Jacques Kallis vs Steve Waugh

[subshakerz]

A classic way of comparing Kallis and Ponting is to look at how they were faring at the very end in their respective last tests.

In Kallis's last test against India in Durban, it was a must win situation after the infamous 458 chase draw in Johannesburg in the previous test. Now in that chase of 458 Kallis started brilliantly, playing his hots and racing to 34 of 36 balls, before being sawn of against Zaheer Khan, while getting massive inside edge into his pads (No DRS thanks to BCCI). This time around, he was more cautious and constructed a painstaking 115 to lead South Africa to massive lead and to an eventual comfortable win. While he was batting however, the usual class of dullards and Australians were all: " WTF is he doing? WhY iS hE sOoO sLowww? Lolz, he is turning the match into a draw, just watch. See this is why Ponting is soooo much better. He wOuLd hAvE pLaYeD hIs sHoTs!!"?

Flashback to a year earlier in Punter's last test (That's right, he lasted a whole year less despite supposedly being on a whole other level with the bat ?) against South Africa in Perth, and we see what he was actually capable of doing by then. In his first innings, he gets totally dominated by Philander and trapped LBW for 4 because his technique just wasn't good enough anymore with his declining reflexes. In the second innings, chasing over 600, he "decided to play his shots™", scored two streaky boundaries before being done by Robin Pieterson of all people. Trying to play an aggressive cut shot, but only getting an edge to slip (And getting caught by Kallis!) and walking of as Australia wound up getting marmalized, losing the test and the series.

To me, this was a microcosm of how they were viewed through their career. All context about Kallis's batting situation being ignored in order to berate him for supposedly letting his team down by scoring too slowly, while claiming Ponting was so much better because he "played his shots™". This while Ponting's failures in his last test (And last few years, TBH) were glossed over and he kept being put above his station by the Aussie cheer squad. Oh, well, at least Kallis proved he was superior in the end.

Nah. I prefer to compare them in the Syndey test of 2006 when they were both at their peak. Kallis' lost the game with his slow crease occupation while Ponting did the opposite.

 

[subshakerz]

Except that he wasn't.

Let's break it down.

Ponting had a better start to his career than Kallis, and then was notably ahead in his peak. Ponting's decline started around 2007/8, but Kallis had his own dip around 2008. However, unlike Ponting who had a long decline, Kallis had a revival period of 29 tests before dipping again at the end of his career.

So Kallis really only could be rated ahead of Ponting 2009 onwards, a period of 29 tests which isnt enough to overhaul Ponting's superiority before that.

 

[Starfighter]

A classic way of comparing Kallis and Ponting is to look at how they were faring at the very end in their respective last tests.

In Kallis's last test against India in Durban, it was a must win situation after the infamous 458 chase draw in Johannesburg in the previous test. Now in that chase of 458 Kallis started brilliantly, playing his hots and racing to 34 of 36 balls, before being sawn of against Zaheer Khan, while getting massive inside edge into his pads (No DRS thanks to BCCI). This time around, he was more cautious and constructed a painstaking 115 to lead South Africa to massive lead and to an eventual comfortable win. While he was batting however, the usual class of dullards and Australians were all: " WTF is he doing? WhY iS hE sOoO sLowww? Lolz, he is turning the match into a draw, just watch. See this is why Ponting is soooo much better. He wOuLd hAvE pLaYeD hIs sHoTs!!"?

Flashback to a year earlier in Punter's last test (That's right, he lasted a whole year less despite supposedly being on a whole other level with the bat ?) against South Africa in Perth, and we see what he was actually capable of doing by then. In his first innings, he gets totally dominated by Philander and trapped LBW for 4 because his technique just wasn't good enough anymore with his declining reflexes. In the second innings, chasing over 600, he "decided to play his shots™", scored two streaky boundaries before being done by Robin Pieterson of all people. Trying to play an aggressive cut shot, but only getting an edge to slip (And getting caught by Kallis!) and walking of as Australia wound up getting marmalized, losing the test and the series.

To me, this was a microcosm of how they were viewed through their career. All context about Kallis's batting situation being ignored in order to berate him for supposedly letting his team down by scoring too slowly, while claiming Ponting was so much better because he "played his shots™". This while Ponting's failures in his last test (And last few years, TBH) were glossed over and he kept being put above his station by the Aussie cheer squad. Oh, well, at least Kallis proved he was superior in the end.

This is one of the most idiotic arguments I've ever seen on here, and it's just as well you used the clown emojis as anytime I see them it's an indicator that the person making the argument is so dumb they can't even possibly know they're wrong. They're wonderfully self-reflecting.

