JH Kallis v SM Pollock

[thierry henry]

That's a bit over the top. Klusener has 189 wickets and 3433 runs in ODI cricket. I don't see how that can place him ahead of the likes of Kapil Dev 253 and 3783, Imran Khan 182(lower avge than Zulu and lower econ.) and 3709.

The of course there's Sir Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards...

Richards-no. Not a proper all-rounder.

Dev and Khan-no. I'm guessing their averages don't compare to Klusener's, especially batting averages. Please feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I am yet to be convinced about Kallis batting against quality bowling he typicaly murders the weeker bowling teams.

So I would say Pollock.

Shaun Pollock who averages 35.86 against the West Indies, 36.66 against Zimbabwe, 41 against Bangladesh (one inns :P) and 25.27 against Australia?

Shaun Pollock who averages 27.64 against Australia and 20.53 against everyone else?

I rate Shaun Pollock as a great player and one of my favourites, but to pick him over Kallis because Kallis 'murders weaker teams' is rather ludicrous.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

As for McGrath, I think he averages 22+? A small but nevertheless important difference.

McGrath averages 21.71 with a SR of 52.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Richards-no. Not a proper all-rounder.

Dev and Khan-no. I'm guessing their averages don't compare to Klusener's, especially batting averages. Please feel free to prove me wrong.

Clearly I was not serious about Richards being a great allrounder.

Kapildev Ramlal Nikhanj

225 ODIs

3783 runs @ 23.79
SR - 95.07
14 fifties
1 hundred
HS - 175*

% NOs - 19.69

253 wickets @ 27.45
SR - 44.2
Econ - 3.71
4w - 3
5w - 1
BB - 5/43

Imran Khan Niazi

175 ODIs

3709 runs @ 33.41
SR - 72.64
19 fifties
1 hundred
HS - 102*

% NOs - 26.49

182 wickets @ 26.61
SR - 40.9
Econ - 3.89
4w - 3
5w - 1
BB - 6/14

Lance Klusener

160 ODIs

3433 runs @ 43.45
SR - 90.74
19 fifties
2 hundreds
HS - 103*

% NOs - 37.79

184 wickets @ 29.14
SR - 37.2
Econ - 4.69
4w - 1
5w - 6
BB - 6/49

Both Dev and Khan were better bowlers by far, whilst Klusener is the better batsman.

I just find it hard to grasp that Klusener be the greatest allrounder in ODI cricket history.

 

[Mr. P]

Beside Australia Eclipse, how many quality bowling line-ups are there? Obviously he doesnt play against South Africa.

I can say that using your logic to apply to many cricketers.

Replying to both you and eclispe's post, i would like to remind everyone that Kallis was nearly the only batsman who did well when South Africa last toured Australia.

Here are the stats of that tour, Kallis averaged 49 with the bat.

SA in Aus, couple of years back

 

[thierry henry]

Clearly I was not serious about Richards being a great allrounder.

Kapildev Ramlal Nikhanj

225 ODIs

3783 runs @ 23.79
SR - 95.07
14 fifties
1 hundred
HS - 175*

% NOs - 19.69

253 wickets @ 27.45
SR - 44.2
Econ - 3.71
4w - 3
5w - 1
BB - 5/43

Imran Khan Niazi

175 ODIs

3709 runs @ 33.41
SR - 72.64
19 fifties
1 hundred
HS - 102*

% NOs - 26.49

182 wickets @ 26.61
SR - 40.9
Econ - 3.89
4w - 3
5w - 1
BB - 6/14

Lance Klusener

160 ODIs

3433 runs @ 43.45
SR - 90.74
19 fifties
2 hundreds
HS - 103*

% NOs - 37.79

184 wickets @ 29.14
SR - 37.2
Econ - 4.69
4w - 1
5w - 6
BB - 6/49

Both Dev and Khan were better bowlers by far, whilst Klusener is the better batsman.

