Am I the only person who thinks Kallis was a better player than Tendulkar?

[kyear2]

Best Batsman: Bradman (not close)
Best Off Spinner: Muralitharan (not close)
Best Leg Spinner: Warne (no doubt)
Best All Rounder : Sobers (no doubt)
Best Fast Bowler: Marshall (closer, but clear)
Best Wicketkeeper Batsman: Gilchrist (no doubt for now)

 

[Zinzan]

Best Batsman: Bradman (not close)
Best Off Spinner: Muralitharan (not close)
Best Leg Spinner: Warne (no doubt)
Best All Rounder : Sobers (no doubt)
Best Fast Bowler: Marshall (closer, but clear)
Best Wicketkeeper Batsman: Gilchrist (no doubt for now)

Bradman - Obv, yes
Murali - I'll give you that
Warne - like Murali
Sobers - many doubters
Marshall- My personal no. 1, but many doubters
Gilchrist - The best batsman/keeper, but more than a few doubters. Many (including ex-cricketers) prefer Knott for his keeping.

 

[Zinzan]

I don't think too many people think someone other than Murali was the best off spinner of all time.

Yup, won't argue too much with that in retrospect.

 

[Zinzan]

This may sound a bit counter-intuitive, but I often wonder if Kallis would have been rated more highly as a Test batsman in his own right had he not had the bowling string to his bow. Ironically seems to count against him as a batsman.

 

[kyear2]

Bradman - Obv, yes
Murali - I'll give you that
Warne - like Murali
Sobers - many doubters
Marshall- My personal no. 1, but many doubters
Gilchrist - The best batsman/keeper, but more than a few doubters. Many (including ex-cricketers) prefer Knott for his keeping.

Who are the Sobers doubters? His place is secure
Marshall is realistically challenged by two players. Lillee anecdotally and McGrath statistically. Lillee just doesn't match up statistically with MM and thats before his subcontinent record or lack there of is taken into account and the fact he basically, in the modern era, played in 3 countries. McGrath comes closest statistically, but still is just a touch below, added to that many saw him as second fiddle to Warne (I disagree btw) and not even the best Aussie fast bowler to have played. Finally, he just wasn't as versatile as Marshall or Lillee.
Never said Gilchrist was the best keeper, said he was the best wicketkeeper batsman. Quite the distinction.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Who are the Sobers doubters? His place is secure
Marshall is realistically challenged by two players. Lillee anecdotally and McGrath statistically. Lillee just doesn't match up statistically with MM and thats before his subcontinent record or lack there of is taken into account and the fact he basically, in the modern era, played in 3 countries. McGrath comes closest statistically, but still is just a touch below, added to that many saw him as second fiddle to Warne (I disagree btw) and not even the best Aussie fast bowler to have played. Finally, he just wasn't as versatile as Marshall or Lillee.
Never said Gilchrist was the best keeper, said he was the best wicketkeeper batsman. Quite the distinction.

Imran and Kallis are very strong competitors to Sobers imo. It is in no way clear cut.

Marshall again, imo is not a lock. I think he's the best for sure, but is he the best beyond doubt? Definitely not.... McGrath's legend will keep rising imo. He achieved whatever was humanly possible from a fast bowler in a pretty barren era for his species.

 

[kyear2]

This may sound a bit counter-intuitive, but I often wonder if Kallis would have been rated more highly as a Test batsman in his own right had he not had the bowling string to his bow. Ironically seems to count against him as a batsman.

