Lara or Kallis

[DrWolverine]

As batsmen

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

 

[sayon basak]

As batmen

 

[DrWolverine]

View attachment 42435

Edited

 

[sayon basak]

Lara obviously.

Bradman

Sachin
Hobbs
Richards
Sobers
Lara
Hammond
Smith
Hutton
Gavaskar

Headley
Pollock
Chappell
Sutcliffe
Ponting
Border
Waugh
Kallis
Trumper
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Root
Barrington
Weekes
Walcott

Compton
Nourse
Kohli
Williamson
De Villiers
Worrell


Top 32 imo (without Grace, Ranji and Barry as usual)

 

[Coronis]

Lara obviously.

Bradman

Sachin
Hobbs
Richards
Sobers
Lara
Hammond
Smith
Hutton
Gavaskar

Headley
Pollock
Chappell
Sutcliffe
Ponting
Border
Waugh
Kallis
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Root
Barrington
Weekes
Walcott

Compton
Nourse
Kohli
Williamson
De Villiers


Top 30 imo (without Grace, Ranji and Barry as usual)

I know there will be arguable reasons obviously, but it will just be hilarious in my head if Kane ends up averaging ~55 and is rated below Kohli averaging say 47

 

[DrWolverine]

I know there will be arguable reasons obviously, but it will just be hilarious in my head if Kane ends up averaging ~55 and is rated below Kohli averaging say 47

If Kane ends up with an average of 54 and Virat ends up with an average of 47, future generations aren’t going to rate Virat higher.

 

[sayon basak]

I know there will be arguable reasons obviously, but it will just be hilarious in my head if Kane ends up averaging ~55 and is rated below Kohli averaging say 47

I'll wait till the BGT.

 

[DrWolverine]

Is there any particular reason why Kallis is not rated higher? I was not a fan of his batting style but there is not really any reason why he is not one of the best. He has one of the most complete records out there doing well against everyone and almost everywhere and he has had a few series where was just a monster.

 

[Coronis]

Is there any particular reason why Kallis is not rated higher? I was not a fan of his batting style but there is not really any reason why he is not one of the best. He has one of the most complete records out there doing well against everyone and almost everywhere and he has had a few series where was just a monster.

“boring”

 

[DrWolverine]

True.

He was boring and made me change the channel but as I grown older I have gone on to appreciate him more

 

[subshakerz]

Is there any particular reason why Kallis is not rated higher? I was not a fan of his batting style but there is not really any reason why he is not one of the best. He has one of the most complete records out there doing well against everyone and almost everywhere and he has had a few series where was just a monster.

He wasn't a dominant bat and his bowling is overrated. Check the post below where it gives details on how in his peak he was being seen as someone with a handicap against pressuring the opposition.

Kallis Vs Ambrose

Maybe I am struggling to understand what you mean by extra bat if SA would have tried someone who can bat to fill Kallis' position anyways. When Kallis played, the 6 best bats played. When he didn't, the 5 best bats played. That is an extra specialist bat. So you can recognize that Kallis added...

www.cricketweb.net

 

[kyear2]

He wasn't a dominant bat and his bowling is overrated. Check the post below where it gives details on how in his peak he was being seen as someone with a handicap against pressuring the opposition.

Kallis Vs Ambrose

Maybe I am struggling to understand what you mean by extra bat if SA would have tried someone who can bat to fill Kallis' position anyways. When Kallis played, the 6 best bats played. When he didn't, the 5 best bats played. That is an extra specialist bat. So you can recognize that Kallis added...

www.cricketweb.net

That article was a hit piece, and lost what credibility it possibly had when it defended Dravid in comparison.

Yes Kallis could, and in some instances should have been more proactive with his scoring rate. But his numbers still place him well inside the top 20, even if below the likes of those who could and showed the ability to accelerate as needed.

 

[Thala_0710]

Lara obviously.

