You have claimed revisionism as some heavy negative countless times whenever anyone has a high opinion of Kallis, but your own opinion is revisionism
-
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 Jack Hobbs
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I don't think I begrudge a person changing an opinion from a decade ago.
shortpitched713
International Captain
Kallis is better as a pure batsman. Let alone as a cricketer.
Coronis
International Coach
So again begs the question, what’s your problem with people rating Kallis more highly than they did a decade ago?
I trust this means you will stop claiming how a player was viewed at a particular stage in their career should define how they are viewed now?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Huh? A poster changing their opinion is different from peer review at a players prime.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Re-writing how highly he was rated by peers during his peak which informs for many how highly they rate him now.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
It's different, but the logic is same. You were basing your opinion at that time on the evidence you had, same for prime rating by peers. Now, you have knowledge of the hindsight, same here for them as well. Not that different really.
Coronis
International Coach
I’m pretty sure I and others haven’t done that? I know I myself have looked back and seen that for a period he was the best batsman in the world, despite not being as highly rated in that time by his peers.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
That was what I was arguing and getting pushback for.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Sure but my point has always been that Kallis never had a ATG-seeming reputation in his heyday and I use that point to explain why rating him so now is problematic.
capt_Luffy
Cricketer Of The Year
And my point has always been that point is bullshit..... Imo ofcourse.
kyear2
International Coach
The only argument anyone's have ever had over Kallis was that he was selfish. Be it how quickly he batted or how often he bowled, but from a production, and value metric there can be no arguments to his status.
He has the record (?, going from memory) for the most MOTM awards, and he's Sobers choosing another sport, away from being a consensus member of an ATG XI.
He's an ATG batsman, don't think that's ever been in question, he's in the upper echelon of slip fielders of all time and he was an incredibly effective 5th bowler.
He has an argument to be the 2nd greatest all rounder of all time. He was as productive as Sachin, with almost the longevity, as safe as Waugh Jr (especially to pace) and could bowl as good as any 5th option in history.
What more could he have done?
Coronis
International Coach
Pretty sure Luffy is arguing for Kallis there.. or at least just against subz
kyear2
International Coach
And I was supporting his argument.
docaberjohn
Cricket Spectator
Not even the best Saffer
Barry Richards and Pollock were streets ahead
Jack Hobbs record speaks for itself
Coronis
International Coach
This is talking about as an overall cricketer mate. i.e taking into account Kallis’ bowling and fielding. To call anyone streets ahead of him as an all round player is pretty disingenuous imo.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No. I never said he was selfish.
I said he lacked the ability to dominate like real ATG bats. If a bat can't dominate attacks, that is a valid reason to not put him in the ATG status.
Coronis
International Coach
Define dominate