Jacques Kallis vs Sachin Tendulkar

[Bolo.]

I can't believe StephenZA continues to think he understands South African cricket better than subshakerz. It's really weird. Like, why would he think that?

SZA is probably a bit of an idiot. I have compared how often him and Subs post. Subs must know more

What have I said that you actually disagree with though? I can't see anything here other than vague accusations of modus operandi

I've heard, and considered, your arguments defending Kallis' SR in the past, about his role in the team, the state of SA cricket etc. and I definitely don't dismiss it out of hand, I am very open-minded and appreciate the insight.

But it's not enough to make him a Lara or Sachin-level bat. Again, I literally saw him cost SA Test-match wins through overly defensive batting while in a strong position, on multiple occassions. It matters.

This criticism is 100% correct.

But your perception of how often it happened is probably wildly off based.on what you watched. I remember it about 4 times. Two were vs Aus. Sure it happened more, it's's just what i remember.

And as punchably annoying as it was, and the fact that he did cost games notwithstanding, if he had come out swinging and gone right away, RSA would have been worse off than they were for his faffing.

 

[StephenZA]

Another myth.

Please tell 90s Lara and Tendulkar about batting with a brittle top order.

Nowhere did I say that other teams did not also have brittle batting orders.... what would be nice to observe is, particularly in foreign conditions, how did those other teams with the more aggressive batsmen compete around the world? SA top order played far more conservatively and because of that tended to draw games and series. But quite often avoided losing. But it was not a winning culture.

 

[anil1405]

Nowhere did I say that other teams did not also have brittle batting orders.... what would be nice to observe is, particularly in foreign conditions, how did those other teams with the more aggressive batsmen compete around the world? SA top order played far more conservatively and because of that tended to draw games and series. But quite often avoided losing. But it was not a winning culture.

Yup, conservative is the right word. While batting teams of India and WI in 90s were brittle, South Africa was far more conservative despite having better batsmen.

 

[StephenZA]

So did Kallis bat conservatively because he was naturally conservative or he was dictated to do so?

He was known as an aggressive young player (can see that when he suddenly starts attacking the spinners then stops)... but he was considered the most talented batsmen in SA with the best technique so was asked by the coaches in the late 90's till mid 2000s to anchor the innings at 3 then 4. By mid to late 2000s the team started developing into the strong team it became (and which everyone thinks of, forgetting the batting problems of the 90s along with many other issues).

 

[Everton Seymour]

I would say Tendulkar was the better batsman , no amount of spin and sad storys is gonna change that ..Want a sad story ? Try having a billion people expecting great things from you since 16 years old in a country that treats your sport like a religion .Walking on to Test fields with legendary Test fast bowlers like Ajit Agarkar and Lakshmipathy Balaji trying to win test matches , that sounds fun !

 

[StephenZA]

Yup, conservative is the right word. While batting teams of India and WI in 90s were brittle, South Africa was far more conservative despite having better batsmen.

SA had a long batting line-up, the top order was brittle... 150-5 was common.

 

[sledger]

oooh a thread debating who the 4th/5th best test batsman ever is eh

 

[subshakerz]

SA had a long batting line-up, the top order was brittle... 150-5 was common.

Kirsten, Gibbs, Cullinan ain't brittle.

And the point is that Lara and Tendulkar had brittle top orders and they were still aggressive. So this is a silly excuse to justify a defensive batting style.

 

[subshakerz]

And as punchably annoying as it was, and the fact that he did cost games notwithstanding, if he had come out swinging and gone right away, RSA would have been worse off than they were for his faffing.

The point is he didn't go out swinging even when the situation demanded quick runs, he just batted accumulator mode like a robot.

 

[StephenZA]

Kirsten, Gibbs, Cullinan ain't brittle.

And the point is that Lara and Tendulkar had brittle top orders and they were still aggressive. So this is a silly excuse to justify a defensive batting style.

Firstly this tells me you know little about SA cricket.

You guys really should go onto cricinfo and see how many times the SA top 5 passed 300 runs in the 90s... and note that most of that was in 98+ period later on.

 

[subshakerz]

Nowhere did I say that other teams did not also have brittle batting orders.... what would be nice to observe is, particularly in foreign conditions, how did those other teams with the more aggressive batsmen compete around the world? SA top order played far more conservatively and because of that tended to draw games and series. But quite often avoided losing. But it was not a winning culture.

And Kallis was the symbol of that. A great reason to downgrade him, not to try and win some sympathy points.

 

[StephenZA]

And Kallis was the symbol of that. A great reason to downgrade him, not to try and win some sympathy points.

Yes but you equating a team culture and coaching with a player... its not the same thing. And when the team culture became more aggressive, his SR went up. What you can accuse him of is being a team man.

And if you really want to know where that conservative culture started it was under Kepler Wessels who was determined SA would be a disciplined competitive team from the day the reentered international cricket.

 

[subshakerz]

Firstly this tells me you know little about SA cricket.

You guys really should go onto cricinfo and see how many times the SA top 5 passed 300 runs in the 90s... and note that most of that was in 98+ period later on.

I watched SA from the mid 90s onwards. They always had the reputation for having a reliable and solid batting lineup. Kirsten was one of the best openers in the world. If Kirsten, Gibbs, Cullinan isn't good enough, please name me a team from the mid/late 90s to early 2000s with a stronger top order barring Australia.

 

[anil1405]

And Kallis was the symbol of that. A great reason to downgrade him, not to try and win some sympathy points.

And it's comments like these where people start to get annoyed with you.

If he was really being given sympathy points Kallis would be rated in the top 10 batters of all time by those whom you believe are sympathising with him. But clearly that's not the case. He is being given credit he deserves unlike you who is trying to put him down based on his strike rate alone.

If you've actually seen the team play closely you would've noticed how pathetically slow the entire batting unit was when they could've accelerated and put themselves in winning positions.

It has nothing to do with Kallis alone. It's got more to do with the team management and as Stephen pointed out earlier, the general culture in that country.

 

[subshakerz]

Yes but you equating a team culture and coaching with a player... its not the same thing. And when the team culture became more aggressive, his SR went up. What you can accuse him of is being a team man.

And if you really want to know where that conservative culture started it was under Kepler Wessels who was determined SA would be a disciplined competitive team from the day the reentered international cricket.

The player played in that style which is why we are equating.

There is only so much context you can give before it just becomes special pleading. At the end of the day the cricketer is judged by what he did on the field and how he actually played, not by 'what ifs' or 'captain's orders'.

And how he played was qualitatively worse than those in the top tier. He overcompensated in his defensiveness to the point it became a weakness compared to ATGs who still could bat aggressively despite similar constraints.

 

[subshakerz]

If he was really being given sympathy points Kallis would be rated in the top 10 batters of all time by those whom you believe are sympathising with him.

Isn't comparing him with Tendulkar suggesting he is that level?

 

[trundler]

No one thinks he was as good as Tendulkar. But he was also definitely better than Steve Waugh.

 

[anil1405]

Isn't comparing him with Tendulkar suggesting he is that level?

You should ask the person who started the thread.

Since his question was about batting alone there is no way Kallis is as good as Sachin.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I see Kallis has votes. That's a bit scary.

 

[subshakerz]

You should ask the person who started the thread.

Since his question was about batting alone there is no way Kallis is as good as Sachin.

The fact that Kallis has 25 percent vote shows how overrated the guy can be on CW.