BazBall21
International Captain
Yeah. I think Kallis is a better cricketer because of his bowling additions but Donald is definitely better at bowling on flat pitches than Kallis is at batting against hostile bowling/conditions.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Allan Donald vs Kallis
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
Have almost the same, have Donald 7th though. Both about equally likely to make it onto a draft team of mine.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
On a list of all bowlers I think I have Donald behind not that many. Well since I did a batting list, may as well do one for bowling.
Again, off the top of my head
Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Warne
Muralitharan
Imran
Donald
Wasim
Garner
Lillee
Trueman
Lindwall
Davidson
O'Reilly
Holding
Waqar
Pollock
The lower it gets the less accurate it gets, and before anyone asks, yes O'Reilly is a bit low. But looking it over, now sure where to place him.
Again, off the top of my head
Marshall
McGrath
Hadlee
Steyn
Ambrose
Warne
Muralitharan
Imran
Donald
Wasim
Garner
Lillee
Trueman
Lindwall
Davidson
O'Reilly
Holding
Waqar
Pollock
The lower it gets the less accurate it gets, and before anyone asks, yes O'Reilly is a bit low. But looking it over, now sure where to place him.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
Steyn is better than Mcgrath
Also Garner is rated too high and Walsh is missing.
Also Garner is rated too high and Walsh is missing.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
The top 8 by the way are all in the same tier, the top 3 are just slightly separated as in my humble opinion they are the ones in contention for greatest ever.
Imran is honestly borderline for 1st and second before anyone takes offence.
I don't believe Steyn is better than McGrath because of his liability to go for runs when things aren't going great, the away record and Glen's consistency.
I think Garner is greatly under rated but also wouldn't place him above most of the top tier no. 1s, guess can slip him after Lillee.
As with the batting left the last place open because there are multiple candidates that I probably forgot.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
I'm more surprised by you putting Holding above Walsh. Walsh record and longevity is really underrated here.
Also Steyn high economy is made up for by his low S/R.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Because Donald was just better to watch and not an eyesore like Kallis.
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You disappoint me, Warne and Murali don't belong ahead of Imran. Eventually you will put Imran firmly in the 1st tier where he belongs, my friend.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
It's very difficult to place spinners in between the fast men, and to be completely honest I was greatly influenced by the poll between Imran and Warne and the vast difference between between either the same Warne and either Steyn or Ambrose. I just went with the overwhelming CW consensus there.
For the record I voted for Imran there a f argued that I personally had him, Donald and possibly Garner ahead of the spinners.
And I did say he was borderline between the tiers, I get no credit? He literally 6th for fast bowlers alone.
But yeah, that poll was pretty conclusive.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
When I checked both my ad hoc lists, I do note that I have Donald 9th and Kallis 12th, a bit closer than I would have though. but still think based in primary skills alone, Donald was the better match winner imo. Sorry, IMHO.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
subshakerz
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah but you haven't given a strong enough reason to pigeonhole Warne and Murali there. Let me give you mine:
Top tier best bowlers, near flawless records and top ratings in their era
1Marshall
2 McGrath
3 Hadlee
Mid tier best bowlers, well rounded records and top ratings in their era
4 Imran
5 Steyn
6 Ambrose
Elite spinners, well rounded records with serious weakness and top ratings in their era
7 Warne
8 Murali
Bottom tier best bowlers, record with gaps but top ratings in their era
9 Lillee
10 Wasim
11 Trueman
You can argue over what order Imran/Steyn/Ambrose should be, but what is less arguable is that they belong together in a tier with all-round impressiveness across countries and opponents, albeit not at the level of the top tier but without any significant gap or weakness.
The reason Warne and Murali go ahead of the last tier is while both sucked against India, the others had not enough output across regions like Lillee and Trueman or not quite the same overall stellar stats/output as others like Akram.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
I feel though comparitively you have to take into account there are fewer bowlers in a team and thus fewer ATG bowlers overall. i.e in your rankings is 9th greatest bowler equivalent to 12th greatest batsman?
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
I agree, that's why I noted that it was closer than I thought. The tie breaker for me was the last sentence that Donald was a better match winner, and it's possible I do have Kallis a bit high.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
What for?
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
I'm honestly growing tired of hearing about longevity. At no point in his career was Walsh a better bowler than Holding, so to anoint him better after because he played longer seems quite disingenuous.
Will make me take a look at other players and how longevity played a role in how they are rated.
Adorable Asshole
International Regular
shortpitched713
Cricketer Of The Year
Congratulations guys, I think we just figured out how bowling averages work.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
I agree with your first list, don't think there's much argument there.
I don't disagree with the names in your mid tier, but diverge on the order. I would have Steyn, Ambrose then Imran.
I understand what you're doing with the last tier, the guys who have seriously high peer and reputational rating, but reality is a bit different. Don't think any of them was better than Donald and possibly Garner, and kind of on par with Holding and Lindwall.
I guess the same way you are holding firm that Lara for you don't belong in or feel right in that top tier, I'm not sure Imran is quite there for me. Unlike you I'm no longer willing to go toe to toe and argue about it.
That doesn't mean I don't think he's amazing, I just prefer the 5 guys I have above him.
With regards to where the spinners fit in, as I said I just want sure, so when I'm not I go with the consensus, it wasn't that complicated.
kyear2
Hall of Fame Member
How I rate players go beyond just the averages, it how the played in and reacted to various conditions. Steyn went all out, but when conditions didn't suit him, he mostly still tried to and could go for runs. Ambrose was the opposite sometimes, when conditions weren't helpful he would pull back his length and become unhittable, even if less of a threat to take wickets.