I just find it hard to grasp that Klusener be the greatest allrounder in ODI cricket history.

Those stats certainly seem to be in Klusener's favour.

 

[Craig]

Replying to both you and eclispe's post, i would like to remind everyone that Kallis was nearly the only batsman who did well when South Africa last toured Australia.

Here are the stats of that tour, Kallis averaged 49 with the bat.

SA in Aus, couple of years back

I still cant believe he got run out for 99. You dont run yurself out on 99, you take it easy, not taking risky 2's.

 

[Richard]

IMO it's like this:
Kallis' batting is up with the best of the 1970-onwards era. His bowling is brilliant on it's day, his average could be about 3 lower than it is. Sobers' average, equally, could have been about 7 lower than it was.
Pollock's bowling is about as deadly as possible on a green\uneven wicket, fairly innocuous on a wicket that offers neither. His batting is vastly underrated; I cannot believe that no-one has mentioned his average of 60+ in the last 2-and-a-half years.
Not in Kallis' league, but IMO with Kallis' underachievement with the ball, Pollock is the better player.
Neither, however, come close to Sobers, though they could end-up third and fourth in the all-time all-rounders list.

 

[marc71178]

So who is number 2 then?

 

[Swervy]

got to be Botham at number two.

Imran Khan fans might have a word ot two about Kallis or Pollock being above him in the rankings though

 

[marc71178]

Personally I would rank Imran above all mentioned actually, certainly by far the bestof the big 4 of the 80s.

 

[Swervy]

Imran was certainly better for longer...but i dont think anyone enjoyed the all round success that Botham did for the first 5 years of his international career (and that probably includes Sobers)

 

[Richard]

Botham, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee!
Where on Earth do you pull those names from?
How on Earth have they come to be ranked ahead of Keith Miller? Or, for that matter, Kallis and Pollock.

 

[marc71178]

Hmm, let me see.

Khan has scored more runs at a higher average than Miller, whilst simultaneously taking more than twice as many wickets at a cheaper cost.

He also had to cope with the pressure of captaining and representing a nation that is far more fanatical about its cricket than Australia ever will be.

That enough for you?

 

[twctopcat]

I'm beginning to wonder about some of richard's motives here as he just seems to be out to wind everyone up( notably marc ), with the endless smart **** drivel that he comes up with, just keep it to yourself sometimes.

 

[Swervy]

Botham, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee!
Where on Earth do you pull those names from?
How on Earth have they come to be ranked ahead of Keith Miller? Or, for that matter, Kallis and Pollock.

what are you on about? 'Where on earth do you pull those names from' gives the impression you have never heard of Botham,Imran,kapil Dev and Hadlee.

Each one of those 4 players has certainly had a bigger impact on test and ODI cricket than Kallis or Pollock as ALLROUNDERS...although Hadlee made a bigger impact with the ball than with the bat.

 

[Craig]

Hmm, let me see.

Khan has scored more runs at a higher average than Miller, whilst simultaneously taking more than twice as many wickets at a cheaper cost.

He also had to cope with the pressure of captaining and representing a nation that is far more fanatical about its cricket than Australia ever will be.

That enough for you?

Before Liam goes and does so otherwise and posts stats to prove me wrong, I believe Khan's performances went up when got the captaincy.

 

[Swervy]

Before Liam goes and does so otherwise and posts stats to prove me wrong, I believe Khan's performances went up when got the captaincy.

it is still a pressure though

 

[Adamc]

Before Liam goes and does so otherwise and posts stats to prove me wrong, I believe Khan's performances went up when got the captaincy.

Actually you are very much right:

Khan batting as captain: 2408 runs at 52.34.
Khan not as captain: 1399 at 25.43.

Bowling as captain: 187 wickets at 20.26.
Not as captain: 175 at 25.53.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

But wouldn't that make him an even greater player? ie the fact that he performed twice as well when given the responsibility of captaincy.