Jacques Kallis vs Ricky Ponting

[PlayerComparisons]

Ponting was never going to retire in 2009/2010. He’s just saying that in hindsight tbh.

 

[subshakerz]

Ponting was never going to retire in 2009/2010. He’s just saying that in hindsight tbh.

I think he would have retired after losing the Ashes at home in 2010.

 

[Coronis]

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.

I literally only said that because you brought up discounting Pontings last few years.

 

[Coronis]

I think he would have retired after losing the Ashes at home in 2010.

And I thought Anderson wouldn’t retire until passing Warne’s tally.

And Broad would definitely not retire before Anderson.

What we think is usually wrong and inconsequential, especially regarding players personal lives and feelings towards the game.

 

[subshakerz]

And I thought Anderson wouldn’t retire until passing Warne’s tally.

And Broad would definitely not retire before Anderson.

What we think is usually wrong and inconsequential, especially regarding players personal lives and feelings towards the game.

Accept when the players inform us of their thinking. You can ignore that, it's fine.

 

[subshakerz]

I literally only said that because you brought up discounting Pontings last few years.

Fine so we are back to square one.

 

[Coronis]

Fine so we are back to square one.

And by this logic (and certain poster(s?) agree with this) Sangakkara is clearly better than both. Extenuating circumstances for the first 6 years of his career.

 

[subshakerz]

And by this logic (and certain poster(s?) agree with this) Sangakkara is clearly better than both. Extenuating circumstances for the first 6 years of his career.

Sure one can argue that though my thinking is that it tended to coincide with the formative batting phase of his career anyways.

 

[Bolo.]

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.

Minnows (if you want to include the Zim teams they mainly played against, which is a bit harsh) raised Kallis' average by two and Ponting's by one. If you think this one run difference is meaningful, you should be regarding the difference between their career averages as extremely meaningful.

A statement made after retirement that a player was doing it for the good of the team should be treated with extreme skepticism. Players have a ton of faith in themselves, and cricket is their lives and salaries.

Kallis retired later anyway. And his record took more of a hit from being pushed into the team too early than Pontings did from playing too long. Took 3 years for his average to cross 30. Which was a team with far bigger batting problems than AUS. And the fact that he was an AR would have been a big part in his selection. If you are handing out sympathy 'too many years batting points', Kallis gets more.

 

[subshakerz]

Minnows (if you want to include the Zim teams they mainly played against, which is a bit harsh) raised Kallis' average by two and Ponting's by one. If you think this one run difference is meaningful, you should be regarding the difference between their career averages as extremely meaningful.

I personally don't care if Kallis average a couple of points higher in my assessment but shallow stat addicts here do and this sways them. Don't pretend it doesn't. So I raise that point.

A statement made after retirement that a player was doing it for the good of the team should be treated with extreme skepticism. Players have a ton of faith in themselves, and cricket is their lives and salaries.

Fine don't believe it.

Kallis retired later anyway. And his record took more of a hit from being pushed into the team too early than Pontings did from playing too long. Took 3 years for his average to cross 30. Which was a team with far bigger batting problems than AUS. And the fact that he was an AR would have been a big part in his selection. If you are handing out sympathy 'too many years batting points', Kallis gets more.

Kallis debuted around the same age as Ponting. SA wasn't by any means a weak batting side compared to others not that it matters. Being an AR is part of his package and anyways his bowling load declined as his batting flourished.

None of these justify re-evaluating his batting record. Ponting maybe being a point or so ahead in average based on stretching his career for reasons outside him is a fair excuse.

Kallis really doesn't have a case against Ponting. Just a bunch of posters retroactively making him seem better when in his peak nobody gave him the time of the day.

 

[Coronis]

I personally don't care if Kallis average a couple of points higher in my assessment but shallow stat addicts here do and this sways them. Don't pretend it doesn't. So I raise that point.


Fine don't believe it.


Kallis debuted around the same age as Ponting. SA wasn't by any means a weak batting side compared to others not that it matters. Being an AR is part of his package and anyways his bowling load declined as his batting flourished.

None of these justify re-evaluating his batting record. Ponting maybe being a point or so ahead in average based on stretching his career for reasons outside him is a fair excuse.

Kallis really doesn't have a case against Ponting. Just a bunch of posters retroactively making him seem better when in his peak nobody gave him the time of the day.

Their best batsmen were allrounders (Cronje, McMillan). They had in fact one top 6 batsman averaging above 40 (and barely above 40 at that) up until Kallis debuted.

Not to mention Peter Kirsten and Kepler Wessels had just retired

 

[Bolo.]

