Best Overall Cricketer?

[Eclipse]

I disagree runs are not just runs it is importaint to deliver when the teams needs you and Brian Lara does and Kallis rarly plays a match winning innings.

Also Gilchrist runs are better than Kallis runs Gilly has the ability to demorilize the attack and make it easyer for batsman at the other end to score.

Also how can 30 runs off 86 balls be as good as 30 off 20 balls in an ODI this is the sort of thing Kallis was doing all the time and to be honest his team would probably want him to get out if he is going that slow.

 

[marc71178]

Kallis averages 43.22 in ODI's - he keeps the innings ticking over with a lot of singles, rather in the fashion of Bevan, so how come you don't want Kallis in your ODI side, but do want Bevan?

 

[Eclipse]

I would probably still have Kallis in my ODI team I never said I did not want him.


Kallis is slower than Beven any way and avrages 12 less and while Beven can be slow at times if things need a step up he can do so and play a match winning innings were as Kallis just continues to go slow most of the time.

I would much rather Lara or Ponting as my Number 3 in ODI's than Kallis even know they avrage slightly less because they can set up victory for the team and at least when they fail they dont eat up 50 odd balls doing so.

 

[Rik]

I disagree runs are not just runs it is importaint to deliver when the teams needs you and Brian Lara does and Kallis rarly plays a match winning innings.

Runs are runs you know...averaging 50 at number 3 in Tests and 40+ at number 4 in ODIs is phenominal, there you cannot disagree. Oh and to top that he bowls too :P

Also Gilchrist runs are better than Kallis runs Gilly has the ability to demorilize the attack and make it easyer for batsman at the other end to score.[/B]

Has it ever occured to you that Kallis' runs might be more vital than Gilchrist's? I mean Kallis comes in at number 3 in Tests and has to hold a batting lineup that can quite easily collapse whilst Gilchrist usually comes in when Australia have piled up 400-6 to flog them round. I don't know where you got the idea Gilchrist's runs are more vital, he bats at 7 in a very strong batting lineup while Kallis bats at 3 in a weaker one.

Also how can 30 runs off 86 balls be as good as 30 off 20 balls in an ODI this is the sort of thing Kallis was doing all the time and to be honest his team would probably want him to get out if he is going that slow.

It doesn't matter about the rate, it matters about the situation. Anyway Kallis showed that he could score quickly if he wanted to by smashing a 50 off 24 balls a few months ago :P

 

[Eclipse]

Well that 50-24 was good to see but I destinctly remember him stuffing SA up on a number off occasions and really preventing them from posting compeditive totals & I also remember 2 SA commentators who were really ****ed off at him and wanted him to hit out or get out.

I dont disagree about his avrages they are very good he is a very good batsman but in ODI's tell me you would rather have Kallis at number three instead of Ponting or Lara?


I dont dispute his class I understand he is a very good batsman.

 

[Rik]

Well that 50-24 was good to see but I destinctly remember him stuffing SA up on a number off occasions and really preventing them from posting compeditive totals & I also remember 2 SA commentators who were really ****ed off at him and wanted him to hit out or get out.

I dont disagree about his avrages they are very good he is a very good batsman but in ODI's tell me you would rather have Kallis at number three instead of Ponting or Lara?


I dont dispute his class I understand he is a very good batsman.

You can't compare Kallis with Lara and Ponting, not only is he an all-rounder but also he's a totally different type of batsman. He sticks around and builds partnerships with people, often letting the other partner play the shots, he's quite often there at the end too. He does the job for SA, Ponting knows that he has other batting to come, Kallis knows although he has some batting to come it's nowhere near as strong as the Australian batting and therefor he doesn't want to attack and get out stupidly. He wants to make sure SA get to a decent target, and he wants to make sure that he's there at the end to make sure of it.

 

[Eclipse]

You are right certainly he does not have the confidence of knowing that if he fails there is almost certainly going to be somone below him who will get the job done.

It's also the responsibility of the top order to sett up the innings and not leave to much for the low order to do and somtimes it's more of a risk to go slow and try not to get out because if you do get out then you run the risk of leaving all the hitting to the low order who might have to score at 7-10 an over because you went so slow.

I remember a few of these situation were Kallis was directly involved.

