Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah I know we disagree a fair but and that's fine, but I don't like it when people think I'm inconsistent.
-
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 Dale Steyn
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
I would rate Miller ahead, despite putting Sachin higher on the list of best bats than Miller is for ARs.
It's fine to go with the argument in your second paragraph. I strongly disagree, but it is a reasonable position with sound logic backing it up. It's not Ok to argue that Steyn was better because he was the best bowler while Kallis was 'only' the best AR.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Ah ok. As long as you are consistent, I respect your position on ARs eve if we disagree.
I think the best AR of an era though is hard to compare with the best bat or bowler, since there is much less competition. Chris Cairns and Shaqib were probably the best for a few years but I wouldn't rate them the best cricketers in the world of those years.
There are fewer ARs as it is inherently more difficult to be good at multiple disciplines than 1. A team is not booting a player for getting better in their secondary discipline.
Yes, competition matters, which is why I said at the start that Kallis being the best AR doesn't necessarily make him the better player.
Do you apply this consistently? Why do you think that a bat needs to be the best in the world to be an ATG when there are many more more bats than bowlers?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah I am fairly consistent on this. There are more bats so staying no.1 bat in the world won't last really as long as for bowler due to competition. But I generally hold that an ATG would have been recognized as the best in the world at some point in their career.
I was just contrasting Steyn, who was unanimously the best bowler of his era, with Kallis who never even nearly was recognized as such as a bat, to highlight the difference in how they excelled at their specialisation.
I don't mean holding consistent opinions. I mean, are your opinions consistent with each other? If you are downgrading the meaning held by an AR being the best because there are fewer, are you doing this to bowlers in relation to bats?
It's not just the amount of time at the top that number of players of that type will hit. It is also how easy it is to get to the top. Although strength of era, number of teams playing etc. will matter more than just being a bat/bowler.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
That's a fair point. Perhaps there is a better way to get across that, aside from lack of competition, Steyn was held in higher regard for his bowling than Kallis for his batting during their careers.
Close ones, probably Kallis due to longevity. But Steyn in shorter time made more impact than Kallis. However, over their entire career, Kallis probably edges.
And yes, these two are the greatest SA international cricketers. Pollock was a couple of level below as a bowler to Steyn. Donald was also a level below. Smith and ABDV were behind as well. The likes of Barry, Mike Proctor and Graeme Pollock can't be considered greatest SA cricketers based on first class experience they had.
My order post 90s is :-
1. Kallis
2. Steyn
3. Pollock/Donald
5. G Smith/ABDV ( Smith in tests, ABDV across formats)
And yes, these two are the greatest SA international cricketers. Pollock was a couple of level below as a bowler to Steyn. Donald was also a level below. Smith and ABDV were behind as well. The likes of Barry, Mike Proctor and Graeme Pollock can't be considered greatest SA cricketers based on first class experience they had.
My order post 90s is :-
1. Kallis
2. Steyn
3. Pollock/Donald
5. G Smith/ABDV ( Smith in tests, ABDV across formats)
shortpitched713
International Captain
Pollock over Steyn, then Donald for mine. A vastly underrated cricketer.
HouHsiaoHsien
International Debutant
Steyn is a top 4 bowler of all time. Kallis ain’t beating that
Coronis
International Coach
Thala_0710
First Class Debutant
For me, the way I compare an AR to a specialist is by comparing their primary disciplines and then seeing whether their secondary disciplines were good enough to bridge the gap. Steyn is clearly an ATG fast bowler, top 5 all time (no 4 for me). Kallis is in an ATG batsman too, although in the lower rungs (around top 15). Overall, there is a decent gap between Steyn's bowling and Kallis' batting. Kallis' bowling I find a bit overrated at times. He was a good 5th option and sometimes a decent 4th option at best. That is not enough for me to bridge the gap in their primary disciplines
A team needs a 4th/5th bowler. He fine at the job, and averaged 30 or 40 more with the bat than the other candidates for most of his career.
Thala_0710
First Class Debutant
That's true and hence he is one of the greatest all Rounders of all time. Just not better than Steyn for me
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
They need a 4th bowler (in reality these tend to be 3rd bowlers who end up 4th). They don't need a 5th bowler if the first four are good enough. A part-time bowler is fine enough.
Overall Kallis was bowling 10 innings. He wasn't a specialist 4th bowler level.
Coronis
International Coach
Nobody said he was? The point is you get a bloke who is going to on average bowl you 12 overs an innings, take a wicket and give your other bowlers a much needed rest. Levels above a part timer who is just going to leak runs and unlikely to take any wickets.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes a level above a part timer, a good asset but not a 'need' for a good team. You can still make do with Clarke or Root bowlers for the overs in between.
You are calling Kallis an AR, but judging him as a specialist.
He is very much 4th bowler quality, and 5th in workload. Workload is dictated by team requirements per innings though.
A bowler doesn't turn into a specialist bat if the other bowlers blitz the opposition out before they get the ball. If they are selected in a bowlers spot, they stay one. Kallis doesn't stop being an AR if not called on to bowl much, cos he wasn't selected in a batsmans spot.
Thala_0710
First Class Debutant
Not really. If I was doing that, it wouldn't be close. I just feel that his bowling isn't good enough to cover the gap in their primary disciplines
Coronis
International Coach
What about his slip catching?