Lance Klusener- contender for greatest ODI allrounder- or at least all-time XI?

[Richard]

Kallis vs Klusener as ODI bowlers is a very interesting question IMO.

Kallis vs Klusener as ODI batsmen might be too... if they weren't so totally and completely incomparable. For mine, Klusener benefited from Kallis to a degree you couldn't possibly put a number on, and ditto the other way around.

Real, real shame they ended-up only playing together for 5 or 6 years, when it should've been 10 or so. Kallis, Klusener and Pollock in the same team is a recipe for

(Provided you're a SA fan, obv.)

 

[morgieb]

Yes. One of the all-time greats in ODI's.

 

[gettingbetter]

By far my favourite ODI player of all time, so you'll know what my answer is.

The simple fact is that he was a match-winner that could of done better - mainly citing the fact that SA should of used up higher when needed. In the 99 WC, even though he probably had the greatest series an ODI player has ever had, he still came in too low at certain moments. And lets just make note that his match-winning skills were not just limited to that tournament

His bowling hasn't been talked about much on here. I know that Dickinson will get out the RPO arguement, but considering that he was competing against Donald, Pollock and maybe de Villiers, in that light his bowling figures are quite amazing. Add to that the match-winner tag, he has more 5-fors than Pollock and Donald and he is equal 5th of all-time, ranking alongside two Pakistani greats; Wasim and Saqlain.

I can't see any all-rounder from the 90s ranking alongside Klusener, but if we go back to the previous decade, debate will occur. Obviously the greats like Imran, Kapil and possibly Hadlee, although the latter was more of a bowler who was 'handy with the bat.

 

[popepouri]

Kallis vs Klusener as ODI bowlers is a very interesting question

Klusener > Kallis in the beginning of his career

Kallis > Klusener at the end of his career.

mainly citing the fact that SA should of used up higher

He batted poorly when he came in higher than 6.

 

[Precambrian]

Klusener, what a matchwinner!!! Sad he never made into Smith's books and got dropped relatively early. Could've hung around for a year or so.

 

[NUFAN]

Klusener was pretty much the most fearful cricketer in the world in 99, shame for him that he couldn't just score 1 more run in the semi final [I was happy].

Very close to an ALL TIME World XI, but he'd probably be just out of my side.

RTD a possible all time World XI contender?

 

[Top_Cat]

Loved Zulu, not surprised his numbers were so good. Made a lot of tough runs too, not just in easy circumstances. He's my Watto.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

He's my Watto.

Gay.

 

[Top_Cat]

Gay.

Figures a ****er like you wouldn't understand our love.

 

[krkode]

When I think ODI all-rounder, I tend to think of someone who can win a match with either bat or ball on a fairly consistent basis. And I think Klusener fits the bill the best. Maybe Chris Cairns as my #2 in terms of match-winning ability, but his over all record is hardly as good as Klusener's. Although, I think that may have something to do with the fact that NZ have more often through the 90s been on the losing side compared to SA who enjoyed great success during that time.

Guys like Kallis and Jayasuriya I feel are more batsmen who can occasionally bowl a great spell. And then there's guys like Pollock and Abdul Razzaq who can occasionally do damage with the bat. All of them match-winners, though.

And while we're talking about '99 and match-winners, let's have a shout-out to another great all-round performance from that tournament - Neil Johnson.

 

[Richard]

Neil Johnson is so unlucky. All right, he had a shortish career, but he doesn't get anywhere near the credit he deserves for his excellence as a ODI opener.

Easily Zimbabwe's best ODI batsman, never mind all-round cricketer, ever for mine.

 

[Richard]

The simple fact is that he was a match-winner that could of done better - mainly citing the fact that SA should of used up higher when needed. In the 99 WC, even though he probably had the greatest series an ODI player has ever had, he still came in too low at certain moments. And lets just make note that his match-winning skills were not just limited to that tournament

Thing is, Klusener's skills were best used in the circumstances he found himself in. How often did we end-up thinking "if only Klusener had come in earlier". I can think of 1 occasion and even that's pretty debateable - the WC2003 game against West Indies.

