Is Jacques Kallis Ken Barrington of modern age?

[Marius]

Oh yes, because SA fans never hype any of their players up.

No we don't. It's not fault that right now we have Steyn, a fast bowler who would be able to bowl Jesus out; Ab de Villiers, a reincarnation of Don Bradman himself; Amla, the best batsman in the universe and who has the best beard anyone has ever had; Vernon Philander, the 'Brown McGrath'; and Imran Tahir, the best legspinner in the world since Clarrie Grimmett (just been unlucky in Tests, is all).

Apart from those guys (and the other ATGs we have in our team) we're relatively mediocre.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Oh yes, because SA fans never hype any of their players up.

Even if they did, they don't have the numbers.

 

[kyear2]

His bowling and slip fielding add immense value. Part of only a handful of cricketers who can do so many things so well.

Very few indeed.

Among batsmen
Sobers, Chappell, Hammond, Simpson, Mitchell, Barlow.

All Rounders
Miller, Botham, Procter

Bowlers
Warne

 

[Adders]

Yeah, definitely.

I was legit more upset when I heard Kallis was retiring than when I heard Mandela had died.

Hmmm, maybe just a touch of lack of perspective going on here.

 

[Marius]

Hmmm, maybe just a touch of lack of perspective going on here.

Good to see facetiousness is appreciated on this forum.

And even if I was more upset by Kallis's retirement than Mandela's death, so what. Mandela was a great, no doubt, the greatest leader South Africa has ever had and one of the giants of the 20th century. But when he died he was 95 and had been retired for ten years. Kallis plays a sport I love and probably had another 18 months in him.

Mandela's death was expected, Kallis's retirement was not.

What would the appropriate perspective be, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Black_Warrior]

Good to see facetiousness is appreciated on this forum.

And even if I was more upset by Kallis's retirement than Mandela's death, so what. Mandela was a great, no doubt, the greatest leader South Africa has ever had and one of the giants of the 20th century. But when he died he was 95 and had been retired for ten years. Kallis plays a sport I love and probably had another 18 months in him.

Mandela's death was expected, Kallis's retirement was not.

What would the appropriate perspective be, if you don't mind me asking?

Very well put.

 

[Gob]

There is a persistent myth that Kallis failed against the Australia of Mcgrath and Warne. He actually averaged 53.69 in 8 matches in Australia where both those bowlers played. Lara, just to give an example averaged much less and even he was far less consistent, with a few big hundreds surround by more numerous failures. Dravid's tailender average is not even worth mentioning. The idea that he was a lesser batsman than say, a flat track home bully like Clarke is laughable.

Also people (usually from the Big Three countries) love to resort to cliches about him failing to "seize a game", "to accelerate when needed", "playing for his average, not his team" blah blah blah while creaming themselves over mediocre plodders from their own teams like Trott, Bell, Katich, etc. Half remembered commentary of Boycott (Projecting himself heavily) about Kallis is taken as gospel regarding how Kallis actually batted.

Don't think anyone here suggested that Clarke was better than big Jaques but your definition of clarke is bit ********

Think most of jaque's failures against McWarne were at home.He was quite prolific in Australia but just couldn't make a match turning performance like the efforts from Lara 99 and Tendulkar 97 with the bat

 

[Chrish]

Pollock is another statistical marvel produced by SA.. If you compare his bowling average to his own countrymen Steyn, there isn't much btw them (23.11 vs 22.48). Both with 400+ wickets.

Now batting wise, Polly >> Steyn (32.31 vs 14.49). In fact, statistically Polly has a legit claim to be one of the greatest all-rounders ever..

Still, how many would choose Polly over Steyn in their all time XI ?? I guess that's what it comes down to in Kallis' case. Not being perceived as effective as stats might suggest by Cricket fans in general.

And don't buy this argument of Kallis not getting his due because of his nationality.. Steyn doesn't play for big 3 either and he is already in a discussion of top 5 pacemen ever even before retirement

 

[Migara]

Pollock is another statistical marvel produced by SA.. If you compare his bowling average to his own countrymen Steyn, there isn't much btw them (23.11 vs 22.48). Both with 400+ wickets.

Now batting wise, Polly >> Steyn (32.31 vs 14.49). In fact, statistically Polly has a legit claim to be one of the greatest all-rounders ever..

