Jacques Kallis - Most Underrated Allrounder

[Sanz]

I look at it in a different way. One bats with responsibility, the other doesn't put enough value on his wicket.

 

[ClownSymonds]

Kallis is over the hill. His bowling average over his last 10 tests is over 38. And look at his hair (or what remains of it, anyway).

Not to say he's not still a great player.

 

[Perm]

Kallis is probably not under-rated as such, mainly because of the fact that he doesn't bowl very often and only bowls when he knows he is likely to take a wicket against some of the lesser sides like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. I would not consider him as an all rounder now, more as a batsman that very occasionally bowls. I don't blame him either really because batting at #4 like he does for long amounts of time must be terribly draining.

Flintoff on the other hand comes in at 6 or 7 and hits the ball around a bit, generally doesn't grind out a long innings where he occupies the crease for a large amount of time. But his bowling is far superior to that of Kallis and the fact he can bowl quickly as well adds to his status as an all-rounder. If Flintoff hadn't gone through that really poor period early in his career I think his statistics would be considerably better than they are now, perhaps even ranking him against some of the games great all rounders.

 

[TT Boy]

Kallis is probably not under-rated as such, mainly because of the fact that he doesn't bowl very often and only bowls when he knows he is likely to take a wicket against some of the lesser sides like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. I would not consider him as an all rounder now, more as a batsman that very occasionally bowls. I don't blame him either really because batting at #4 like he does for long amounts of time must be terribly draining.

Flintoff on the other hand comes in at 6 or 7 and hits the ball around a bit, generally doesn't grind out a long innings where he occupies the crease for a large amount of time. But his bowling is far superior to that of Kallis and the fact he can bowl quickly as well adds to his status as an all-rounder. If Flintoff hadn't gone through that really poor period early in his career I think his statistics would be considerably better than they are now, perhaps even ranking him against some of the games great all rounders.

Kallis does still bowl with a fair lick, bowled a few around the 140km/h mark against the New Zealanders recently and his fastest ball was quicker than Makhaya’s.

In regard to the underrated question, as a batsman I still think his grossly underrated considering the importance put upon him. As a bowler right conditions his still a handful but his nowhere near the bowler he was in the nineties but as a batsman his one of the best around.

 

[aussie]

Well currently he is under-rated because his bowling as declined since 2003 while his batting has gone from strength to strenght.

His bowling isn't as effective as before i remember in the 99 world cup when he had the new ball & was bowled over 90 mph & testing the best batsmen, or in the West Indies in 2001 when his form with the bat wasn't below par but he stepped up to the plate with the ball superbly. He doesn't do that anymore, he just bats superbly while contributing on & off with the ball

 

[Mister Wright]

Kallis doesn't need to be an allrounder anymore. S.A. bowling attack is stronger than it was 6-7 years ago and Hall often plays now as an allrounder.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

6-7 years ago they had Donald and Pollock at their peaks! The attack was miles stronger then.

Kallis used to be a good batsman and a decent bowler. Now he's a great batsman and a poor bowler. Having said that, he bowled decently at times against Australia this year. Certainly the best I've seen him bowl in a long time. Generally speaking though, he's been a nothing bowler since around 2001 or so. Before that he was widely recognised as the best all-rounder in the world, now he's simply a very good batsman who occasionally bowls, and mostly against the weaker teams.

The reason Kallis will never be one of the great all-rounders is because he was simply never quite at the top level with both disciplines around the same time. For someone like Imran that doesn't matter so much because he was so amazingly good as a bowler that he only had to be a decent batsman to be a very good all-rounder. He never peaked in both areas at the same time like Botham did, but he was very good nonetheless.

For Kallis, he was a decent bowler at his bowling peak and certainly qualified as a good all-rounder, but he wasn't really someone who would run through a side or a top class batsman. These days he certainly appears to be among the best statistically, but that's largely because he's become a far better batsman and his bowling has declined to the point where he's basically a part-timer. If his bowling and batting peaks had been at the same time, he'd be rated much higher.

Add to that his selfish image and the fact that he tends to come out and take 4/20 against Zimbabwe and then bowl 20 overs in a whole series against a better team.

Also, when comparing him to Sobers, it's worth remembering that Sobers was genuinely a front-line bowler for his team. He was in the top 5 most prolific wicket takers in the world throughout his career, and he bowled a LOT of overs. There's a big difference between taking 200 wickets in 50 tests @ 30 and taking 50 wickets in 50 tests @ 30.

 

[Mister Wright]

6-7 years ago they had Donald and Pollock at their peaks! The attack was miles stronger then.

Not exactly what I meant. Yes Donald & Pollock were at their peak, but that was about it. De Vililers was really before Kallis came along, so when Kallis came into the team he really had to bowl because after Donald and Pollock there wasn't that much. But now with Pollock, Ntini, Nel and co. there isn't as much need for Kallis to bowl as there once was.

 

[Alysum]

I dislike Kallis because of his batting strike rate, always the forward defensive shot that ton at the SCG earlier this year was one of the most boring innings ever I saw. Was falling asleep at the ground!

 

[Johnners]

I'd reckon most teams would much rather face an attack with Pollock, Ntini & Nel than an attack with Pollock & Donald at their peaks. Pollock's best days are well behind him, and whilst he might be ecnomical, it stops about there. Nel's far to patchy, he bowled some good spells against Aus, but they were outnumbered by the horrid ones.

Ntini has been great the last few years, but nowhere near pollock or Donald at their peak!!!