I personally don't care if Kallis average a couple of points higher in my assessment but shallow stat addicts here do and this sways them. Don't pretend it doesn't. So I raise that point.


Fine don't believe it.


Kallis debuted around the same age as Ponting. SA wasn't by any means a weak batting side compared to others not that it matters. Being an AR is part of his package and anyways his bowling load declined as his batting flourished.

None of these justify re-evaluating his batting record. Ponting maybe being a point or so ahead in average based on stretching his career for reasons outside him is a fair excuse.

Kallis really doesn't have a case against Ponting. Just a bunch of posters retroactively making him seem better when in his peak nobody gave him the time of the day.

This conversation is a result of you saying Zim and Bangers raised Kallis' average. But nice job trying to change the focus after you get called out on it.

RSA had horrific holes in their top order before and after Kallis debuted. Look at the numbers most of the players in their top 6 were posting:

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Excluding Kallis, and P Kirsten, who had retired before Kallis, there are 4 bats averaging over 30 to fill a top 6. Over 5 years. No active player averaging over 40. Do you really believe that AUS was having these types of problems with their bats in the twilight of Pontings career?

Ponting was better earlier and Kallis later. They both would have had better records with shorter careers, just at different times. If you are going to credit Ponting for batting at the wrong ages, Kallis gets more credit. He was filling heavier gaps, particularly when including bowling. Which your point about him as an AR is entirely unrelated to.

 

[subshakerz]

Their best batsmen were allrounders (Cronje, McMillan). They had in fact one top 6 batsman averaging above 40 (and barely above 40 at that) up until Kallis debuted.

Not to mention Peter Kirsten and Kepler Wessels had just retired

And? Compare that to many other poorer batting sides in which you had top bats. We don't give Lara or Border extra runs to their average for having poor bats around them.

 

[subshakerz]

This conversation is a result of you saying Zim and Bangers raised Kallis' average. But nice job trying to change the focus after you get called out on it.

Change focus? You already conceded my point that it does raise his average compared to Ponting.

RSA had horrific holes in their top order before and after Kallis debuted. Look at the numbers most of the players in their top 6 were posting:

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

Excluding Kallis, and P Kirsten, who had retired before Kallis, there are 4 bats averaging over 30 to fill a top 6. Over 5 years. No active player averaging over 40. Do you really believe that AUS was having these types of problems with their bats in the twilight of Pontings career?

Again why would any of this cause me to give Kallis extra runs. They are par for the course as far as batting greats go.

Ponting was better earlier and Kallis later. They both would have had better records with shorter careers, just at different times. If you are going to credit Ponting for batting at the wrong ages, Kallis gets more credit. He was filling heavier gaps, particularly when including bowling. Which your point about him as an AR is entirely unrelated to.

Don't twist my argument. I am just saying Ponting having an unusually long career end dip isn't just due to him being that bad but extenuating circumstances that should be accounted for in his career record. I do the same when it comes to Wasim taking longer as a teen to hit his fast bowling strides.

 

[Coronis]

And? Compare that to many other poorer batting sides in which you had top bats. We don't give Lara or Border extra runs to their average for having poor bats around them.

I’m just responding to your incorrect point mate.

 

[Prince EWS]

I’m just responding to your incorrect point mate.

How dare.

 

[subshakerz]

I’m just responding to your incorrect point mate.

SA wasn't a weak batting side in mid 90s. Not as strong as Aus obviously but if you compare with cricket standards of the time they were pretty good. WI had already slipped, Pak unstable, SL not quite there yet, India just Tendulkar, NZ and Eng bad.

 

[Majestic]

Ponting was Batman while Kallis was Robin.

 

[Bolo.]

Change focus? You already conceded my point that it does raise his average compared to Ponting.


Again why would any of this cause me to give Kallis extra runs. They are par for the course as far as batting greats go.


Don't twist my argument. I am just saying Ponting having an unusually long career end dip isn't just due to him being that bad but extenuating circumstances that should be accounted for in his career record. I do the same when it comes to Wasim taking longer as a teen to hit his fast bowling strides.

You have raised the impact of minnows on average repeatedly. It creates a delta of one run in average between the two.

There is a delta of 3 runs between their career averages.

3 is more than 1. So are you intentionally raising meaningless points about minnows, or should we consider Kallis to have a very meaningfully higher career average?

Whatever extenuating circumstances apply to Pontings end dip apply more so to Kallis' early performances. Look at this and tell me.if you think AUS were hurting more for bats than RSA?

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

 

[capt_Luffy]

Ponting was Batman while Kallis was Robin.

Ponting was Batman (Batman and Robin) while Kallis was Robin (Teen Titans).