Jacques Kallis vs Ricky Ponting

[Coronis]

South Africans who average 50+ at home (min 20 innings)

Pollock 1513 @ 68.77
Nourse 1881 @ 58.78
Kallis 7035 @ 56.73

 

[Johan]

South Africans who average 50+ at home (min 20 innings)

Pollock 1513 @ 68.77
Nourse 1881 @ 58.78
Kallis 7035 @ 56.73

Richards 508 @ 72.57

 

[Coronis]

Richards 508 @ 72.57

Learn to read

 

[subshakerz]

Do you think this is true in relation to Ponting? I don't think conditions were that different between AUS and RSA at the start of their careers, but they diverged pretty heavily.

Look at the 3 highest averaging bats from each team from the 2000s, who have counterparts with comparable batting positions and overall records.

Hayden, Clarke and Hussey averaged about 41 away and 60 home.
Smith, Amla and AB averaged about 45 home and 52 away.

Obviously, these six are a wonky sample, and runs in RSA were not worth ~70% more. But they were worth a lot more. More than a feather in the cap for Kallis. Unless you are a big believer in away records being >>> home records. Which I do kinda agree with. But which still reflects extremely well on Kallis.

Of course Ponting had it much easier at home.

Just saying that Kallis at home was more about doing well in such conditions but not exactly against SA-level attacks.

 

[Bolo.]

Of course Ponting had it much easier at home.

Just saying that Kallis at home was more about doing well in such conditions but not exactly against SA-level attacks.

If the point you are trying to make us that he played most of his career in a weak bowling era, then sure. This isn't news or particularly relevant to conditions.

 

[subshakerz]

If the point you are trying to make us that he played most of his career in a weak bowling era, then sure. This isn't news or particularly relevant to conditions.

I am saying Kallis averaging 56 odd in his home isn't the same as someone touring and doing the same and we shouldn't present it as such. It's just impressive relative to his colleagues.

 

[Bolo.]

I am saying Kallis averaging 56 odd in his home isn't the same as someone touring and doing the same and we shouldn't present it as such. It's just impressive relative to his colleagues.

OFC a home and away average are not the same. I don't think people tend to present it that way.

It's just an exceptional home average relative to his colleagues. But by a greater degree than just about anyone else in modern cricket, with a caveat that you need to include quality of the colleagues to work out to what degree conditions are responsible for it. He two of the 4 highest away averaging bats in modern cricket in his team, and he was way better than them at home.

Anyway, as impressive as his home average is, I think away averages are a much more reliable indicator of quality. But he averages nearly the same away as home regardless.

 

[subshakerz]

OFC a home and away average are not the same. I don't think people tend to present it that way.

It's just an exceptional home average relative to his colleagues. But by a greater degree than just about anyone else in modern cricket, with a caveat that you need to include quality of the colleagues to work out to what degree conditions are responsible for it. He two of the 4 highest away averaging bats in modern cricket in his team, and he was way better than them at home.

Anyway, as impressive as his home average is, I think away averages are a much more reliable indicator of quality. But he averages nearly the same away as home regardless.

In this comparison those averages take a minor hit when you remove Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

 

[Coronis]

In this comparison those averages take a minor hit when you remove Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Jesus

 

[kyear2]

OFC a home and away average are not the same. I don't think people tend to present it that way.

It's just an exceptional home average relative to his colleagues. But by a greater degree than just about anyone else in modern cricket, with a caveat that you need to include quality of the colleagues to work out to what degree conditions are responsible for it. He two of the 4 highest away averaging bats in modern cricket in his team, and he was way better than them at home.

Anyway, as impressive as his home average is, I think away averages are a much more reliable indicator of quality. But he averages nearly the same away as home regardless.

This for the most part

 

[Bolo.]

In this comparison those averages take a minor hit when you remove Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Ya. It drops his average by a staggering 2 runs. And he is completely unique in this regard, cos he is the only bat to ever score against minnows. The only notable impact on his average that removing them brings is that it turns him into the highest averaging bat with a complete career in the modern era.

