Tendulkar vs Kallis

[silentstriker]

It's a pity how little recognization Kallis receives.

Eh? How little? I think he gets his just due IMO. As a pure batsman, he is right behind Ponting for this century, along with Dravid.

 

[Perm]

the removal of 'non test standard' stats is of course completely arbitrary crap.

How so?

 

[Richard]

Yeah but to say he'd had it since he was 27 or 29 is really pushing it. Actually, he is probably in his best period since that 'era'.

Except he was 31 - and suffering from tennis-elbow - when his decline started. It's perfectly reasonable.

 

[Richard]

LOL, that's absolutely absurd. If I, or anyone, expects to give Tendulkar the same credit for being a great batsman in a supposedly harder era, I will also expect him to do well in an easier one. That's just logical. If Tendulkar were averaging anything near the others, but just not as close as them, then that's something entirely different. Averaging 49, whereas guys like Ponting and Kallis are 71 and 66 respectively, IS something totally different.

No one is saying Tendulkar ISN'T a lesser played since 2003 because that's the whole point... he is. And when the conditions also suit scoring runs even more, then that damns his trough even more.

Tendulkar is no longer in a class of his own because of this because he really doesn't have much of an excuse for that kind of drop.

What this means is:

1) Scoring runs in this era, whilst it maybe easier, is still a very difficult thing to do. Even if you wish to take of a full 10 points off Ponting, he is still averaging a monster amount of runs.

2) Tendulkar cannot be excused in these comparisons for scoring this much lower. Sure, no one can take away his legacy, but at the same time he has fallen from grace and not at the end of his career or to any such notion that would suggest he is at the end of it or incapable. He just hasn't been good enough.

I'm not claiming Tendulkar has any massive excuse for this kind of drop, though as you see above, I certainly feel there is some mitigation.

However, I still hold 11 years of excellence in a generally tough period and 1 in an easier one (regardless of the fact that it was followed by 3 years of relative paucity in an easier one) in far higher esteem than I hold 6 years of excellence in an easier time following-on from 5 or 6 of no-more-than-good performances in a generally tough one.

However, the central point is that I really don't care overtly about someone having 3 years of relative paucity (which is what averaging 42 between 2003 and 2006 was) when they've had 12 of excellence. It doesn't mean much to me. Especially when 18 months of that was hampered, severely, by tennis-elbow. Because if you can find me someone else who was excellent for 15 years and 170 or 180-odd innings, then we'll talk about how it reflects so abysmally on Tendulkar that he was unable to do this.

One other thing - do you deny that, had Tendulkar continued to play as he did between 1990 and 2002, that he'd have been very likely to have averaged around the 70 mark that the likes of Ponting and Kallis have since 2001\02?

 

[Beleg]

silentstriker,

He doesn't get his due on cricketweb, let alone generally.

Perm,

been there, done that.

 

[silentstriker]

silentstriker,

He doesn't get his due on cricketweb, let alone generally.

The fact that a lot of people put him as a better batsman than Tendulkar on this thread, and thus by definition, making him arguably the greatest batsman of his generation shows that he does.

 

[Perm]

Perm,

been there, done that.

Righteo then.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I can't be bothered to read the whole thread but if anyone has seriously stated that Kallis is a better batsman than Tendulkar at his peak then urgent remedial surgery is required.

 

[Manee]

I am just going to compare their batting since it is hard to compare Kallis' bowling with the combination of Tendulkar's bowling and aura which motivates team mates to perform.

Tests

A close contest

The averages excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are:

Kallis: 53.41
Tendulkar: 51.74

Kallis clearly has the better average and this makes Kallis the better Test match batsman. Kallis has no conversion issues with 28 hundreds and 45 fifties and does not have the privledge of a home country famous for flat pitches but rather one famous for fast, bouncy tracks. Kallis has also had the similarly tough but reasonable job as batting spearhead with arguably worse partners than Tendulkar has had. Kallis is no doubt and exploiter of good conditions such as Pakistan and India where he has played well but succeeding where the other has not succeeded as much cannot be taken as a negative in a comparison.

Selecting a team to play against a similarly strong team (Living Vs Dead for example), I would have Tendulkar because I feel his strength is relishing a challenge and excelling.

ODIs

The averages in ODIs are remarkably similar but Tendulkar's speed of scoring and superb fifty to hundred conversion (except this year of course) makes him a clear winner here. Furthermore, Kallis' average is helped by having 10 more not outs in about a million less innings whereas Tendulkar often opens.

No stats needed here, Tendulkar the clear winner in 50 over cricket.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Kallis clearly has the better average and this makes Kallis the better Test match batsman.

 

[Jono]

It's a pity how little recognization Kallis receives.

Disagree. Used to be that way, but as SS said, the fact that people are saying he's a better test batsman than Sachin suggests not.

Go and ask the likes of Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Shoaib Akhtar or Flintoff who they think Kallis is the better batsman, and I think you'd get a different answer.

Ian Chappell would probably laugh But that's a different story.

 

[JBH001]

Kallis is a lot better than people think, and especially recently has come on a lot and started getting the recognition he deserves. Kallis is a great bat. However, Sachin's recent form slump in tests notwithstanding (and stats aside) he is, I believe, a class above. I would rate SRT the better bat than JK by a considerable distance.

 

[adharcric]

Tendulkar as a batsman (though not by as much as some would suggest) and Kallis as a cricketer (though not by as much as some would suggest). Kallis comes just behind Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Dravid in this generation.

 

[Ikki]

One other thing - do you deny that, had Tendulkar continued to play as he did between 1990 and 2002, that he'd have been very likely to have averaged around the 70 mark that the likes of Ponting and Kallis have since 2001\02?

Deny it? You say it as a fact. No, I am not sure he would. His contemporary in his own team hasn't managed it (Dravid) and he has been said to be equal to the likes of Ponting and Kallis so it is no automatic assumption. COULD he? Sure. But he didn't. 2003-2007, 5 years of averaging sub-50 in an 'easy' era. I think that does dent his legacy of the 12 before, sorry to say.

 

[Perm]

TBF to Dravid, he has averaged 62 since the start of 2002 which is pretty damn good. Not to mention he averages 67 when playing away, something I doubt many batsmen in the current era could lay claim to.

EDIT:

Since 2002 Kallis averages 66 overall, and 64 away from home.
Ponting averages 71 overall and 62 away.

 

[pasag]

Kallis clearly has the better average and this makes Kallis the better Test match batsman.

 

[Manee]

A foolish comment on my behalf but reading the rest of the post will make you realise the context which I have put the figures in.

 

[funnygirl]

I don't like Tendulkar so statistics tells the whole story



I like Tendulkar ,so statistics never tells the whole story

 

[Manee]

I don't like Tendulkar so statistics tells the whole story

I like Tendulkar ,so statistics never tells the whole story

Different forms of the game, if you want me to provide statistics of Tendulkar being better than Kallis in ODIs, please ask but I do not think it is necessary.

 

[funnygirl]

Different forms of the game, if you want me to provide statistics of Tendulkar being better than Kallis in ODIs, please ask but I do not think it is necessary.

ODIs are nothing.Tests are importanat .Moreover don't bring statistics minus minnows

Manee ,i was kidding . These are all personal preferences . A very good member of this forum The Sean stated this "'Statistics are fans' bloody tactics'.Very true.