 

[subshakerz]

Unfortunately, Kallis' supporters actually end up doing him a disservice by disregarding his own performances and focusing just on the numbers.

For example, Kallis' greatest series performance was in 2004/5 against the English Ashes quartet, when he scored over 600 runs and three hundreds. That was the brief transition period when Kirsten and Cullinan had retired and ABD and Amla hadnt hit their strides.

Of course, England won the series, but how come nobody ever brings that performance up? We know about Dravid in England in 2002 and 2011 but never hear about this.

 

[TheJediBrah]

A classic way of comparing Kallis and Ponting is to look at how they were faring at the very end in their respective last tests.

In Kallis's last test against India in Durban, it was a must win situation after the infamous 458 chase draw in Johannesburg in the previous test. Now in that chase of 458 Kallis started brilliantly, playing his hots and racing to 34 of 36 balls, before being sawn of against Zaheer Khan, while getting massive inside edge into his pads (No DRS thanks to BCCI). This time around, he was more cautious and constructed a painstaking 115 to lead South Africa to massive lead and to an eventual comfortable win. While he was batting however, the usual class of dullards and Australians were all: " WTF is he doing? WhY iS hE sOoO sLowww? Lolz, he is turning the match into a draw, just watch. See this is why Ponting is soooo much better. He wOuLd hAvE pLaYeD hIs sHoTs!!"?

Flashback to a year earlier in Punter's last test (That's right, he lasted a whole year less despite supposedly being on a whole other level with the bat ?) against South Africa in Perth, and we see what he was actually capable of doing by then. In his first innings, he gets totally dominated by Philander and trapped LBW for 4 because his technique just wasn't good enough anymore with his declining reflexes. In the second innings, chasing over 600, he "decided to play his shots™", scored two streaky boundaries before being done by Robin Pieterson of all people. Trying to play an aggressive cut shot, but only getting an edge to slip (And getting caught by Kallis!) and walking of as Australia wound up getting marmalized, losing the test and the series.

To me, this was a microcosm of how they were viewed through their career. All context about Kallis's batting situation being ignored in order to berate him for supposedly letting his team down by scoring too slowly, while claiming Ponting was so much better because he "played his shots™". This while Ponting's failures in his last test (And last few years, TBH) were glossed over and he kept being put above his station by the Aussie cheer squad. Oh, well, at least Kallis proved he was superior in the end.

I don't mind this at all. There's no attempt at legitimacy or civility, just a guy unleashing what he thinks. No trying to dig around some numbers for support, or any attempt to hide the fact that the only reason he's here is to **** on a country that he has always hated for some reason. And whichever way you look at it, it's entertaining.

It's refreshing honesty and I'm not being facetious. Generally don't mind seeing it.

 

[StephenZA]

Unfortunately, Kallis' supporters actually end up doing him a disservice by disregarding his own performances and focusing just on the numbers.

For example, Kallis' greatest series performance was in 2004/5 against the English Ashes quartet, when he scored over 600 runs and three hundreds. That was the brief transition period when Kirsten and Cullinan had retired and ABD and Amla hadnt hit their strides.

Of course, England won the series, but how come nobody ever brings that performance up? We know about Dravid in England in 2002 and 2011 but never hear about this.

Don't put words into mouths... you have been the one that has said that Kallis never did anything. That fact that all some of us did, was laugh, rather than engage in a minute by minute expose of a great career does not mean that Kallis did not have great innings and/or periods. There is no requirement to engage.

About the only thing that is really been taken exception to was the stupid idiotic, time and again brought up, argument of Kallis SR, which has been done to death...
Hence

Kallis was not exciting enough... thus he was not good enough. It does not matter what he actually did for his country for 15 years.

Which is pretty much sums up Kallis's detractors.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Unfortunately, Kallis' supporters actually end up doing him a disservice by disregarding his own performances and focusing just on the numbers.

For example, Kallis' greatest series performance was in 2004/5 against the English Ashes quartet, when he scored over 600 runs and three hundreds. That was the brief transition period when Kirsten and Cullinan had retired and ABD and Amla hadnt hit their strides.

Of course, England won the series, but how come nobody ever brings that performance up? We know about Dravid in England in 2002 and 2011 but never hear about this.

Funnily enough Kallis was criticized in the last test for not pushing the tempo in the 3rd innings when SA were trying to force a result. Was expecting you of all people to mention it lol.

I think it's horseshit mostly ftr, but I remember him being made the scapegoat because they scored very slowly after AB got out.

 

[subshakerz]

Don't put words into mouths... you have been the one that has said that Kallis never did anything. That fact that all some of us did, was laugh, rather than engage in a minute by minute expose of a great career does not mean that Kallis did not have great innings and/or periods. There is no requirement to engage.