Still, how many would choose Polly over Steyn in their all time XI ?? I guess that's what it comes down to in Kallis' case. Not being perceived as effective as stats might suggest by Cricket fans in general.

And don't buy this argument of Kallis not getting his due because of his nationality.. Steyn doesn't play for big 3 either and he is already in a discussion of top 5 pacemen ever even before retirement

Effectiveness wise I think Pollock is right up there. We don't feel he's effective because it is comes without being flashy. pollock 38% only few are ahead of him

Greg Matthews ? Mo? Better Impact | Cricket Web

 

[smash84]

Pollock is another statistical marvel produced by SA.. If you compare his bowling average to his own countrymen Steyn, there isn't much btw them (23.11 vs 22.48). Both with 400+ wickets.

Now batting wise, Polly >> Steyn (32.31 vs 14.49). In fact, statistically Polly has a legit claim to be one of the greatest all-rounders ever..

Still, how many would choose Polly over Steyn in their all time XI ?? I guess that's what it comes down to in Kallis' case. Not being perceived as effective as stats might suggest by Cricket fans in general.

And don't buy this argument of Kallis not getting his due because of his nationality.. Steyn doesn't play for big 3 either and he is already in a discussion of top 5 pacemen ever even before retirement

Its not a case of perception. It is definitely a case of performance as well between pollock and Steyn,

As a bowler they aren't at the same level. You can see it in their bowling.

Steyn is more like Donald. Both capable of running through batting lineups through pace and aggression. something that pollock lacked.

Just take a look at their 5fers to get an idea.

Pollock has only 16 from 108 tests.

Donald has 20 from 72 tests and Steyn has 25 from 80 tests

 

[Migara]

Its not a case of perception. It is definitely a case of performance as well between pollock and Steyn,

As a bowler they aren't at the same level. You can see it in their bowling.

Steyn is more like Donald. Both capable of running through batting lineups through pace and aggression. something that pollock lacked.

Just take a look at their 5fers to get an idea.

Pollock has only 16 from 108 tests.

Donald has 20 from 72 tests and Steyn has 25 from 80 tests

It means that Donald produced some utter crap performances as well, because they have similar averages. What Pollock did was take wickets frequently, and that too with less flashy dismissals. A booming away swinger squaring batsman and getting the edge or a raring ball hitting the gloves and popping up to short leg are flashy dismissals. But getting an lbw from a gun-barrel straight ball or a feather touch to the keeper from a ball that moved just enough doesn't look flashy. Pollock's dismissals are of latter type. That is why people tend to remember Akthar's bowling due to brute force and absolute jaffas (the one with the name would even take Bradman out) compared to Asif who made the batsman look foolish. Asif is an ATG bowler for Pakistan in same pedestal with Imran, W &W, but never rated (of course will not be rated due to fixing saga).

The numbers don't lie. Consistency itself is impact.

 

[smash84]

It means that Donald produced some utter crap performances as well, because they have similar averages. What Pollock did was take wickets frequently, and that too with less flashy dismissals. A booming away swinger squaring batsman and getting the edge or a raring ball hitting the gloves and popping up to short leg are flashy dismissals. But getting an lbw from a gun-barrel straight ball or a feather touch to the keeper from a ball that moved just enough doesn't look flashy. Pollock's dismissals are of latter type. That is why people tend to remember Akthar's bowling due to brute force and absolute jaffas (the one with the name would even take Bradman out) compared to Asif who made the batsman look foolish. Asif is an ATG bowler for Pakistan in same pedestal with Imran, W &W, but never rated (of course will not be rated due to fixing saga).

The numbers don't lie. Consistency itself is impact.

Consistency can also mean low impact. You can have 2 wickets per odi for 250 matches and will end up with 500 wickets. There will rarely be a match where that will be counted as having a big impact.

Same with test matches. You can take 2 wickets every innings and end up with 320 wickets in 80 matches. However that would still be quite low impact (mostly)

 

[honestbharani]

Cricket is not won by spreadsheets. Performances matter and every player has their off days and on days. When you are in form, you gotta make it count. The guys that get rated as amongst the best, not just based on statsguru, are those who provide such impact performances.

