Kallis retires from Tests

[Jassy]

Well what you said about him having it easier wrt to his bowling is not true. He competes with Steyn and Co for wickets and on good pitches he was unlikely to get a bowl. He was often turned to when SA were a bit struggling for wickets. In other words, he was asked to bowl more often when the premier bowlers were not able to buy wickets. Also in his wickets column, so many good batsmen top the list.

I'm not going to get into this batting debate. I rank him along with Ponting and just below Lara and Sachin. Rate Sanga ahead of Dravid. Dravid was even more boring than Kallis.

nah that's just BS. Kallis has often said that his 3 goals in cricket was to win in England and Australia and win a WC. He just wants to win a WC. It's just that simple.

From a bloke who was having a go at Clarke for being good mostly at home

nah that's just BS. Kallis has often said that his 3 goals in cricket was to win in England and Australia and win a WC. He just wants to win a WC. It's just that simple.

I did mention the WC FFS, you do this in every thread. Read bits and pieces of posts and go off on a tangent. I said in general I get the impression that SA tend to value ODIs and WCs more than teams like England and Australia do. You'll be hard pressed to find a high profile English or Aussie player giving up tests before ODI's, WC or no WC.

 

[Furball]

Not sure whether this is agreeing with the infamous guyfromlancs or not but I would argue that bowling allrounders tend to be quite a bit more exciting/dynamic to watch than their batting counterparts.Has no real relevance to this discussion though. But it does explain why Kallis gets somewhat underrated. People will generally prefer players they were most entertained by.

It's because they don't carry the burden of being a proper batsman and are therefore free to have a swing at things.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Hope nobody else retires soon or we'd have a triple whammy of crap threads for a good/great player going out.

 

[Jassy]

What a load of rubbish. He's a better bowler than my fellow countryman Hadlee was as a batsman for example, and few question that Hadlee was an true all-rounder. The guy has the same sort of bowling record as the likes of Zaheer Khan, Jimmy Anderson etc.

He does not, let us stop being disingenuous. If bowling record means average only, then he has the same sort of record. Otherwise NO.

 

[Jarquis]

Unless I'm missing something here (quite possible), that's not even remotely close to what Cabinet suggested.

No, it is.
1st Test: Pakistan v South Africa at Dubai (DSC), Nov 12-16, 2010 | Cricket Career averages | ESPN Cricinfo
Pakistan = 10925 runs, 179 wickets, 153 catches
Kallis = 11334 runs, 266 wickets, 160 catches

 

[OverratedSanity]

No, it is.
1st Test: Pakistan v South Africa at Dubai (DSC), Nov 12-16, 2010 | Cricket Career averages | ESPN Cricinfo
Pakistan = 10925 runs, 179 wickets, 153 catches
Kallis = 11334 runs, 266 wickets, 160 catches

Well that clarifies it. Somehow I took his post as meaning kallis scored more runs, took more wickets and catches than the Pakistan team combined for that particular series.


Some things are beyond even him it seems

 

[Jassy]

Well that clarifies it. Somehow I took his post as meaning kallis scored more runs, took more wickets and catches than the Pakistan team combined for that particular series.


Some things are beyond even him it seems

Haha, I took it to mean the same. Hayden did it once against Pakistan - scored more runs in one innings than all twenty two Pak bats scored in both innings combined. Thought Kallis had pulled off something like that!

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Well that clarifies it. Somehow I took his post as meaning kallis scored more runs, took more wickets and catches than the Pakistan team combined for that particular series.


Some things are beyond even him it seems

That was how I read it too. knew it couldn't be that though.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

The comment about him being an insurance policy is interesting.

I'd kill to have him at 3 or 4 for England.

But lets say "no" to sacred cows.

 

[Spark]

Come on, do we have to have this argument here? Not so much as the posts immediately above mine, but at the top of this page and previous pages.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

Come on, do we have to have this argument here?

Perhaps not, no.

 

[Riggins]

Well that clarifies it. Somehow I took his post as meaning kallis scored more runs, took more wickets and catches than the Pakistan team combined for that particular series.