I don't think so, Smali belives that Imran's bowling is down graded because his biggest legacy may have been his captaincy and people forget his bowling. Kallis though is somewhat different, without his bowling I belive Kallis would have been rated just where he is, the same or just a tad above Dravid. Kallis was without doubt great, but he was the guy who batted with/ supported the guy who won the match. He was the guy who saved the match or built the platform for most of his career, he was hardly the guy to change the match in a session or destroy the opposition like a Lara, Ponting or even Tendulkar. For me he was closer to a much better Chanderpaul that to an equal to Lara, just my opnion, but Lara hardly supported the match winner, he was the match winner. He never let the opposition dictate to him, he didtated to the opposition, similar to Ponting, Viv, Sobers ect. As someone else mentioned, he seen at times isolated or detachted from the match situation, but he was almost always there, and kudos to him for that, he just wouldn't be my pick.

 

[Zinzan]

Who are the Sobers doubters? His place is secure
Marshall is realistically challenged by two players. Lillee anecdotally and McGrath statistically. Lillee just doesn't match up statistically with MM and thats before his subcontinent record or lack there of is taken into account and the fact he basically, in the modern era, played in 3 countries. McGrath comes closest statistically, but still is just a touch below, added to that many saw him as second fiddle to Warne (I disagree btw) and not even the best Aussie fast bowler to have played. Finally, he just wasn't as versatile as Marshall or Lillee.
Never said Gilchrist was the best keeper, said he was the best wicketkeeper batsman. Quite the distinction.

Huh? I know many who genuinely doubt Sobers as the best all-rounder. There's many who would make the case for Imran or Miller for instance depending on what sort of all-rounder people think provides a team the most value.

Marshall is highly in dispute, I've even know of some West Indian supporters arguing the case for Garner, Ambrose & Holding at different times as the best of the Windies bowlers. As I said before Marshall is my personal favorite, but it's far from being undoubted.

Re Gilchrist, if you want to look specifically at the best Keeper/Batsman (with batting being the key factor), then there's a very good case that Flower was > Gilchrist at test level.

I think there's some polls you may be able to dig up which clearly demonstrate that there's many in the CW community who doubt Sobers as the no.1 allrounder. Personally, I make the distinction between batting all-rounders and bowling all-rounders when I consider them and imho Kallis & Sobers are clearly the best batting all-rounders with Miller & Imran being the best of the bowling all-rounders.

 

[Shri]

Er, how does that make my point invalid exactly? I'm well aware Migara is a Lankan supporter. I was questioning his use of the word 'undoubtably' as the statement it was used in seemed to imply almost all cricket fans agree Tendulkar was categorically the best batsmen of his era which is palbably untrue. Certaintly not true in the same sense as saying Bradman is 'undoubtably' the greatest batsman, in which 99% of cricket fans would agree with. To be fair on Migara, he may have simply been expressing his own opinion, which is fine, however it read as if all cricket fans think it.

Relax it was an attempt at a Nicholas Cage meme that says "My hair is a bird, your point is invalid." Here:

 

[akilana]

Yada yada Kallis supported the guy who won the match. Who that **** that won the match?? Lara destroyed Aussie attack, especially at home and then got destroyed by Donald and co, Akram , Waqar, the mighty Indian attack. He, like, KP played a lot of good innings but wasn't consistent. A big hundred followed by string of low scores is not going to help you.

 

[kyear2]

Imran and Kallis are very strong competitors to Sobers imo. It is in no way clear cut.

Marshall again, imo is not a lock. I think he's the best for sure, but is he the best beyond doubt? Definitely not.... McGrath's legend will keep rising imo. He achieved whatever was humanly possible from a fast bowler in a pretty barren era for his species.

The day that Kallis starts taking votes from, far less replaces Sobers on ATG XI's or similar exercises, I will see Kallis as a compeditor. Sobers was a class above Kallis as a batsman and played a far greater and versatile role as a bowler for his team than Kallis did, and in an era of dour batsman for whom patience was important as swing or pace to dismiss. As great as Kallis was in the slips, Sobers may have been the greatest fielder and catcher to have walked onto a cricket field.

Sobers and Imran played far different roles, and for many it may come down to who was better at their primary disipline and for me Soobers was a better batsman than Imran was a bowler. Also, Imran, unlike Kallis has been retired from the game for over 20 years, outside of CW I have never heard anyone suggest that Imran was the superior all rounder or than anyone other than Sobers was the greatest ever.

