Greatest cricketer post 1990

[Migara]

Kevin Pietersen is a specialist all rounder. Don't forget that he bowls too.

AB's keeping >>>> KP's bowling. Put in otherwords, KP's bowling is ****, while AB's keeping is at least ODI standard.

 

[Champ]

Batsman - Lara
Pace bowler - Akram/Mcgrath
Spinner - Muralitharan

 

[Uppercut]

I picked Shane Warne. WAFG.

I completely agree that none of the specialists can quite match the output of a genuine all-rounder that's world-class in one discipline like Kallis and Pollock were. But I can't really be bothered having that argument every time.

 

[asty80]

Its between Warnie and Sachin for me..and its damn hard to better the art of legspin. Hence I'll go with Warnie.
I suspect we might see the next sachin sooner than we see the next warnie.

 

[fezzie]

I remind you all that "greatest" =/= "best". The 11 that have voted for Kallis should hang their heads in shame tbh.

its a poll, isnt it?

yes kallis is the greatest cricketer for me. he is the jacques of all trade.



why hand our heads in shame? kevin pietesen said this in 2009
" "I truly believe that Jacques Kallis is the greatest cricketer ever. He's just phenomenal"

and recently pietersen tweeted after the 36th ton which is now 38

Kallis scores his 36 test ton.. Along with his 250+ wickets & doesn't drop a catch... Is he the best cricketer ever??? I think so!!


players in the game acknowledge this, maybe you should find a thread and hang your head in shame pal.

 

[Maximus0723]

No way. Not even close. McGrath, in particular, owned everyone he came up against. Bradman should consider himself lucky not to have faced him.

This. Absolutely this.

 

[Athlai]

On what basis?

A swallow doesn't make a summer, AB is a high quality middle order bat but Watto is a quality opener and a handy bowler.

 

[Cevno]

I know Kallis is under-rated and all that. But imagine these cricketers up for sell for your team to play a 5-test series. Those who have voted for Kallis will really bid the highest for him? Find it hard to believe tbh.

I agree with this.

His bowling would not be neccesarily required if you have 4 top class bowlers in any case .
Besides though his average might be decent he has always been a backup bowler .

And if we are considering ODI's too compared to others his value goes down a bit too. Same was the case with warne too.

It was between Murali,Mcgrath and Sachin for me.

Very very hard to split,But Went with Sachin because he has been at the very top and great this whole time period which is to be evaluated. Outlasting everybody.

 

[TumTum]

players in the game acknowledge this, maybe you should find a thread and hang your head in shame pal.

players? If Kevin said it, it must be true

 

[Uppercut]

A swallow doesn't make a summer, AB is a high quality middle order bat but Watto is a quality opener and a handy bowler.

Mmm I don't think so.. Watto's actually been properly good for Australia but the test side crumbling around him has sometimes made his consistent 7/10 contributions just seem inadequate or inconsequential. Ponting, Clarke and Katich really aren't making the most of having a player around who so frequently sees off the new ball and gets a few runs on the board.

Fitness is a pretty huge issue though, I think he's actually unable to bowl (or just doesn't much) in more tests than he is, so although I really rate his bowling I still only think of him as a partial all-rounder. Fielding has to come into the equation as well when someone's as demonic as AB is, especially with Watto not being the best slip ever. And calling AB a high-quality bat undersells him by quite a bit, he's been on a "hot streak" for three years now, has every right to be considered one of the best in the world for a test match taking place tomorrow.

So while I think your point about Watto being rather underappreciated is spot on, I can't agree with the conclusion because I think De Villiers is probably even more underappreciated. And doesn't have quite the same fanbase to fight his corner for him .

 

[Uppercut]

I know Kallis is under-rated and all that. But imagine these cricketers up for sell for your team to play a 5-test series. Those who have voted for Kallis will really bid the highest for him? Find it hard to believe tbh.

Haha, it's funny how we all define "best" or "greatest" slightly differently. The fictional auction isn't something that enters my mind..

I'd certainly be bidding a lot more for Kallis than I would any other specialist batsman of the last twenty years. It's tough to compare batsmen and bowlers so I'm a bit undecided as far as that goes. But it's not tough at all to compare a world-class batsman who's also serious wicket-taking threat with the ball to a world-class batsman who isn't.

 

[Hit Wicket]

To people advocating Kallis and Pollock, don't you think it's absolutely essential for a player to be in the top notch category of at least one suit before laying a claim to be the best ever cricketer. Neither Kallis nor Pollock would count amongst the top 20 batsmen or bowlers in the game. Even counting from 1990, neither would be in the top 5.

I know it's a bit harsh to be using the term with respect to these tremendously exceptional cricketers, but isn't it a bit like picking bits and pieces cricketers over specialists?

 

[akilana]

To people advocating Kallis and Pollock, don't you think it's absolutely essential for a player to be in the top notch category of at least one suit before laying a claim to be the best ever cricketer. Neither Kallis nor Pollock would count amongst the top 20 batsmen or bowlers in the game. Even counting from 1990, neither would be in the top 5.