Some things are beyond even him it seems

Yeah I thought that too, was super confused.

wag though, hope he makes 200 against them indian ****s this week.

 

[kyear2]

Ponting might have been a better all round fieldsman but certainly dropped more slips catches than Kallis whilst Lara simply wasn't in his class

Ponting only started to drop later in his career when he eyes began to go and he batting was in decline similar to Lara. Otherwise Ponting pulled of more blinders in the slips while Lara had fantastic hands and a superb technique. Lara was actually quite brilliant to Ambrose, Bishop, Walsh etc. in the slips.

No disrespect to Kallis though as he was very safe in the cordon.

 

[steve132]

Lots to discuss here, but I'll address just one issue. Why are bowling all-rounders considered superior to batting ones? I have not seen any analysis to support this view. The traditional definition of an all-rounder is someone who could make a strong team with either bat or ball. By this criterion the leading bowling all-rounders (Botham, Imran, Miller etc.) would struggle to do so, since they all averaged in the mid 30-'s with the bat in Test cricket when a front-line batsman would be expected to average 40 or more. Yet it appears that certain posters are willing to overlook this while insisting on the most stringent standards for batting all rounders in terms of bowling averages, strike rates, wickets per Test, etc.

If the comparison is not a general one but rather one between particular players, Kallis is as likely to be selected to a strong team for his bowling alone as most bowling all-rounders are to make such a team for their batting alone. Sobers would easily have been picked as a bowler alone in the West Indian teams of the 1960's (including the half-dozen or so years when they were the best team in the world) despite suggestions to the contrary made by people unfamiliar with the history of the game in that period. If you were to ask knowledgeable observers such as former players or journalists to select one and only one all-rounder for their all time team Kallis would be considered comparable to most of the bowling all-rounders and Sobers would certainly be preferred to any of them. This particular experiment has been performed many times.

 

[Migara]

Greatest batting all rounder on par with Sobers. Will be missing in tests.

 

[Migara]

What a great player, this era of the 90s is almost officially over, the only one left is Chanderpaul.

Compare his understated way of retiring with all the hoopla over Tendulkar's retirement. And he was arguably a better player than Tendulkar. Though to be fair, Kallis is only retiring from tests.

If I am not mistaken, TM Dilshan is still playing. But Chanders is the only one playing test cricket from 90s though.

 

[smash84]

Lots to discuss here, but I'll address just one issue. Why are bowling all-rounders considered superior to batting ones? .

To take Ikki's simple line of reasoning. Everybody has to bat, but not everybody has to bowl. Hence bowling all rounders more useful

 

[kyear2]

To take Ikki's simple line of reasoning. Everybody has to bat, but not everybody has to bowl. Hence bowling all rounders more useful

That makes no sense to me. Never did. A handy 5th bowler is of greater use and need to a good team for balance that a no. 8 batsman averaging over 20. Marshall and Warne were more than good enough in that spot for the two greatest teams ever.

 

[centurymaker]

From a bloke who was having a go at Clarke for being good mostly at home



I did mention the WC FFS, you do this in every thread. Read bits and pieces of posts and go off on a tangent. I said in general I get the impression that SA tend to value ODIs and WCs more than teams like England and Australia do. You'll be hard pressed to find a high profile English or Aussie player giving up tests before ODI's, WC or no WC.

Why did you have to quote people on ignore lists?

 

[akilana]

From a bloke who was having a go at Clarke for being good mostly at home



I did mention the WC FFS, you do this in every thread. Read bits and pieces of posts and go off on a tangent. I said in general I get the impression that SA tend to value ODIs and WCs more than teams like England and Australia do. You'll be hard pressed to find a high profile English or Aussie player giving up tests before ODI's, WC or no WC.

Wtf. Had a go at Clarke? Not sure what the heck that has to do with Sanga being rated highly.

Nah cut it. You are wrong and your assumption about how I read post is also wrong. Not sure why you bother. McGrath retired from tests before ODIs. Your impression on SA players valuing ODIs more than tests is based on a player gushing about a series win in UAE. He is the captain and he hardly won many matches so he is going to dwelve on it a bit. Other that that you didn't give us any reason to believe it.