 

[subshakerz]

Ya. It drops his average by a staggering 2 runs. And he is completely unique in this regard, cos he is the only bat to ever score against minnows. The only notable impact on his average that removing them brings is that it turns him into the highest averaging bat with a complete career in the modern era.

I said, it matters in this comparison because Ponting didn't really play against minnows. Same as between Warne and Murali the minnow bashing makes the difference seem more. And because plenty of posters here are dull enough to be swayed by raw number difference.

And like I said, Ponting had a longer than usual post peak dip because he felt the need to extend his career for the team. This hit his average. I take those extenuating circumstances into account.

Once you take average difference out of the equation (in fact Ponting in context has a better record) Kallis has almost no case to be ahead of Ponting.

 

[Coronis]

I said, it matters in this comparison because Ponting didn't really play against minnows. Same as between Warne and Murali the minnow bashing makes the difference seem more. And because plenty of posters here are dull enough to be swayed by raw number difference.

And like I said, Ponting had a longer than usual post peak dip because he felt the need to extend his career for the team. This hit his average. I take those extenuating circumstances into account.

Once you take average difference out of the equation, Kallis has almost no case to be ahead of Ponting.

How about longevity then…

 

[subshakerz]

How about longevity then…

I don't see how that factors in. Even if you cut the end extra years, Ponting still has around 15 years of a career stretch, that's long enough to compare and a 55 average. If you don't cut the end years, they played almost the same length.

 

[Coronis]

I don't see how that factors in. Even if you cut the end extra years, Ponting still has around 15 years of a career stretch, that's long enough to compare and a 55 average. If you don't cut the end years, they played almost the same length.

If you don’t cut the end years then Kallis has a much better average. But that’s fine to you. Talk about double standards

 

[subshakerz]

If you don’t cut the end years then Kallis has a much better average. But that’s fine to you. Talk about double standards

I am giving that argument for your sake, that if you insist on full careers then Kallis has no longevity advantage which you brought up.

I prefer to not count Ponting last three years, in which case he has the same average as Kallis without minnows, Kallis playing a few years longer but it's not like Ponting didn't have a long enough career anyways.

So you take your pick.

 

[Coronis]

I am giving that argument for your sake, that if you insist on full careers then Kallis has no longevity advantage which you brought up.

I prefer to not count Ponting last three years, in which case he has the same average as Kallis without minnows, Kallis playing a few years longer but it's not like Ponting didn't have a long enough career anyways.

So you take your pick.

He played for longer and was quality for longer… I’d call that the definition of an advantage.

Oh ok cool.

I prefer not to count Kohli and Root’s last few years. So Kohli is way better!

I prefer not to count Anderson’s first 7 years! Bloke is a serious top 10 contender!

 

[subshakerz]

He played for longer and was quality for longer… I’d call that the definition of an advantage.

A year longer.

I prefer not to count Kohli and Root’s last few years. So Kohli is way better!

I prefer not to count Anderson’s first 7 years! Bloke is a serious top 10 contender!

That's fine if you can give what extenuating circumstances justifies excluding those years. It's not like I am saying cut every bats career end dip.

 

[Coronis]

A year longer.


That's fine if you can justify what extenuating circumstances justifies excluding those years. It's not like I am saying cut every bats career end dip.

Those aren’t extenuating circumstances. That’s Ponting’s pathetic excuse years later for being **** in his last few years.

Extenuating circumstances are coming back for your team after a war or multiple years of not playing tests/FC and not performing well.

 

[subshakerz]

Those aren’t extenuating circumstances. That’s Ponting’s pathetic excuse years later for being **** in his last few years.

Extenuating circumstances are coming back for your team after a war or multiple years of not playing tests/FC and not performing well.

I am willing to take him at his word since it is true that Australia did have a problem then with the resources in their team.

Regardless, if you don't accept it, then please take back the longevity argument for Kallis.