And as alluded to, when he was sent in above seven or eight, he didn't often do that well.

His bowling hasn't been talked about much on here. I know that Dickinson will get out the RPO arguement, but considering that he was competing against Donald, Pollock and maybe de Villiers, in that light his bowling figures are quite amazing. Add to that the match-winner tag, he has more 5-fors than Pollock and Donald and he is equal 5th of all-time, ranking alongside two Pakistani greats; Wasim and Saqlain.

Regardless of who else is in the team, a poor economy-rate is a poor economy-rate. What disappoints me is that Klusener, at his best, was essentially a very accurate bowler - same as Kallis. The attack of Pollock, Kallis, Donald, Klusener, AN Other (in WC99 it was Elworthy who outperformed the lot of them) was potentially by far the best in modern ODI history, but because Kallis and Klusener never quite manged the economy-rates they should, it wasn't irrefutably so.

I think Matthews and de Villiers, both of whom were also outstanding ODI bowlers, had both pretty much left the team by the time he came in.

 

[kiwi_chick]

If I recall correctly, De Villiers last ODI was in '97 at Lahore against Sri Lanka, when Klusener scored 99 batting at number three. :roll:

In the previous game, also against Sri Lanka, Klusener made 54 in 41 balls batting at number three and took 6/49. Oh and De Villiers took one wicket in each of the two matches.

 

[Richard]

To answer the question: Craig Matthews had finished his ODI career by the time Klusener hit the scene; PSdeV played alongside him in 7 matches.

 

[ozone]

Neil Johnson is so unlucky. All right, he had a shortish career, but he doesn't get anywhere near the credit he deserves for his excellence as a ODI opener.

Easily Zimbabwe's best ODI batsman, never mind all-round cricketer, ever for mine.

Andy Flower? Johnson might have a slightly higher average but, IMO, Flower carried the Zimbabwean batting for over 200 games, and his average would have been considerbly higher had he been playing in a better team.

 

[Richard]

Think it might've been lower TBH. And think Flower's superlative nature in Tests often makes people think he was better in ODIs than he was. In reality he was no more than slightly above average at the shorter game.

And Flower's average came up considerably towards the end of his career - for most of it Johnson's was 3-4 runs higher. Not sure how different their strike-rates are, but Johnson was damn good at getting after bowling early on when it was wayward - and unlike quite a few batsmen of that nature, he could also pare back when the bowling was good.

It's a real shame he only had a short ODI career, as I say - because he was a damn good batsman and a useful, if far from flawless, bowler.

 

[tooextracool]

When I rewatch some of Klusener's 99 wc innings, I still get goosebumps and I dont say that about many players. Absolutely lethal, I cant think of any other player that could inspire fear in the opposition like he did and it didnt seem to matter if the ball was seaming around the place either. He did however, genuinely struggle to score against the spinners and that was his real achilles heel. It wasnt like he had a genuine weakness against spin as hed scored runs against some top spinners in the longer format, but he struggled to get the runs flowing against spinners in ODIs and that is why his record against all the subcontinental teams are somewhat disappointing. So I am a bit surprised that his record is that good, especially for someone who routinely batted so low down the order, but I do rate him very highly and he along with Pollock surely have to be the best ODI all rounders in the history of the game.

 

[Ikki]

TBF, if it wasn't for Warne, S.Africa would have won the 99 WC.

 

[NUFAN]

TBF, if it wasn't for Warne, S.Africa would have won the 99 WC.

Pretty hard to say that Warne would have made an impact on the Pakistan performance in the final.

 

[Richard]

Even with Warne, if it wasn't for an inability to run the most vital single of the whole SA team's lives, they'd still have reached the final - and thus, on the presumption that Pakistan would've gone to pieces the way they did against Aus, won it.