Kallis underrated?? Not in my book, his bowling, as mentioned by most, has detiorated from being a good 2nd/3rd change bowler, to a handy part-timer. He did bowl some good spells against Australia last summer, but he was well below his best.

His batting is definetly his strong point, but IMO he's still behind the likes of Sachin, Lara, Ponting & Dravid for the fact that his batting is positively uninspiring, and selfish. This was most obvious to me in the final test in Sydney where SA were looking to up the anty to give themselves as much time to take 10 wickets as possible. Kallis didn't seem to notice though as his front foot defensive and leave were at their peak.

This was again highlighted, much to the dissappoint of myself and rest of the gabba crowd, as Kallis was playing his best test innings yet, pity it was in the Inagural 20/20 match

 

[Mister Wright]

I'd reckon most teams would much rather face an attack with Pollock, Ntini & Nel than an attack with Pollock & Donald at their peaks. Pollock's best days are well behind him, and whilst he might be ecnomical, it stops about there. Nel's far to patchy, he bowled some good spells against Aus, but they were outnumbered by the horrid ones.

Ntini has been great the last few years, but nowhere near pollock or Donald at their peak!!!

Kallis underrated?? Not in my book, his bowling, as mentioned by most, has detiorated from being a good 2nd/3rd change bowler, to a handy part-timer. He did bowl some good spells against Australia last summer, but he was well below his best.

His batting is definetly his strong point, but IMO he's still behind the likes of Sachin, Lara, Ponting & Dravid for the fact that his batting is positively uninspiring, and selfish. This was most obvious to me in the final test in Sydney where SA were looking to up the anty to give themselves as much time to take 10 wickets as possible. Kallis didn't seem to notice though as his front foot defensive and leave were at their peak.

This was again highlighted, much to the dissappoint of myself and rest of the gabba crowd, as Kallis was playing his best test innings yet, pity it was in the Inagural 20/20 match

Perhaps Stronger was the incorrect word to use. Perhaps, depth would have been a better word to use.

 

[Johnners]

Agreed on that point, Ntini is their best bowler, but he's not even close to what Donald was at his peak, but he, pollock & nel are all better than the make up bowlers of SA of 7/8/9 years ago

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Agreed on that point, Ntini is their best bowler, but he's not even close to what Donald was at his peak, but he, pollock & nel are all better than the make up bowlers of SA of 7/8/9 years ago

Really depends which SA attack you are talking about. Around the late 90s Lance Kluesener was still a very fine bowler (far better than Kallis ever was), and the likes of McMillan were better than him too. Kallis bowls less now because he's older and has more injury concerns, he spends more time batting and he's simply not as good. Except against Zimbabwe, of course.

If you look at the last 5 years or so of Kallis's career in isolation, he's certainly not an all-rounder, but he's in the top 5 or 6 batsmen in the world.

 

[Jono]

As an allrounder, he is. Afridi, Razzaq, Pathan, Bravo, Oram etc are considered allrounders now a days and Kallis is simply considered as a world class batsman despite being a better bowler than each one of them at the moment (except Freddie ofcourse).

How is he a better bowler than Bravo?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

How is he a better bowler than Bravo?

I don't think he's clearly a better bowler than any of those players. The only ones that are close for me are Oram and Afridi. Oram's certainly much better in ODIs, but Kallis is a better test bowler. Afridi's not really an all-rounder for mine, and I'd rate him about equal to Kallis as a bowler. Usually poor, occasionally useful.

These days, Razzaq, Bravo and Pathan are much better bowlers than Kallis, the poor form of Razzaq and Pathan aside. They are used in every match, Pathan was one of the better ODI bowlers around last year and Bravo improves with every game. Razzaq is a poor bowler these days, but at least he works hard and bowls when his team needs it to add a bit of depth to the squad.

 

[JBH001]

Frankly I find this thread title a little incendiary.

Kallis an all-rounder? It's another prime example of stats never telling the full story.

Kallis may have been a decent all-rounder for a short span of 2- 3 years, but those years are now about 5 years behind him. It is difficult to call him an all-rounder and give legitimacy to the term based on a few short, and even then not exceptional years.

Call him what he is, a defensive batsman who bowls a bit.

IMO Kallis is over-rated as an allrounder.

 

[Langeveldt]

Kallis is the only Cricketer to score 8000+ runs and take 200+ wickets in both Tests and ODIs, yet when it comes to allrounders, he doesn't get any mention now a days.

His Stats -

Batting - 55.78 (TEST), 43.61(ODI)
Bowling - 31.71(TEST), 31.89(ODI)

Not to forget, very soon he will be reaching 100 catches milestone in both Tests and ODIs and he is only 30.

To be honest, he's slow, boring and South African.. SO obviously not a patch on Freddy Flintoff, Razzaq etc.

 

[Jono]

To be honest, he's slow, boring and South African.. SO obviously not a patch on Freddy Flintoff, Razzaq etc.

Klusener was everyone's hero, and he's South African.

People just don't like Kallis, nopthing to do with him being from SA. I love him, one of my fav batsman ever, but surely you understand why people don't see him as good as an allrounder like Freddy, Bravo, Oram etc.

 

[Sanz]

How is he a better bowler than Bravo?

Just what is the bowling averages of Bravo in Odis and Tests ?

 

[Matt79]

As a few people have said, he's a great player but comes across as a bit of a tool. Reputation can not be built on stats alone. He seems to inspire few, unlike a Flintoff, a Tendaulkar or a Ponting, certainly a Botham or an Imran, and thus history will remember him.

His batting record will probably end up occupying a similar kind of position to Ken Barrington's - looks great when you look at the runs scored and the average, but that's not the whole story.