Kallis vs Ponting as test batsmen

[Ruckus]

Average of 53.82 is not equal to 56.82 ( Kallis has a better average in both formats )

Some of you will say that we dont go by stats, so be it. You are already targeting Kallis's SR by comparing numbers.

Also would you please DEFINE the meaning of achieved here? What did he achieve? He achieved ( as a skipper / batsman ) more when he had Warney, Pidge, Gilly, Haydos.

As it is, that difference in average is practically negligible anyway, but it is also reflects an unfair comparison where Ponting is in a trough and Kallis is in a peak (just 1 year ago Ponting's average was also 56). Furthermore, Kallis has a good deal more not-outs both in test and ODIs (significantly) hence inflating his average.

I never indicated to just use these stats as the only basis for argument, but I'm saying as their records ARE (fact) almost indentical, what reasons would a Kallis supported have to suggest he is better given Ponting's SR is far superior?

And what I meant by 'achieve' was simply the amount of runs/centuries etc. they have scored. To suggest that Ponting only played that well because he had a good team is ridiculous. Even if he is in a good team, he still has to have the skill to be able to score as proficiently as he did. He also has scored centuries many time when one or both of the openers failed, so that argument is pretty weak imo.

 

[robelinda]

I was there for that MCG ton, flattest pitch of the summer, wasnt anything in it for the bowlers at all. Kallis played ok but it was pretty tame Day 5 stuff, wouldnt call it an awesome knock by any means. Bored the absolute pants out of the crowd, he couldnt even hit the ball off the square for the whole day. Hung in, give him credit for that, thats what his team needed, he'd been made to look a complete fool in previous tests vs Aus, and in the ones after that too that summer.

 

[Jarquis]

And no you don't win games JUST because you score more than your opponents..

I didn't say it was the only way to win a game. However, find me an example of a match, with a genuine result, where the winner has scored fewer runs than the loser.
I can provide you with examples of matches where teams have won despite not taking 20 wickets.

 

[Jarquis]

As it is, that difference in average is practically negligible anyway, but it is also reflects an unfair comparison where Ponting is in a trough and Kallis is in a peak (just 1 year ago Ponting's average was also 56). Furthermore, Kallis has a good deal more not-outs both in test and ODIs (significantly) hence inflating his average.

I never indicated to just use these stats as the only basis for argument, but I'm saying as their records ARE (fact) almost indentical, what reasons would a Kallis supported have to suggest he is better given Ponting's SR is far superior?

And what I meant by 'achieve' was simply the amount of runs/centuries etc. they have scored. To suggest that Ponting only played that well because he had a good team is ridiculous. Even if he is in a good team, he still has to have the skill to be able to score as proficiently as he did. He also has scored centuries many time when one or both of the openers failed, so that argument is pretty weak imo.

lol.

 

[honestbharani]

I didn't say it was the only way to win a game. However, find me an example of a match, with a genuine result, where the winner has scored fewer runs than the loser.
I can provide you with examples of matches where teams have won despite not taking 20 wickets.

And those would be very very rare... which is my point. And it is against the REALLY good opposition that your runs would mean more, as it is more likely that others would fail and that your bowlers would also need the cushion of a few extra runs... And I just don't think Kallis beats Ponting there...

 

[Ruckus]

lol.

Kallis has 16 more not-outs in ODI's than Ponting in 50 less innings. Are you seriously doubting whether that will exaggerate Kallis' ODI average?

 

[Jarquis]

Kallis has 16 more not-outs in ODI's than Ponting in 50 less innings. Are you seriously doubting whether that will exaggerate Kallis' ODI average?

Not outs don't inflate anything.
However, the lol was more so to do with the point you were making in Tests.

 

[Ruckus]

Not outs don't inflate anything.
However, the lol was more so to do with the point you were making in Tests.

MS Dhoni and Michael Hussey beg to differ. In tests it is not as much of an issue, but I already said the current difference between Kallis' and Ponting's average is negligible anyway, so it isn't even particularly relevent.

 

[Jono]

Surely... surely no one is arguing Kallis is a better ODI batsman than Ponting?

 

[Jarquis]

MS Dhoni and Michael Hussey beg to differ.

Your average is calculated by runs scored / number of dismissals. Not outs don't inflate it.

Conveniently ignore that fact that your initial about the importance of NOs in Tests being bull**** though.. which I'll reiterate, was the main reason for my post.

 

[Ruckus]

kingkallis was implying it by saying "Kallis has a better average in both formats".

 

[Ruckus]

Your average is calculated by runs scored / number of dismissals. Not outs don't inflate it.

Conveniently ignore that fact that your initial about the importance of NOs in Tests being bull**** though.. which I'll reiterate, was the main reason for my post.

Haha yes they do. If someone is not-out it means the runs will be added to their overall total without an additional dismissal = inflated average.

And not I didn't ignore it, you just replied before the edit. The whole point was raised because kingkallis said the current difference between Ponting and Hussey's average meant their records weren't identical (with specific mention of both formats). I already said in isn't as significant in tests.

 

[Mike5181]

You can't really apply the not out argument for a player whose career span is 15 years or whatever and is a number 4 batsmen. It only really works with players like Bevan, Hussey, Dhoni etc

 

[Ruckus]

You can't really apply the not out argument for a player whose career span is 15 years or whatever and is a number 4 batsmen. It only really works with players like Bevan, Hussey, Dhoni etc

Yes you can, because Kallis in ODIs is much less of an aggressive batsmen than Ponting and will stay around until the end much more frequently. Anyway as Jono implied, there is no contest about who is a better ODI batsmen, so lets just leave that topic aside...

 

[Jarquis]

Haha yes they do. If someone is not-out it means the runs will be added to their overall total without an additional dismissal = inflated average.

And not I didn't ignore it, you just replied before the edit. The whole point was raised because kingkallis said the current difference between Ponting and Hussey's average meant their records weren't identical (with specific mention of both formats). I already said in isn't as significant in tests.

They don't inflate it. Your average is your average, if bowlers can't dismiss a batsman then so be it. Not getting out is never a bad thing

 

[Ruckus]

They don't inflate it. Your average is your average, if bowlers can't dismiss a batsman then so be it. Not getting out is never a bad thing

By that logic in ODIs all players should have SR's of 50 and play like it's test cricket just so the bowlers can't dismiss them, hence making the innings total an epic 150/0.

 

[Jarquis]

By that logic in ODIs all players should have SR's of 50 and play like it's test cricket just so the bowlers can't dismiss them, hence making the innings total an epic 150/0.

No because I've never implied that simply having a better average makes you a better od player.

 

[Ruckus]

Saying "not getting out is never a bad thing" implies that statement is true at the expense of everything else (e.g. SR, winning matches etc). Or, in other words, maintaining an average for the sake of it is also never bad. Both statements are bull**** for both tests and ODIs.

 

[Jarquis]

So you wouldn't criticise the batsman for not getting out, you'd criticise them for having a low Sr. Being dismissed itself is not a positive.

 

[Uppercut]

You can't really apply the not out argument for a player whose career span is 15 years or whatever and is a number 4 batsmen. It only really works with players like Bevan, Hussey, Dhoni etc

We actually went through this a while back for Dhoni and found it to be a bit ridiculous- basically he was finishing not-out so often because he kept winning India games!