a match with either bat or ball - example Kapil dev, Botham etc. Kallis does not appear to have the latter skill. The stats argument for Kallis as a taker of 270 odd wickets without significant match winning or match changing performances against good sides is weak.

[Crookbond]

Yes, he is a decent bowler. He could be the one of the frontline bowlers of a team like India. The question is whether he is the best all rounder for being a decent bowler who cannot tear into batting line ups. A top all rounder has the ability to win or turn around a match with either bat or ball - example Kapil dev, Botham etc. Kallis does not appear to have the latter skill. The stats argument for Kallis as a taker of 270 odd wickets without significant match winning or match changing performances against good sides is weak.

I think all the all rounders you mention of had match winning performances against good side when they were young. Similarly, Kallis has decent match winning performances against good sides when he was a young bowler. You are a product of your environment and therefore, Kallis is a batting all-rounder for this era. In some other era, he might have had better bowling statistics.

[King Tendulkar]

Well losing smith is a blow. But he just played the aus series and they got spanked. What we are seeing is life without the greatest all rounder ever is going to be impssoible to replace and make life much much more difficult for saffies. Boy did they need him against aussies. Life after Kallis. Not good for saffies.

[nanda14792]

I WONT RATE KALLIS AS BEST BECAUSE HE RATED LARA AHEAD OF TENDULKAR AS GREATEST BATSMAN. TIT-FOR-TAT. :beee:

[gazza]

Kallis isn't a bad bowler so with his batting he's certainly up there. but i think there are a few ahead of him, sobers, miller, procter, imran and then i think kallis comes in around there, then you have guys like botham, kapil, rice, hadlee. tbf on kallis when he did open the bowling he did alright, 8 innings averaged 23, strike rate 57 and snagged a 5 wicket haul. compare that to sobers who opened in 39 innings where he averaged 30 at a strike rate of 87. sobers gets points because so many that saw him play say he was that good despite his statistics, i don't see people talking about kallis and saying he was that good with his bowling like they do with other great all rounders. miller started off as a batsman and batted top 6 for one of the best teams ever and was turned a bowler who became one of the best in his era and opened for one of the strongest teams ever to walk onto a cricket field. he's very much rated with the bat and it's said had he not bowled he would have made it as a top batsman (his FC stats suggest he could have done so to) and many say he was a great bowler despite being left of the top lists. procter, didn't play much but did enough in county cricket and world series cricket etc to show off his stuff, in his 7 tests he showed his bowling quality, zaheer abbas said he'd be one of the first batsmen he'd pick if he was building his own team, many have said he could have been picked as a top 6 batsman alone and many have said he was such a bowler that had he had an entire test career he'd be up there with the all time great fast bowlers. imran, well no one doubts his bowling, most consider him an all time great fast bowler, he wasn't as natural as many of the other all rounders at batting (sobers, kallis, miller, procter, botham, kapil, rice, cairns) but he worked on it, this is his main downfall as an all rounder, his ceiling as a batsman wasn't as high as others (you'd probably say similar things about kallis with his bowling). botham is around about there but he really didn't do well enough for long enough imo to be put ahead of these guys, and he and kapil are the reason why i believe it's fair to rate cairns up there as an all rounder, he was a match winner with both bat and ball and had similar stats to these 2 great all rounders. hadllee as terrific of a bowler he was didn't quite reach the heights he needed to with the bat to be rated with sobers, miller, procter, kalllis, imran. his batting did improve through his career like imran's but imran still achieved more with the bat, though averaging 31 with 14 tons and 59 half tons with a top score of 210* show that he did have some batting potential.

[bharat297]

Can't compare with sobers because they played in different eras. But in terms of modern day all rounders ... If I had to pick one player for an entire year, I'd go with Kallis ... If I had to pick one for one match, I'd go with imran Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

[gazza]

If I was picking for just one match I'd probably pick Procter.

[gazza]

And if I was picking an all rounder to play for my life then probably miller as he tended to try harder and perform better when things were tough.