Personally think Chappell was better than Gavaskar by quite some distance
Genuine question here:
Why is SRT an automatic choice into a world XI, while Jacques Kallis is completely ignored despite being statistically better than him even whilst carrying the added burden of pace bowling? I know some will say "it's beyond stats" or something like that but is is really? Has Sachin not been overhyped due to his massive fanbase?
An interesting debate would be that, given that Sobers could be given the bowling in an ATG team, would a pure-batsman Kallis not be an even greater asset with the bat than he has been in his career whilst bogged down with the ball?
And finally, is Kallis seen as worse than SRT, Ponting and Lara because he is less exciting a player?
@CowsCorner - 202 followers and counting!
Disclaimer: I am a biased South African. Anything I say is likely to have something in it that ultimately favours the Proteas.
Sachin's consistency against everyone, everywhere, is a big selling point. The guys has never been mediocre against anyone, anywhere. Against all opponents, in all conditions. He is a brilliant batsman to watch, and probably the most "technically complete" batsman I've ever seen. I think that accounts for his success everywhere.
Massively overhyped by his Indian fan-base, sure. But an absolute champion.
I dont mean to demean Kallis at all...,i think he's a legend and if someone picks him over the mentioned three i wouldnt argue, but personally, id have him just below those three for the generation.
A conversation with kyear2 goes like this
FAST BOWLING CONVERSATION
poster x: For bowlers playing over 50 tests the averages are really close and a lot of avid cricket followers think that Lillee is the greatest fast bowler ever to play the game.
kyear2: The avid followers are pathetically biased
poster x: Why do you say that?
kyear2: Because Sobers is the greatest all rounder ever to play the game.
poster x: But we were discussing fast bowlers. Why do you think the so called experts and followers are heavily biased?
Kyear2: Because Marshall is the greatest fast bowler ever to play the game.
poster x: You make that sound like a fact. Do you have any reasons.
Kyear2: Marshall played in the greatest cricket team ever.
poster x: You pass that around like another fact. Do you have any reasons.
kyear2: That is my opinion. I don't need to give reasons.
But that's just bollocks. Most entertaining and best batsman are two separate accolades. You should be selecting for an ATG team based on who the superior batsman is. Basically what you're saying is that because SRT is better to watch, he should make an ATG team? So you're basically saying aesthetics is more important than performance in determining the best player of all time.
It just sounds a bit like those lacking in cricket knowledge saying "OK, Steyn is the best in the world, and then Lasith Malinga is second. Why? Because he's awesome to watch."
Obviously that's an extreme example, but you get my point.
First of all, i clearly said aesthetics come into the picture only if batsmen have comparable records, which these four do. Theres little to choose between them stats wise. Its totally subjective too so theres no point arguing this
Secondly, Sachin, lara and Ponting could change gears and do both the defensive and attacking jobs superbly and demonstrated that on numerous occasions. Kallis while as effective as them in terms of stats cant quite counter-attack as effectively as them which makes him less versatile in my opinion. Arguable, but i stick by what i said. Kallis.is magnificent but Lara, Sachin and Punter better batsmen for the reasons stated above
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)