 

[cnerd123]

I think Pollock loses out because he played in a tougher era for batsmen/an era with a lot of great bowlers.

Steyn pretty much stands out alone from his peers in being an exceptional bowler in the current era.

 

[Red]

There is a persistent myth that Kallis failed against the Australia of Mcgrath and Warne. He actually averaged 53.69 in 8 matches in Australia where both those bowlers played. Lara, just to give an example averaged much less and even he was far less consistent, with a few big hundreds surround by more numerous failures. Dravid's tailender average is not even worth mentioning. The idea that he was a lesser batsman than say, a flat track home bully like Clarke is laughable.

Also people (usually from the Big Three countries) love to resort to cliches about him failing to "seize a game", "to accelerate when needed", "playing for his average, not his team" blah blah blah while creaming themselves over mediocre plodders from their own teams like Trott, Bell, Katich, etc. Half remembered commentary of Boycott (Projecting himself heavily) about Kallis is taken as gospel regarding how Kallis actually batted.

Pls quote where someone on this site has creamed themselves over Katich.

 

[Red]

Yeah that's another good point. CW is the ultimate manifestation of Big 3..with most of the fans from the 3 greatest cricketing nations of all time.. If we had more South African fans, blokes like Kallis and Donald (another criminally underrated player on CW) would have been rated much higher.

I'd say Donald is ranked right up there on CW. If anything, his own countryman Steyn has taken some of his gloss away with how good he's been.

Nearly every poster from every country on this site says how good Steyn is. And I've never seen a disparaging comment re. Donald, only praise. So I'm not exactly sure what you're point is here re. CW, but I think you're wrong.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Pollock is another statistical marvel produced by SA.. If you compare his bowling average to his own countrymen Steyn, there isn't much btw them (23.11 vs 22.48). Both with 400+ wickets.

Now batting wise, Polly >> Steyn (32.31 vs 14.49). In fact, statistically Polly has a legit claim to be one of the greatest all-rounders ever..

Still, how many would choose Polly over Steyn in their all time XI ?? I guess that's what it comes down to in Kallis' case. Not being perceived as effective as stats might suggest by Cricket fans in general.

And don't buy this argument of Kallis not getting his due because of his nationality.. Steyn doesn't play for big 3 either and he is already in a discussion of top 5 pacemen ever even before retirement

Here is the thing with stats. Just looking at bowling average does not mean jack ****. Stats encompasses a host of different kind of numbers and when you start breaking things down, Steyn and Pollock is not even a conversation.

I'd say Donald is ranked right up there on CW. If anything, his own countryman Steyn has taken some of his gloss away with how good he's been.

Nearly every poster from every country on this site says how good Steyn is. And I've never seen a disparaging comment re. Donald, only praise. So I'm not exactly sure what you're point is here re. CW, but I think you're wrong.

I have read various posts on CW disparaging Donald over the years. I don't really have the time now to go and look for them, so I can't really have this conversation with you any further unfortunately.

 

[Red]

I have read various posts on CW disparaging Donald over the years. I don't really have the time now to go and look for them, so I can't really have this conversation with you any further unfortunately.

Give me an idea, because TBH I've never seen someone on here be negative about Donald.

 

[honestbharani]

Maybe he just remembers it that way when people compared Donald to McGrath or Ambrose or Hadlee or Marshall... Not too many quicks better than Donald tbh..

 

[Black_Warrior]

Give me an idea, because TBH I've never seen someone on here be negative about Donald.

On a number of occasions people have said how Donald tried to talk big and bowl fast but was unable to walk the talk. They have referred to his apparent 'under performance' vs Australia..apparently he tried to fight Australia with aggression and failed.

This is not based on one particular topic or debate but overall in various topics and discussions where Donald's name had crept in.

I don't really have a problem with people holding such opinions, even though I strongly disagree with them. My original point was, if we had more South African fans on CW, then we would have a flow of opinions to challenge that narrative..and which in turn would make the conversation more balanced and interesting.

As such, now we have by and large, Dravid/Ponting > Kallis (just batting), McGrath > Donald.

I am not talking about the particular merit/demerits of those positions..just that these discussions are not as balanced as say Lara vs Tendulkar because we have a balanced number of differing views there..