About the only thing that is really been taken exception to was the stupid idiotic, time and again brought up, argument of Kallis SR, which has been done to death...
HenceWhich is pretty much sums up Kallis's detractors.

I never said he didnt do anything, so you are the one putting words into mouths bro. I brought up lack of standout innings compared to other ATGs. But I give credit where it is due so i brought up this example which you never bothered to.

Feel free not to engage but then don't expect by staying silent that people won't draw other conclusions.

 

[TheJediBrah]

About the only thing that is really been taken exception to was the stupid idiotic, time and again brought up, argument of Kallis SR, which has been done to death...

It's been "done to death" because it's a decisive factor. It's the only thing really holding him back from that top echelon. It's not "stupid idiotic" just because you don't like it.

 

[subshakerz]

Funnily enough Kallis was criticized in the last test for not pushing the tempo in the 3rd innings when SA were trying to force a result. Was expecting you of all people to mention it lol.

I think it's horse**** mostly ftr, but I remember him being made the scapegoat because they scored very slowly after AB got out.

Yeah that was a feature of Kallis' crease occupation batting in that period but still 600 runs against a good quality attack over a series is noteworthy.

 

[Xix2565]

I never said he didnt do anything, so you are the one putting words into mouths bro. I brought up lack of standout innings compared to other ATGs. But I give credit where it is due so i brought up this example which you never bothered to.

Feel free not to engage but then don't expect by staying silent that people won't draw other conclusions.

Lol I'm still waiting for an actual answer buddy, if you can't front up then what are you doing here prancing around like a know-it-all?

 

[Uppercut]

Don't put words into mouths... you have been the one that has said that Kallis never did anything. That fact that all some of us did, was laugh, rather than engage in a minute by minute expose of a great career does not mean that Kallis did not have great innings and/or periods. There is no requirement to engage.

About the only thing that is really been taken exception to was the stupid idiotic, time and again brought up, argument of Kallis SR, which has been done to death...
HenceWhich is pretty much sums up Kallis's detractors.

I have a question. I always thought the reason that we don't hear much about (e.g.) Kallis's 04/05 England tour was because we don't have many South African members. But then, you don't hear very much about South African cricketing heroics anywhere else either. In the last decade SA cricket went on a string of thrilling away series wins and dramatic last-day rearguards to become world #1, but it never seemed to generate any kind of legend, or even much of a narrative.

Is this... cultural? It's noticeable that fans of certain sports teams (cough Liverpool cough) try to turn everything that happens to them into a deeply sentimental seven-act epic. South African cricket almost strikes me as the opposite end of the spectrum? Like the stories are there to be written, but for whatever reason, nobody writes them. Do South Africans infuse test matches with less meaning than fans of other countries?

 

[TheJediBrah]

^That is definitely true. Not sure about South African fans specifically but World cricket in general doesn't give as much attention to South Africa as it deserves. Shaun Pollock, Kallis, Graeme Smith are all given less coverage and general discussion than counterparts from Aus, Eng, India, and even NZ.

 

[StephenZA]

It's been "done to death" because it's a decisive factor. It's the only thing really holding him back from that top echelon. It's not "stupid idiotic" just because you don't like it.

Its been done to death because people like yourself bring it up, to bring a great man down and detract from his record. And that is fine if that is how you think. But in no way does your opinion on the subject make it a correct opinion. I don't like the opinion because its myopic and 1-dimensional thought process as far as I`m concerned. You may notice I have not once said a negative comment regarding Pontings record or Waughs record, because I think of them as great players. And even if I think Kallis is greater than Waugh but not as good as Ponting, I realize my opinions are just that opinions.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Its been done to death because people like yourself bring it up, to bring a great man down and detract from his record. And that is fine if that is how you think. But in no way does your opinion on the subject make it a correct opinion. I don't like the opinion because its myopic and 1-dimensional thought process as far as I`m concerned. You may notice I have not once said a negative comment regarding Pontings record or Waughs record, because I think of them as great players. And even if I think Kallis is greater than Waugh but not as good as Ponting, I realize my opinions are just that opinions.

That's your point of view, and it makes you see it that way, as someone trying "to bring a great man down". All I can do is assure that's simply not true, it's an inevitable result of comparing 2 players though.

If you think 1 is better, the other is going to have be shown in some negative light, in some way. Looking at that as someone going out of their way purely to "detract from his record" is very small-minded and just sounds defensive. You can disagree with the opinion that Kallis' slow scoring was an issue, but that doesn't mean it's stupid or malicious as you're implying.

