Sachin Tendulkar vs Jacques Kallis

[centurymaker]

In an ATG contest, you don't want a 32.5 averaging bowler bowling any overs, ideally speaking. They'd be targeted ruthlessly.

But everyone has to bat in a lineup so runs at 7/8 can be useful.

 

[DrWolverine]

In ATG when you have 5 great batsmen and 4 great bowlers, I am not sure how useful the bowling of Sobers or batting of Imran/Hadlee is going to be.

 

[subshakerz]

In an ATG contest, you don't want a 32.5 averaging bowler bowling any overs, ideally speaking. They'd be targeted ruthlessly.

But everyone has to bat in a lineup so runs at 7/8 can be useful.

Yes and what they miss is that the scenarios when a 5th bowler is called upon are not key game changing ones, they are literally just a few overs in between to give a rest or if the pitch is dead. Unless your 5th bowler is actually test standard (Kallis is not) it's not a big deal at all.

The way Kallis was actively used in his actual career will never be how he will be used in an ATG setting which will be limited with four worldclass bowlers around.

But a 7/8 like you said is batting every innings and potentially stretching scores out. More critical.

 

[DrWolverine]

If someone gives me an option to have Brian Lara or Jacques Kallis in the Indian team for next 15 years, I would choose Kallis without hesitation.

 

[subshakerz]

In ATG when you have 5 great batsmen and 4 great bowlers, I am not sure how useful the bowling of Sobers or batting of Imran/Hadlee is going to be.

Batting of Imran is definitely useful in low scoring scenarios even if he ends up averaging mid-20s at no.8. if Sobers is coming at no.6 he needs the tail to wag for him to get his full value.

Whereas like I said with the bowling, a 5th bowler role is less critical and can be taken up by even part timers if necessary. @kyear2 himself admits this when he drops Miller and is fine with Simpson as a 5th bowler for an Aus ATG XI and doesn't see this as really harming Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

If someone gives me an option to have Brian Lara or Jacques Kallis in the Indian team for next 15 years, I would choose Kallis without hesitation.

Lara easily. It's not just runs it's how they play. You can build an entire batting order around Lara and his aggressive threat but not Kallis the accumulator.

Posters here are obsessed with a 'balanced XI' at the expense of what is actually more effective in real life.

 

[sayon basak]

Posters here are obsessed with a 'balanced XI' at the expense of what is actually more effective in real life.

Balance is very effective in real life.

 

[subshakerz]

Balance is very effective in real life.

Depends.

If the idea is 'runs are runs' and I can replace Lara with any 50 odd bat of completely different style and quality to achieve balance, I disagree.

However, I can see a case for Kallis over Lara if it is a completely horrible side with sub test standard bowling and Kallis has to take a more active bowling role.

 

[Bolo.]

I think it's quite debatable whether Kallis' bowling is of more value than Pollock's batting. I think I would agree that Kallis was a slightly better bowl than Pollock as a bat but just in the nature of the roles, a 4/5th bowler vs 7/8th bat. Either way it's close. But I would take McGrath over Pollock and Sachin over Kallis too, and probably most people would have while their careers were ongoing

The team could be selected around Kallis' bowling. This usually meant playing an extra bat instead of no rounder or poor bowler. As valuable as I consider tail end runs to be, this wasn't a luxury Pollock's bowling provided. Plus a much longer career.

Mcgrath and Sachin were firing years before Kallis. Most people would be right in picking them for most of the time they were playing, but it has no bearing on who ended up the better player.

 

[sayon basak]

Btw I didn't realize Sachin was losing to Kallis in this poll lol.

 

[Thala_0710]

If someone gives me an option to have Brian Lara or Jacques Kallis in the Indian team for next 15 years, I would choose Kallis without hesitation.

Let's just take the example of the BGT that recently took place. You place an ATG top 3-5 bat like Sachin or Lara in the middle order and IND probably end up winning the whole series. Kallis would have a less of an effect with the bat, and bowl some tidy 8-10 overs to give Bumrah and Siraj a rest, which someone like Reddy was already doing a decent job of and Kallis would have been a slight upgrade in that bowling department. But the sheer match winning hundreds of a Tendulkar/Lara would be the difference maker

 

[sayon basak]

But the sheer match winning hundreds of a Tendulkar/Lara would be the difference maker

Why wouldn't Kallis be able to score that match defining hundred? He might be inferior to Sachin/Lara as a batter but he was an ATG as well, and always felt like the gap among the top players is smaller than we often think.