 

[Zinzan]

Relax it was an attempt at a Nicholas Cage meme that says "My hair is a bird, your point is invalid." Here:

Nice acknowledgement of defeat Shri, but I like the Cage-bird-hair all the same

 

[harsh.ag]

Way too much dispute on Marshall being the best pacer. Anybody who has seen Lillee, Ambrose, Wasim, Roberts, Hadlee, McGrath etc bowl cannot say easily who the best was. Why are you treating it as a given?

Knott, Ames, Flower all have a very strong argument vs Gilly.

Leg spinner - O'Reilly a major, major contender vs Warne.

And Sobers is the best batting all-rounder. That's it. And Kallis has a good case against him, given his SR as a bowler and being mainly a top order batsman while Sobers used to usually bat lower down (not always, but usually). Overall, Imran, Miller and Botham all have a good case for the best AR of all time as well.

 

[Shri]

Nice acknowledgement of defeat Shri

What defeat? I wasn't even really arguing.

 

[Zinzan]

What defeat? I wasn't even really arguing.

Argue damn it !

 

[akilana]

The day that Kallis starts taking votes from, far less replaces Sobers on ATG XI's or similar exercises, I will see Kallis as a compeditor. Sobers was a class above Kallis as a batsman and played a far greater and versatile role as a bowler for his team than Kallis did, and in an era of dour batsman for whom patience was important as swing or pace to dismiss. As great as Kallis was in the slips, Sobers may have been the greatest fielder and catcher to have walked onto a cricket field.

Sobers and Imran played far different roles, and for many it may come down to who was better at their primary disipline and for me Soobers was a better batsman than Imran was a bowler. Also, Imran, unlike Kallis has been retired from the game for over 20 years, outside of CW I have never heard anyone suggest that Imran was the superior all rounder or than anyone other than Sobers was the greatest ever.

Sobers might have been versatile but wasn't more effective than Kallis. His SR is worse than even Paul Harris. Kallis hardly gets to bowl with the new ball and he competed with the likes of Donald, Steyn, Pollock for wickets. He is the better bowler of the two.

 

[Prince EWS]

Sobers and Imran played far different roles, and for many it may come down to who was better at their primary disipline and for me Soobers was a better batsman than Imran was a bowler.

Yeah but what you or any other one individual thinks isn't relevant to what you're actually arguing. If you want to say that Sobers was the best allrounder then your opinion and your reasons for it are absolutely important, but what you're trying to say is that there's an absolute consensus, that it's beyond doubt. "For you" is an irrelevance to that argument.

outside of CW I have never heard anyone suggest that Imran was the superior all rounder or than anyone other than Sobers was the greatest ever.

Have you ever considered that might be because of where you live? Does it really surprise you that the one place you've seen someone say a West Indian wasn't the greatest is the place you converse most often with cricket fans from outside the West Indies?

Sobers is widely regarded as the greatest allrounder to play the game. However it is certainly not beyond debate; there are many who think otherwise, myself included. Whether or not you think they're wrong isn't the issue here; you claimed that there was "no doubt" he was, and whether you think he is or not, or indeed whether he actually is or not, there certainly is doubt and an argument to be had. And that's a good thing; all these ATG threads you post in would be bloody boring if there was a universal consensus on everything.

Marshall is even more debatable. I actually agree with you on your actual opinion there - I think he was the best fast bowler of all time - but again there are definitely some differing opinions across the cricket community about that.

