capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
And that just goes to show how @Coronis's point on peer rating being extremely biased is very true. I am also making a point on Kallis, that being your point is very wrong.
-
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.
Kallis Vs Wasim
- Thread starter Jumno
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Please tell me when Kallis was rated no.1 on form.
That has more to with the fact that 6-7 of the greatest pacers ever happened to appear in a decade or so window which is a freak occurence. Wasim still had his years when he shined ahead of others and arguably had a better rep than all of them except Marshall.
Kallis isn't close in this regard. He wasn't seen as a bonafide ATG bat in his career in that all. He was seen as the harmless accumulator, often seen as selfish and lacking intent.
Last edited:
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Sure then just say all the players and pundits of that time watching all the bats were wrong and missed this superman Kallis somehow.
Coronis
International Coach
Did you not even read my post?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes and I am asking who rated Kallis as the best bat then if it was so obvious?
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
No no that's impossible!!! An Attacking Aussie player getting overrated based on fast runs again weak opponents!!? Sure, that can never happen and Ponting definitely was approaching Sachin Tendulkar..... Such a vile and disingenuous post. Peter May and Denis Compton were rated over Hutton by many "experts", and Lillee was considered the epitome of pace bowling by even more "experts", and Rohan Kanhai was considered Sobers' equal and at times even better by such "experts", and after all this, there are still many "experts" who rate Kallis the batsman ahead of Ponting. Lo, Coronis provided you stats and you started ranting about peer ratings. You and Kyear have no right to criticize past players for overrating their favourites. Kohli had an easily better peak than Ponting, and he actually scored runs tough runs unlike the former in SA, Australia and even in England, but if someone said he was approaching Sachin; I would say they should not be allowed to share opinions on batsmanship; and there are still "experts" who feels just that; AND some even rate Kohli higher already!! (Looking at you Imran).
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
My Lord what a rant.
Do players get occasionally overrated or underrated by pundits/peers? Yes and we have discussed what circumstances is this obviously the case. Does does mean it is meaningless as you and Coronis suggest and we should just become dataset crunchers? I say no.
The point is quite straightforward. If Kallis was so good in the mid-2000s, why wasn't he recognized as such?
And the reason why is simple. It's not the runs, it's the way he scored his runs. A weak-kneed, conservative, soft, tone deaf accumulative approach that was unbecoming of a top bat in a good lineup. He didn't score big at the decisive moments then like Dravid or smash the will of opposition teams then like Ponting.
He was just sort of there, doing his thing, nurdling the ball around like a wallflower. Only at the end of his career did he open up a bit.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
So you agree Kallis was a more consistent run scorer than Ponting and also wasn't useless in the latter half of his career?? Ofcourse peer rating has his place, but sometimes it's really easy to see when "experts" are just wrong/biased. And saying Ponting was approaching Sachin was more wrong than saying Kohli was doing that.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Yes. The best version of Kallis was the last phase of his career when his SR also went up too and he batted with more freedom.
And his overall run record is comparable to Ponting, but Ponting was ahead based on his ability to intimidate and dominate attacks which had a big effect in the game. He was seen as a bigger threat by the opposing team.
If you are going to be reductionist about it, you could compare Kallis's record with Lara and argue Kallis is a better bat. But nobody here will take that seriously as they shouldn't.
Last edited:
kyear2
International Coach
Seriously, what do you have against Punter?
kyear2
International Coach
And now you're going too far, dude was a legit ATG.
kyear2
International Coach
He had significantly tougher home conditions than both of them.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Is Dravid an ATG to you?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
And they had their pluses too. So it's not clearcut and pretending it is and Kallis is somehow a level ahead to me just ignores how they were seen during their playing days.
kyear2
International Coach
Wasim played very much in a bowling era the same way Kallis did in the batting one. Difference being Kallis had the unfortunate circumstance of having his home matches in the sole remnant of the blowing era. I know your next argument and we can have that as well.
Your revisionist history argument that you use for Kallis, very much applies, though to a slightly degree, to Imran as well. I find it strange that you constantly being up one while ignoring the other.
kyear2
International Coach
I think the harmless accumulator bit is a tad unfair.
I'll also remind you that the reason Hadlee wasn't seen on par with Lillee was also a bit of the same.
Could it be that they were just from countries where players (until Steyn) just weren't seen as impactful on the world stage?
Could be wrong, and they were just a bit too good to be viewed that way imo.
kyear2
International Coach
I preferred Ponting because he scored faster and the runs seemed more impactful for a, ummmm. The team was relevant, the runs mattered. They were becoming one of the two greatest teams ever and he was a major reason why.
He was just dominant and he put bowlers on the back foot.
Re Sachin and Lara, they were just better, but they were more than 98% of the batsmen in cricket ever, so that's kinda of an unfair comp.
kyear2
International Coach
Why am I catching strays?
kyear2
International Coach
No.
Search Kallisball on this website. I think it's safe to say that when people rename the sport after a player, they rate him. Not even his best (extended) form. Plenty of people recognized how good his form was in the mid 2000s. You will always have a bunch of people calling a player on top of the ICC rankings the form player. It's what the system was designed for, and (reasonably or not), tons of people trust it. This site has less respect for the rankings system than anywhere else, and they still constantly get brought up.*
You recognize that Akram was quality despite playing alongside better players. Extend this to other players too. Having to be better than your competition is ridiculous when facing vastly different levels of competition.
*And this is all junk anyway, unless perception actually matches reality. Missrating a player does not change their quality, regardless of how many people do it.