 

[marc71178]

With regards to Bevan vs. Kallis:

Kallis has played 7 innings less for 211 runs less, but he has made more centuries and more fifties than Bevan. Bevan's high average is all to do with his high not out percentage.

Bevan's S/R is 73.86, Kallis' is 69.99, so any criticism at Kallis for slow scoring must also be levelled at Bevan, since they both hit out at times.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

With an opening batsman like Herschelle Gibbs, Kallis usually has to play a supporting role. I have seen several innings where Kallis has batted through and, after being at the crease for so long, was able to hit out and accelerate late in the innings.

 

[Neil Pickup]

You can't compare Kallis to Lara/Ponting as he's not a number three batsman.

The SA Top Five in an ODI would be:

Gibbs
Smith
Dippenaar
Rudolph
Kallis

 

[Slats4ever]

Gilchrist is by far and away the best player
i don't have any reasoning he just is

 

[Rik]

Gilchrist is by far and away the best player
i don't have any reasoning he just is

Well then your choice could easily be put on Australian bias...

 

[Rik]

You can't compare Kallis to Lara/Ponting as he's not a number three batsman.

Well, yes you can, because he has batted at 3 rather a lot in his career. The only reason why you can't compare him to Lara/Ponting is because not only is he a different type of batsman all-together, but he's also an all-rounder...

 

[marc71178]

It amazes me there's all this talk, but hardly any of it is about SRT.

 

[aussie_beater]

It amazes me there's all this talk, but hardly any of it is about SRT.

SRT is primarily a batsman and a damn good one at that.But he cannot be classed as an allrounder, which is what I thought, this discussion was about.He is a good fielder but his bowling is just something that can be used at times to break partnerships etc. and it surely cannot be compared to the bowling of someone like Kallis.

In my estimation, the search for the best overall cricketer in these times is a hard one because of the lack of great all rounders like Botham, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee and others of the past.Other then Kallis there's hardly anyone that fits the profile of a conventional allrounder. Gilchrist has re-defined the theory of allrounders by being a keeper-batsman of the highest order. And so his inclusion into the race is also a valid one. Who else ? Pollock maybe ?

And ofcourse our hero Ajit Agarkar :P :P

 

[marc71178]

I think SRT's bowling is vastly underrated, and if he really wanted to, he could develop it greatly.

 

[Anil]

I think SRT's bowling is vastly underrated, and if he really wanted to, he could develop it greatly.

Probably, but he still can't be called an all-rounder, can he?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Probably, but he still can't be called an all-rounder, can he?

Not with the amount of bowling he's done recently. He's a very useful bowler and can be well utilized by India.

(Lara's also a fairly decent leggie... )

 

[marc71178]

Probably, but he still can't be called an all-rounder, can he?

No, but we're looking for the best overall cricketer, and that's a different kettle of fish to best all rounder.

 

[masterblaster]

Okay, this is my opinion, and as you all know, im not Indian biased at all,

but here goes....

To ME: Sachin is the greatest batsman of MY generation, he is the greatest batsman I have witnessed in a live game or on tv (LIVE), he is the most hard working cricketer in the world who just doesnt let talent be it, he works hard for his success, he is a genuine matchwinner and cannot and should not be criticized if he fails on occassion (he is human too), I have more respect for Sachin Tendulkar than any other cricketer in the world.

Does it make him the best overall cricketer in the world....
In same cases, yes it does, on others no it doesnt.

His bowling is not that super, but he tries very hard, and is very successful with the ball too, his fielding is good, and his batting is 'a work of art with a touch of arrogance'

What are you people looking for in "The best overall cricketer"
Someone who is great at everything? Tendulkar is the best overall batsman of this generation, and Kallis is probably the best all round cricketer.

To have a batting average of 50 and a bowling average under 30, is quite an effort. Scoring rates, and aggressiveness has nothing to do with best overall cricketer. Gilchrist is awesome, but his keeping skills aren't as good as Healy's. To me, scoring rates has NOTHING to do with it. Its dependabilty, reliabilty, solidity, and consistent performance in all areas.

Gilchrist is very hot and cold, he has just had one huge HOT patch,
and as we saw in India, he can be vulernerable to cold patches as well. But good luck to Adam, he is a fantastic player, but Kallis pips him.


Thats just my two cents