Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I feel sorry for you then.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Jacques Kallis vs Steve Waugh
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
This is a gutsy call when you're posting on a site of dedicated cricket nutbags.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Just to elaborate on this point, look at some of the main bats of the 2000s era and the averages the had at the end of the 90s and what average they ended their career with.
End of 90s averages
Inzi 43
Chanderpaul 40
Dravid 49
Kallis 41
Ponting 44
Andy Flower 44
Hayden 21
Jayawardene 44
Mohd Yousuf 34
Langer 36
Laxman 24
End of career averages
Inzi 49
Chanderpaul 51
Dravid 52
Kallis 55
Ponting 51
Andy Flower 51
Hayden 51
Jayawardene 49
Mohd Yousuf 52
Langer 45
Laxman 45
Except for Lara, Waugh and Tendulkar, not a single major bat of the 2000s was averaging 50 by the end of the century. Around twice as many batsman averaged over 50 in the 2000s compared to the 90s anways. The only batsman I found who did significantly worse in the 2000s playing much in that decade was Ganguly, who went from 49 to 42. Tendulkar also had an overall average decrease but was still comfortably averaging over 50 in the 2000s onwards despite a dip due to injuries in the middle.
Yes, they may all have been at early career stages and peaked at the right time, but the 2000s definitely gave a statistical bump in the range of 2 to 7 points perhaps depending on the batsman and where they played. It is hard to quantify it but it should definitely be factored in when looking at their numbers.
This is why I put a higher price at the runs Waugh scored in the 90s era when it was far more difficult to be a 50 average bat.
Last edited:
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Seeing how strongly Ganguly came back after the miserable Greg Chappell affair, wonder if he would have finished at near 50 average if he was not made captain and Chappell did not happen.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
The early 2000s to early 2010s was an outlier decade as far as I am concerned. Yes, batsmen before that would also cash in on weak attacks and flat pitches, but the ratio of challenging bowling/conditions was balanced enough that their overall figures were not that misleading.
Mohd Yousuf has one of the best averages of any Pakistani batsman but frankly he is not a 50 plus caliber batsman. Nor are some of the other 2000s batters.
Mohd Yousuf has one of the best averages of any Pakistani batsman but frankly he is not a 50 plus caliber batsman. Nor are some of the other 2000s batters.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
There's definitely a lot to it, but also keep in mind that batsmen tend to get better as they get older and some batsmen having lower averages in the 90s as the 00s would be at least partly due to them becoming better players as they gained experience.
That's definitely the case for Laxman, Hayden, Langer and probably Chanderpaul. Hayden only played 7 games in the 90s in his early-20s, then came back a much better player when he hit 30, a bit disingenuous including him in the list.
You're joking if you think the difference in Laxman's 90s average to his 00s average is mostly to do with the conditions in each decade. He just got much better
That's definitely the case for Laxman, Hayden, Langer and probably Chanderpaul. Hayden only played 7 games in the 90s in his early-20s, then came back a much better player when he hit 30, a bit disingenuous including him in the list.
You're joking if you think the difference in Laxman's 90s average to his 00s average is mostly to do with the conditions in each decade. He just got much better
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's less him getting better and more about him getting to bat where he was comfortable. He was batting completely out of position as a makeshift opener in the 90s.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes I mentioned that in part it is due to them being in an early career phase and they do get better over time.
Yet others had played substantial cricket and hadnt averaged 50 yet.
I think, looking in the big picture, the fact that none of them hit it really big in the 90s says something. Because it clearly was more difficult to do so.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's probably part of it too. It's not enough to explain him nearly doubling his average though IMO.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Sanga = Kallis > Dravid > Ponting is the right order then.
OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Including NZ but not WI for that period is dodgy imo.I had a look at how both these great batsmen fared against decent opposition away from home (NZ, SL, India, Pak,Eng, Aus, SA) over their whole career and turns out that Kallis is doing much better than Ponting, by a larger margin than I expected. Thought it was much closer than this.
Kallis - 49.01
Ponting - 41.87
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Including WI, Kallis averages 50.02. Ponting 45.07
Excluding both WI and NZ, Kallis averages 47.62. Ponting 40.62.
The whole exercise pretty much points to Punter minnow bashing.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Minnow bashing who?
He only played 3 away Tests in his whole career against anyone who wasn't one of those top 8 sides.
You need to look more closely at the stats your choosing to manipulate.
What it shows is that Kallis had better stats away from home than Ponting, but everyone already knows that, and Ponting is mostly known for being dominant at home.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
WI and NZ obviously.
Double tonned against Dillon, Drakes,Collins and Bernard. I haven't heard Bernard before.
Scored 158 against Powell, Edwards, Sammy, Bravo and Jaggernauth. Haven't heard Jaggernauth earlier either.
His hundred against NZ came against Franklin, Martin, Vettori and Wiseman.
Others probably did the same against weak opposition as well but they took their overseas average from 45 to 50. Ponting took it from 40 to 45.
I am not manipulating any stats, but you are having a hard time accepting it as it is.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not the worst call from you this thread. I tend to agree, though there would have been plenty of attacks from England, India and Sri Lanka over the period as bad or worse than that NZ attack in particular.
StephenZA
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Out of interest do you think that Kallis did not dominate at home?
Kallis started in 95. Waugh finished in 04. 99 is an arbitrary cutoff point. You want to be comparing pre 95 to post 04. You won't be able to do this with individual bats. The gap is too long. You will run into lol sample sizes before and/or after for most bats, and massive quality changes in their batting over the better part of a decade.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I guess depends on your definition of "dominate". Kallis had a better average at home than he did away
StephenZA
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yes but more importantly he avg considerably more than any other SA since readmission. SA is a tough place to bat generally and to be so much further ahead says much about his domination at home. Of course he did not score obscene amounts like you sometimes get in the Aus and India player tours, but that has directly to do with batting conditions and also length of tours.