Is Kallis South Africa's greatest ever batsman?

[Days of Grace]

Kallis is now averaging 58, with 29 centuries, equal to Bradman. He has scored 4 centuries in his last 4 tests. A great run.

How does he now compare to Pollock and Richards?

 

[haroon510]

Kallis is now averaging 58, with 29 centuries, equal to Bradman. He has scored 4 centuries in his last 4 tests. A great run.

How does he now compare to Pollock and Richards?

pollock i don't know but richards noo way..
kallis lacks that Aggression on his game to be compared to Richards...

 

[steve132]

Kallis is now averaging 58, with 29 centuries, equal to Bradman. He has scored 4 centuries in his last 4 tests. A great run.

How does he now compare to Pollock and Richards?

Both Pollock and Richards are a class above Kallis.

 

[amokk1]

Both Pollock and Richards are a class above Kallis.

Please, elaborate.

 

[Prince EWS]

In a word: yes.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

In a word: yes.

Agree.

 

[silentstriker]

Yes. Richards might have been better but did not play enough Tests.

 

[gettingbetter]

Greatest batsman: probably not
Greatest cricketer: he's got a strong case

 

[Jono]

He's both greatest cricket for SA and greatest batsman.

Fact is he's done more. Yes he had the opportunity to do more, but that's not his fault.

 

[Engle]

Doesn't have the aura of B.Richards or G.Pollock

 

[Langeveldt]

Doesn't have the aura of B.Richards or G.Pollock

Aura? Aura doesn't score you test hundreds...

 

[bond21]

Hes probably their best overall cricketer - top class batsman, good bowler, great slips fielder.

One thing i like about him is he doesnt throw his wicket away like so many modern batsman like Gayle and Afridi.

 

[nightprowler10]

Greatest Test batsman, yes.

 

[Anil]

he is certainly the most consistent and durable batsman they have produced...

 

[jammay123]

hes scored 29 test hundreds no other sa batsmen as. therfore hes their best. cricket isnt about what could have been its about hard facts and they say kallis is the best

 

[bond21]

no its not.

If Ponting averaged 20 for a series and McGrath averaged 30 for the same series, whos the better batsmen?

If you're a stats geek, you have no choice but to say McGrath is a better batsman.

If you're a cricketer, Ponting is the best

 

[silentstriker]

no its not.

If Ponting averaged 20 for a series and McGrath averaged 30 for the same series, whos the better batsmen?

If you're a stats geek, you have no choice but to say McGrath is a better batsman.

If you're a cricketer, Ponting is the best

No, if McGrath averaged 30 for the series and Ponting averaged 20, then stats geek or not, McGrath was the better batsman for that series, assuming McGrath didn't average 30 by making scores of 5*, 15*, 5*, 5.

 

[The Sean]

hes scored 29 test hundreds no other sa batsmen as. therfore hes their best. cricket isnt about what could have been its about hard facts and they say kallis is the best

I've got no problem with that sentiment but the logic is dangerous - he's not the best purely because he's scored more Test centuries than any other SA batsman. By that rationale Ponting is Australia's greatest ever batsman because he's made 33 Test centuries and no other Aussie ever has.

 

[Richard]

Best (ie, most effective) Test batsman ever? Pretty well beyond doubt IMO.

Very possible Pollock (G) and Richards (B) could have been better had they had the chance, but that's mere conjecture - the fact is, they didn't. Kallis had the chance to be better than them, and took it.

Gets on my nerves the way Dudley Nourse is always forgotten in these debates though. Certainly fit to rank with the two above, and Kallis, in the "up for consideration" stakes.

I don't see Kallis averaging much more than 50 had the standard of bowling not deteriorated in 2001\02 (exactly when Kallis went from good to sensational) but I do still see him having been a fantastic Test batsman.

As for is he South Africa's best-ever cricketer, well, I think that (that he is, of course) is almost beyond question really.

 

[Richard]

pollock i don't know but richards noo way..
kallis lacks that Aggression on his game to be compared to Richards...

Aggression is not an essential part of being a batsman of the very highest class - it is, however, a by-product of far more of the very best batsmen than not.

In any case, Barry Richards was hardly a strokeplayer-par-extreme, he was just a routine fastish-scorer like Mark Waugh or Damien Martyn (though fairly obviously considerably better than both).