• 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 Allan Border

Who was the greater test batsman?

  • Jacques Kallis

    Votes: 28 50.0%

  • Allan Border

    Votes: 28 50.0%
  • Total voters
    56
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
How many players get to play 20 tests in an overseas country? That seems like too narrow a criteria.
Click to expand...
That's the point. It's why pointing at some guy's average in a certain country as a signficant weakness is deeply flawed unless they've played like 200 Tests
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
BazBall21 said:
Not really. Think Lara is pretty universally regarded as being better. Tendulkar-Sanga is not even worth talking about.
Click to expand...
Yeah but that just demonstrates how misleading using this average difference is.

I think it should be taken for granted that batsmen whose career peaks aligned most in the 2000s shouldnt have their averages taken on face value.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
TheJediBrah said:
That's the point. It's why pointing at some guy's average in a certain country as a signficant weakness is deeply flawed unless they've played like 200 Tests
Click to expand...
So then comparing any overseas record for 95 percent of players is a pointless exercise by your measure.

Nobody really succeeds or fails in a country unless they play 20 tests there?
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
Three of them are ATGs imo. Mahela isn’t even close. Hayden is very good but falls just short.
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
subshakerz said:
Does anyone use Sanga averaging 57 as him being better than Tendulkar or Lara?

Obviously minnows and flatter pitches played a part.
Click to expand...
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
shortpitched713 said:
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
Click to expand...
This is a very hot take. I don't think I could rate Sanga ahead of Tendulkar as a batsman on any metric
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
shortpitched713 said:
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
Click to expand...
Didnt you just say that average differences can point to playing in a more batting friendly era? Sanga's entire batting career coincided with that.
 
akilana

akilana

International 12th Man
subshakerz said:
Yeah but they had already established themselves as champs in the tougher era before. Not so Sanga.
Click to expand...
Not really though. Lara averaged in the 40s. He had no hundred against Donald and Wasim. He had to wait for the easier batting era/ weak attacks to bring his average over 40 against SA and Pakistan. He did absolutely nothing of significant in India and NZ. Lara’s legend is based his couple of great knocks vs Australia.
Sachin averaged less than 40 vs SA before the turn of the century. He had a middling record in Australia too.

If you scrutinize Sachin and Lara the same way you do Sanga, Ponting or Kallis, you’d find Lara and Sachin, especially the former get overrated a lot.
 
akilana

akilana

International 12th Man
Th champ of the 90s era was S Waugh. Should be rated higher than both Sachin and Lara. Was better against better bowling attacks.
 
ankitj

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
shortpitched713 said:
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
Click to expand...
@Himannv
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top