I don't really think Waugh was better than Kallis. I definitely don't have a strong opinion either way, and it's certainly got nothing to do with scoring speed given they were pretty similar in that regard

 

[subshakerz]

I have a question. I always thought the reason that we don't hear much about (e.g.) Kallis's 04/05 England tour was because we don't have many South African members. But then, you don't hear very much about South African cricketing heroics anywhere else either. In the last decade SA cricket went on a string of thrilling away series wins and dramatic last-day rearguards to become world #1, but it never seemed to generate any kind of legend, or even much of a narrative.

Is this... cultural? It's noticeable that fans of certain sports teams (cough Liverpool cough) try to turn everything that happens to them into a deeply sentimental seven-act epic. South African cricket almost strikes me as the opposite end of the spectrum? Like the stories are there to be written, but for whatever reason, nobody writes them. Do South Africans infuse test matches with less meaning than fans of other countries?

Yes, this is true, though it has lessened somewhat with Steyn and ABD being feted for their performances. Good article on this phenomenon here:

South Africa: giants without laurels

Their dominance overseas for a decade ranks among the most impressive in cricket history. So why haven't they been feted like history's other great teams?

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[subshakerz]

Its been done to death because people like yourself bring it up, to bring a great man down and detract from his record. And that is fine if that is how you think. But in no way does your opinion on the subject make it a correct opinion. I don't like the opinion because its myopic and 1-dimensional thought process as far as I`m concerned. You may notice I have not once said a negative comment regarding Pontings record or Waughs record, because I think of them as great players. And even if I think Kallis is greater than Waugh but not as good as Ponting, I realize my opinions are just that opinions.

Isn't the whole point of this thread to compare Kallis and Waugh, offer our opinions, and provide our critiques, with the understanding that these are elite players and the differences in essence are minor but need to be drilled down?

The only question is whether the critiques are valid and substantiated. If I consider Kallis conservatism as a bat a negative, it is only within this narrow spectrum of upper echelon players that he already belongs to. But that critique has haunted Kallis his entire career. It is beyond just a solitary opinion.

I routinely get surprised how jumpy posters can get.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Isn't the whole point of this thread to compare Kallis and Waugh, offer our opinions, and provide our critiques, with the understanding that these are elite players and the differences in essence are minor but need to be drilled down?

The only question is whether the critiques are valid and substantiated. If I consider Kallis conservatism as a bat a negative, it is only within this narrow spectrum of upper echelon players that he already belongs to. But that critique has haunted Kallis his entire career. It is beyond just a solitary opinion.

The reason why it rings hollow is because you've pointed it out as a differentiator between Kallis and Waugh. Once it shifted from that to Kallis v Ponting most people agree Ponting's attacking ability was a point in his favour.

You've tried to justify it as a reason to separate Waugh and Kallis by saying Waugh counterattacked more often, but honestly considering the positions and teams they played in, I'd say Waugh having a SR of only 48 is something that kinda defeats your own point. I'd expect and want my number 5/6 in an excellent lineup to manage a better strike rate. Number 3s like Kallis/Dravid had lower SRs but surely doing it up the order when they're facing the new ball more often is not only more difficult but often required when their openers weren't that reliable for large chunks of their careers. It makes absolutely no sense to bring low SR up as a negative for Kallis in a comparison with Waugh.

 

[subshakerz]

The reason why it rings hollow is because you've pointed it out as a differentiator between Kallis and Waugh. Once it shifted from that to Kallis v Ponting most people agree Ponting's attacking ability was a point in his favour.

I've explained it before. You should be judged in your team context, not in isolation as a set of numbers.

Their contexts were different. Kallis, batting at 4, not 3, was in a lineup of accumulators and his one-mode batting was a liability. If your main bat cant accelerate, that is a problem, not always, but often enough as we have seen in examples. I brought up the similar example of Azhar Ali, who was Pakistan's main bat until Babar rose, often its anchor, yet couldnt up the pace when he needed to which cost the team on occasion.

Waugh was in a lineup of strokemakers like Slater and his own brother, and his whole job was to rebuild, consolidate and occasionally counterattack, quite often with the tail. In that context, him batting slower than others isn't a problem. Similar to Dravid, who could afford to bat slower knowing that he had strokemakers like Sehwag, Tendulkar and Laxman to bat around him.

So yes, Kallis' conservatism is an issue that is not for Waugh. A minor difference in the grand scheme but along with other factors, enough to put Waugh in front of him for me.

Just to be clear though, I know that the accusation of being selfish and playing for average is levied on both cricketers, and I don't subscribe to it. They played the way they thought best.

 

[trundler]

Waugh's batting with the tail is absolutely not a point in his favour as he often exposed it and didn't try to get as many runs as possible as quickly as possible. Laxman, for example, was much better at this.