Bradman

Sachin
Hobbs
Richards
Sobers
Lara
Hammond
Smith
Hutton
Gavaskar

Headley
Pollock
Chappell
Sutcliffe
Ponting
Border
Waugh
Kallis
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Root
Barrington
Weekes
Walcott

Compton
Nourse
Kohli
Williamson
De Villiers


Top 30 imo (without Grace, Ranji and Barry as usual)

Let's give the top 30 a try:

1. Bradman

2. Tendulkar
3. Hobbs
4. Lara
5. Sobers
6. Richards
7. Smith
8. Hutton
9. Gavaskar
10. Hammond

11. Headley
12. Sutcliffe
13. Pollock
14. Ponting
15. Chappell
16. Border
17. Kallis
18. Waugh
19. Dravid
20. Barrington
21. Weekes
22. Walcott
23. Root
24. Sangakkara

25. Nourse
26. Miandad
27. De Villiers
28. Younis
29. Compton
30. Kohli

 

[capt_Luffy]

Lara obviously.

Bradman

Sachin
Hobbs
Richards
Sobers
Lara
Hammond
Smith
Hutton
Gavaskar

Headley
Pollock
Chappell
Sutcliffe
Ponting
Border
Waugh
Kallis
Sangakkara
Dravid
Miandad
Root
Barrington
Weekes
Walcott

Compton
Nourse
Kohli
Williamson
De Villiers


Top 30 imo (without Grace, Ranji and Barry as usual)

Let's give the top 30 a try:

1. Bradman

2. Tendulkar
3. Hobbs
4. Lara
5. Sobers
6. Richards
7. Smith
8. Hutton
9. Gavaskar
10. Hammond

11. Headley
12. Sutcliffe
13. Pollock
14. Ponting
15. Chappell
16. Border
17. Kallis
18. Waugh
19. Dravid
20. Barrington
21. Weekes
22. Walcott
23. Root
24. Sangakkara

25. Nourse
26. Miandad
27. De Villiers
28. Younis
29. Compton
30. Kohli

No Trumper in both???

 

[Thala_0710]

No Trumper in both???

I was surprised he didn't have him. Me personally, I just don't rate pre WW1 players with the others. To me the game was too different and variance too high for me to rate them properly. Hence I try to avoid rating Grace, Ranji, Trumper, Barnes etc

 

[Thala_0710]

Btw this comparison would be closer if we did it as players instead of batsmen

 

[subshakerz]

That article was a hit piece, and lost what credibility it possibly had when it defended Dravid in comparison.

Lol you don't actually address any of the arguments. And nobody rates Dravid that high as well for the same reason it's just that Dravids approach was less damaging to his team since he didn't have similar accumulator all around him.

Yes Kallis could, and in some instances should have been more proactive with his scoring rate. But his numbers still place him well inside the top 20, even if below the likes of those who could and showed the ability to accelerate as needed.

I agree. I have Kallis in top 20 too. But the inability to be dominant as a no.4 means I won't call him an ATG.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Excluding Grace, Ranji, Shrewsbury, Merchant and Barry:

1. Bradman



2. Hobbs
3. Tendulkar
4. Sobers
5. Lara
6. Smith
7. Richards
8. Gavaskar
9. Hutton
10. Hammond

11. Headley
12. Sutcliffe
13. Border
14. Pollock
15. Kallis
16. Waugh
17. Chappell
18. Sangakkara
19. Ponting
20. Dravid
21. Root
22. Trumper
23. Barrington
24. Weekes
25. Nourse

26. Miandad
27. Walcott
28. de Villiers
29. Kohli
30. Compton
31. Younis
32. Harvey
33. Williamson
34. Hill
35. Kanhai
36. May
37. Flower
38. Worrell
39. Crowe
40. Boycott
41. MaCartney

42. Lloyd
43. Amla
44. Greenidge
45. Chanderpaul
46. G Smith
47. Hayden
48. Mitchell
49. Simpson
50. Sehwag
51. Cook
52. Inzi
53. Gilchrist
54. Pietersen
55. Laxman
56. Clarke
57. McCabe
58. Lawry
59. Cowdrey
60. Jayawardene
61. Gooch
62. Gower
63. H Taylor
64. Yousuf
65. Morris
66. Ponsford
67. Walters
68. Hanif
69. Hazare
70. Dexter
71. De Silva
72. Hunte
73. Kirsten
74. Hussey
75. Hendren
76. Thorpe
77. Hassett
78. Pujara
79. I Chappell
80. Boon

 

[kyear2]

I was surprised he didn't have him. Me personally, I just don't rate pre WW1 players with the others. To me the game was too different and variance too high for me to rate them properly. Hence I try to avoid rating Grace, Ranji, Trumper, Barnes etc

100% agree.

Just rate them among themselves.