I struggle with you sometimes. It's hard to quite put into words. I've heard people say you put your opinion across as fact, but it's not quite that; it's something a bit different. You seem to be in a life-long pursuit of a consensus among fans as to who the best players were, and this causes you to make claims of universally agreed upon pseudo-facts on certain things when they're not really there. When called on it you, for some reason, reply with your own opinion as if it somehow backs up your point. People aren't actually arguing with your opinion of the best allrounder or the best fast bowler so telling us why you think they were best doesn't support or defend your argument; what people are doing are saying there is some disagreement there across the wider cricket community, even if not always from themselves. To argue that you should not be telling us what you think but in fact supplying evidence of what everyone else thinks, which is a hard task (and no, I do not mean 20 ATWXI's either).

 

[kyear2]

Way too much dispute on Marshall being the best pacer. Anybody who has seen Lillee, Ambrose, Wasim, Roberts, Hadlee, McGrath etc bowl cannot say easily who the best was. Why are you treating it as a given?

Lillee, I discussed already, Ambrose, Wasim, Roberts wasn't in the same class as Marshall. Ambrose at times tended to get too negative and just shut down the run rate, Akram averaged less than 4 WPM, took to high a proportion of tail end wickets and statistically just falls short. Hadlee played in the same era and again his stats are closer, but not quite and again, never heard one person ever suggest that Hadlee was Marshall's superior. McGrath I do admit is closest, but that doesn't mean better.

Knott, Ames, Flower all have a very strong argument vs Gilly.

Knott was the better keeper, he also averaged 14 runs less and didn't possess Gilchrist's ability to take the game away from the opposition, Ames for his 100 FC 100's averaged 27 against the only good attack he faced and Flower was quite poor as a keeper even in comparrison to Gilly.


Leg spinner - O'Reilly a major, major contender vs Warne.

27 Tests and a strike rate of practically 70 desn't quite cut it.

And Sobers is the best batting all-rounder. That's it. And Kallis has a good case against him, given his SR as a bowler and being mainly a top order batsman while Sobers used to usually bat lower down (not always, but usually). Overall, Imran, Miller and Botham all have a good case for the best AR of all time as well.

Sobers batted at 6 because of the significantly higher bowling load that he bore on the team compared to Kallis. His numbers at the higher positions are all better than what he averaged at No. 6. Sobers is also a legitimate contender for the best batsman after Bradman, yet to see Kallis mentioned in that company.

Miller averaged 36 as top order batsman and averaged 3 WPM with a strike rate of 60 as a bowler. He was was neither good enough as a top order batsman or front line primary bowler to make an ATG XI. Botham ended with a batting average of 33 and a bowling average of 28. If he plas as a batsman he weakens the top order, if he bolws as one of the 4 bowlers, he weakens the bowling attack. Added to his way too short peak and made hay during WSC and the aftermatch.
Imran was godlike in Pakistan, but with the ball didn't average less than 24 in any other country. Averaged 28 in India and Australia, 24 in England and 25 in the caribbean. Batting wise averaged 30 before his injury, and 50 after when hos bowling wasn't quite the same. Scored 4 of his 6 hundreds in that time as well. Again have never heard anyone outside of CW even suggest that Imran was the equal or better to Sobers. He just wasn't.

 

[Dan]

Yeah but what you or any other one individual thinks isn't relevant to what you're actually arguing. If you want to say that Sobers was the best allrounder then your opinion and your reasons for it are absolutely important, but what you're trying to say is that there's an absolute consensus, that it's beyond doubt. "For you" is an irrelevance to that argument.
[...]
Sobers is widely regarded as the greatest allrounder to play the game. However it is certainly not beyond debate; there are many who think otherwise, myself included. Whether or not you think they're wrong isn't the issue here; you claimed that there was "no doubt" he was, and whether you think he is or not, or indeed whether he actually is or not, there certainly is doubt and an argument to be had.

Chris Martin > Don Bradman because reasons. Now Bradman isn't undoubtedly the best batsman of all time because there isn't a consensus

 

[Prince EWS]

Chris Martin > Don Bradman because reasons. Now Bradman isn't undoubtedly the best batsman of all time because there isn't a consensus

So be it. There doesn't need to be one.