I know it's a bit harsh to be using the term with respect to these tremendously exceptional cricketers, but isn't it a bit like picking bits and pieces cricketers over specialists?

epic fail

 

[0RI0N]

To people advocating Kallis and Pollock, don't you think it's absolutely essential for a player to be in the top notch category of at least one suit before laying a claim to be the best ever cricketer. Neither Kallis nor Pollock would count amongst the top 20 batsmen or bowlers in the game. Even counting from 1990, neither would be in the top 5.

I know it's a bit harsh to be using the term with respect to these tremendously exceptional cricketers, but isn't it a bit like picking bits and pieces cricketers over specialists?

Epic fail that has to be quoted again.
Kallis or Murali.They win matches for their teams and contribute a lot.
Kallis haters umadkat?

 

[ankitj]

Epic fail that has to be quoted again.
Kallis or Murali.They win matches for their teams and contribute a lot.
Kallis haters umadkat?

No one hates Kallis, please.

I jsut don't feel Kallis is an impact player who can help leave the opposition in tatters. And even after taking into account his bowling (which is only part-time), he doesn't become more valuable for me than Murali, Warne, McGrath, Tendulkar, Lara or Ambrose.

Before creating this poll I did not actually expect him to get 2nd highest votes.

 

[fezzie]

Mmm I don't think so.. Watto's actually been properly good for Australia but the test side crumbling around him has sometimes made his consistent 7/10 contributions just seem inadequate or inconsequential. Ponting, Clarke and Katich really aren't making the most of having a player around who so frequently sees off the new ball and gets a few runs on the board.

Fitness is a pretty huge issue though, I think he's actually unable to bowl (or just doesn't much) in more tests than he is, so although I really rate his bowling I still only think of him as a partial all-rounder. Fielding has to come into the equation as well when someone's as demonic as AB is, especially with Watto not being the best slip ever. And calling AB a high-quality bat undersells him by quite a bit, he's been on a "hot streak" for three years now, has every right to be considered one of the best in the world for a test match taking place tomorrow.

So while I think your point about Watto being rather underappreciated is spot on, I can't agree with the conclusion because I think De Villiers is probably even more underappreciated. And doesn't have quite the same fanbase to fight his corner for him .

devilliers > watson.

I posted on here a few months back sayin how ppl talk abt clarke and KP as the next big thing but abdv is the main man. hes been nothing but amazing in all formats. im sure if someone pulls his stats for the past few years and compares it with the rest hes right up there with the best of them.

oh yeah he also already has ODI player of the year under his belt.

champion cricketer, treat to watch.

 

[Jarquis]

To people advocating Kallis and Pollock, don't you think it's absolutely essential for a player to be in the top notch category of at least one suit before laying a claim to be the best ever cricketer. Neither Kallis nor Pollock would count amongst the top 20 batsmen or bowlers in the game. Even counting from 1990, neither would be in the top 5.

I know it's a bit harsh to be using the term with respect to these tremendously exceptional cricketers, but isn't it a bit like picking bits and pieces cricketers over specialists?

Yeah, quoting this for the next time somebody tells me Kallis is fairly rated on this forum.

 

[Athlai]

Better bats than Kallis since 1990:

Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Waugh, Dravid, Inzi, Sanga and maybe Flower

I think you'd struggle beyond those guys and beyond the first 3 Kallis probably could be said to be better than the others.

Better bowlers than Pollock since 1990:
Warne, Murali, McGrath, Waqar, Wasim, Ambrose, Donald and I'd say thats it.

So both are roughly in the top 8 of their specialist field in their era and easily provide more with the ball (Kallis) / bat (Pollock) than their counterparts.

Bits and pieces cricketers for sure. Really you could argue Kallis is in the top 50 (or 30 if you are more adventerous than me) of bowlers in his era, how isn't that an essential player? He is at the top in his specialist field, the difference is so negilible beyond the best 3 and the rest of the top 10 batsman.

The same is true of Pollock albeit to a lesser extent.

 

[TT Boy]

A swallow doesn't make a summer, AB is a high quality middle order bat but Watto is a quality opener and a handy bowler.

Swallow? 3 years of brilliance...

All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

All-round records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[TT Boy]

Better bats than Kallis since 1990:

Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Waugh, Dravid, Inzi, Sanga and maybe Flower

I think you'd struggle beyond those guys and beyond the first 3 Kallis probably could be said to be better than the others.

Better bowlers than Pollock since 1990:
Warne, Murali, McGrath, Waqar, Wasim, Ambrose, Donald and I'd say thats it.

So both are roughly in the top 8 of their specialist field in their era and easily provide more with the ball (Kallis) / bat (Pollock) than their counterparts.

Bits and pieces cricketers for sure. Really you could argue Kallis is in the top 50 (or 30 if you are more adventerous than me) of bowlers in his era, how isn't that an essential player? He is at the top in his specialist field, the difference is so negilible beyond the best 3 and the rest of the top 10 batsman.

The same is true of Pollock albeit to a lesser extent.

No way.