 

[Bolo.]

It's pretty ridiculous to compare career or peak duration of a fast bowler with a bat. You might as well rate Kallis ahead of Marshall by this standard. Pollock took 310 wickets @20 in 70 tests in his peak btw.

I already acknowledged that Kallis as a bat is ahead of Pollock as a bowler but it's marginal.

As for secondary disciplines, apparently everyone can see Pollock has a soft batting record but few can acknowledge that for Kallis with his minnow bashing.

Regardless, my main point stands. We wouldnt entertain Pollock over McGrath based on raw numbers of wickets and runs nor should we Kallis over Tendulkar.

Do you think it's equally valid to say Mitch Marsh and Imran shouldn't be entertained as better than Mcgrath/Sachin based on wickets plus runs? Or do we bring quality into it? Kallis was better than Pollock.

 

[subshakerz]

The team could be selected around Kallis' bowling. This usually meant playing an extra bat instead of no rounder or poor bowler. As valuable as I consider tail end runs to be, this wasn't a luxury Pollock's bowling provided. Plus a much longer career.

Again it's silly to compare a fast bowler and a bat based on career length. Your top ten cricketers would all be bats based on that.

And no Kallis' is not test specialist standard to select an extra bat in a regular XI.

Mcgrath and Sachin were firing years before Kallis. Most people would be right in picking them for most of the time they were playing, but it has no bearing on who ended up the better player.

Kallis doesn't become a better cricketer based on 2-3 good late career years. He was rightly rated behind those two despite being in his prime.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Let's just take the example of the BGT that recently took place. You place an ATG top 3-5 bat like Sachin or Lara in the middle order and IND probably end up winning the whole series. Kallis would have a less of an effect with the bat, and bowl some tidy 8-10 overs to give Bumrah and Siraj a rest, which someone like Reddy was already doing a decent job of and Kallis would have been a slight upgrade in that bowling department. But the sheer match winning hundreds of a Tendulkar/Lara would be the difference maker

Kallis I don't think will have a significant lesser effect with the bat. And re Kallis, it means benching Washington/Reddy for a better bat in the XI (Paddikal, Jurel or Easwaran).

 

[sayon basak]

I could replace the Indian team with all BD players (except Bumrah), and the team would still perform better in the BGT.

 

[subshakerz]

Why wouldn't Kallis be able to score that match defining hundred? He might be inferior to Sachin/Lara as a batter but he was an ATG as well, and always felt like the gap among the top players is smaller than we often think.

Because in his style didn't do that match defining hindred. In Aus, he scored hundreds usually in partnership with others as opposed to lead knocks.

His hundred in 2005/6 literally cost SA the game by taking too long.

He wasn't doing any aggressive knock that set the opposition back.

 

[subshakerz]

Kallis I don't think will have a significant lesser effect with the bat. And re Kallis, it means benching Washington/Reddy for a better bat in the XI (Paddikal, Jurel or Easwaran).

So literally instead of an actual pacer you will have Kallis who will be forced to bowl more overs that would likely affect his batting.

 

[capt_Luffy]

So literally instead of an actual pacer you will have Kallis who will be forced to bowl more overs that would likely affect his batting.

Literally I am having as an improvement in the 4th bowler department, as I think by skill he is better than Akash Deep. We literally broke down Bumrah by overbowling him, Kallis would hugely help with that. And re batting, Kallis has a better record in Australia than Lara.

 

[Thala_0710]

Literally I am having as an improvement in the 4th bowler department, as I think by skill he is better than Akash Deep. We literally broke down Bumrah by overbowling him, Kallis would hugely help with that. And re batting, Kallis has a better record in Australia than Lara.

I don't agree re the skills level wrt Akashdeep. Akashdeep imo is a higher skilled bowler than Kallis by quite a decent margin actually. His numbers won't just show it yet, but hopefully he has a long and successful career to prove it