Greatest Limited Overs All-rounder of all time, tournament/voting thread

[Noble One]

Imran Khan vs Kapil Dev
Chris Harris vs Shane Watson

Andrew Flintoff vs Viv Richards
Jacques Kallis vs Lance Klusener

 

[weldone]

Quarter finals:

Imran Khan vs Kapil Dev
Chris Harris vs Shane Watson

Andrew Flintoff vs Viv Richards
Jacques Kallis vs Lance Klusener

All 4 are very easy for me.

 

[weldone]

Imran Khan vs Kapil Dev

I love you for doing this smali.

 

[Red]

Symonds had no idea as a bowler. Any good batsman will take him apart. Kallis had much better idea as a bowler.

Just saying something doesn't make it true.

And as batsmen, the only thing Symonds was better at is hitting big

Better at hitting big, better strike rate, better at not letting his team get bogged down, better at having a modern SR than a SR from the 80s, more situational awareness, less selfish….

You guys are, and have been, over rating Symonds way too much.

Just saying something doesn't make it true.

 

[viriya]

I can't understand how a person that has watched both Kallis and Symonds bowl could possibly think they are in similar planes. Their records confirm that they are not, the eye test (Symonds looked like he was bowling close to rubbish) confirms that they are not.

 

[jaideep]

Kapil Dev
Watson
Richards
Klusener

 

[smash84]

I can't understand how a person that has watched both Kallis and Symonds bowl could possibly think they are in similar planes. Their records confirm that they are not, the eye test (Symonds looked like he was bowling close to rubbish) confirms that they are not.

I like the fact that you are coming around to watching some of the players and making a judgment.

I quite agree. Symonds was a pretty ordinary bowler playing in an awesome team.

 

[viriya]

I like the fact that you are coming around to watching some of the players and making a judgment.

So I guess we can't ever judge players we haven't seen live anymore?

 

[smash84]

So I guess we can't ever judge players we haven't seen live anymore?

You can't usually judge a player better on stats alone compared to somebody who has followed the player closely and also uses stats. You seem to make too many judgements based on stats with no weight for context

 

[viriya]

You can't usually judge a player better on stats alone compared to somebody who has followed the player closely and also uses stats. You seem to make too many judgements based on stats with no weight for context

My argument wasn't made solely on stats. I focused on the numbers because you started with the home-away records.

Your argument was based on "he has the skills of a frontline batsman" which doesn't matter if he doesn't deliver. You were conflating his Test accomplishments into ODIs.

 

[smash84]

My argument wasn't made solely on stats. I focused on the numbers because you started with the home-away records.

Your argument was based on "he has the skills of a frontline batsman" which doesn't matter if he doesn't deliver. You were conflating his Test accomplishments into ODIs.

Lol

 

[honestbharani]

Just saying something doesn't make it true.



Better at hitting big, better strike rate, better at not letting his team get bogged down, better at having a modern SR than a SR from the 80s, more situational awareness, less selfish….



Just saying something doesn't make it true.

I agree about the selfish bit on Kallis but inspite of that, he has played enough innings that mattered to easily be considered a better all-round batsman than Symonds, even in ODIs. And I didn't say anything that was not true, so that does make it true.

 

[watson]

Symonds had no idea as a bowler. Any good batsman will take him apart. Kallis had much better idea as a bowler. And as batsmen, the only thing Symonds was better at is hitting big but it is quite arguable that Kallis performed his role in that RSA side just as well as, if not better than, Symonds did. That WC semi had a very very good Kallis inning somewhere in there which would have been deified had Klusener and Donald not lost their minds. He has had significant innings in most WCs. Symonds only had 2003. You guys are, and have been, over rating Symonds way too much.

Symonds (1998 - 2009)
Matches = 198
Runs = 5,088
Ave = 39.75
Strike Rate = 92.24
100s = 6
Player of the Match Awards = 22 (11%)
Player of the Series Awards = 4

Wickets = 133
Ave = 37.26
Strike Rate = 44.62
Economy Rate = 5.01
Best Bowling = 5/18
Completed 10 overs = 27 (14%)


Kallis (1996 - 2014)
Matches = 328
Runs = 11,579
Ave = 44.36
Strike Rate = 72.89
100s = 17
Player of the Match Awards = 33 (10%)
Player of the Series Awards = 5

Wickets = 273
Ave = 31.79
Strike Rate = 39.38
Economy Rate = 4.84
Best Bowling = 5/30
Completed 10 overs = 35 (11%)


This is simply not true. Generally speaking Kallis was the better bowler and certainly so in Test matches. But in ODIs the stats show that Symonds was just as effective as Kallis

An important factor is that neither bowler bowled 10 overs that often in an innings because neither were good enough. If Symonds required the help of a 6th bowler then so did Kallis.

Symonds should have won this two horse race relatively easily because of his superior batting Strike Rate.

 

[viriya]

How can you conclude that Symonds was just as effective a bowler as Kallis in ODIs based on those numbers?

Also, that batting SR you have for Symonds is too high.

 

[watson]

Quarter finals:

Imran Khan vs Kapil Dev
Chris Harris vs Shane Watson

Andrew Flintoff vs Viv Richards
Jacques Kallis vs Lance Klusener

 

[watson]

How can you conclude that Symonds was just as effective a bowler as Kallis in ODIs based on those numbers?

Also, that batting SR you have for Symonds is too high.

Easily.

The most important stat for a 4th or 5th change bowler is their Economy Rate. I don't see a difference of 0.17 as a big deal.

 

[Red]

I agree about the selfish bit on Kallis but inspite of that, he has played enough innings that mattered to easily be considered a better all-round batsman than Symonds, even in ODIs. And I didn't say anything that was not true, so that does make it true.

I'm not arguing that Symonds was a better batsman than Kallis. Kallis is an ATG batsman in test cricket, and a good batsman in ODI cricket. However, Kallis' batting in ODIs was way too slow. Symonds was a weapon in ODIs. Kallis was significantly slower scoring than his contemporaries, and surely you can agree that's a liability in ODI cricket. There is no basis to say that Kallis should be considered a better "all round batsman than Symonds" in ODIs. None at all. In tests, of course. In ODIs, just no.

I can't understand how a person that has watched both Kallis and Symonds bowl could possibly think they are in similar planes. Their records confirm that they are not, the eye test (Symonds looked like he was bowling close to rubbish) confirms that they are not.

This is just unsubstantiated bull**** mate. Their ODI bowling records actually reveal they were similar in effectiveness in ODIs as bowlers. And as for your "eye test (Symonds looked like he was bowling close to rubbish)", please. Symonds wasn't the greatest bowler ever, and no one is saying that he was. But had you actually watched him (and if you want to look at his record) you'd realise there were very few occasions that he got taken apart as a bowler, and that he was nearly always economical and tidy, which is exactly what you want your 5th bowler in an ODI to be.

 

[watson]

.

 

[Red]

Great piece of footage there where he almost decapitates Kallis with a straight drive and then they smile at each other!

 

[StephenZA]

Genuine question do you guys rate Klusener a better ODI bat than Kallis (I note that Watson has just voted for Klusener over Kallis)?

The reason I ask is that Klusener and Symonds have similar statistics (I rate Symonds higher though). And I know from a SA perspective (at least mine) the importance that we placed on Kallis in the top order was far greater than anything Klusener accomplished. I personally think Klusener is highly overrated based almost purely on his WC exploits.