Jacques Kallis vs Imran Khan

[smash84]

Lol Imran Khan had every intention to retire he was literally demanded by the head of state of the time Zia Ul Haq to come out of retirement.

I dont know what this means but this makes it sound like it was more forceful than what it was given that Zia was a military dictator.

 

[DrWolverine]

I think the guy who isn’t easily influenced by politicians is more valuable to my team than the guy who is tbh

It’s easier to say this if you are from a country like Australia where you can openly defy politicians

 

[Xix2565]

Imran was far more than a frontline bowler. In addition to being one of the best who has ever played, he carried a stupid workload in his peak. Very few quicks have carried that kind of load and level of responsibility. And that workload is just his bowling. He did a ton of batting too. Possibly captaincy as well in terms of workload. I've never captained, and don't know if it makes a difference. But his workload shut him down repeatedly. Couldn't bowl for a nearly a couple of years at his peak. Early retirement before coming back. And couldn't bowl at the end.

There is no point comparing one of the top handful of of bowlers ever to Kallis as a bowler. Kallis was a batting AR.

On total workload though, nobody beats Kallis. He spent longer at the crease than almost anyone else in history. He bowled more overs than Imran. And spent more time in the slips than just about anyone else when not bowling. He handled being a frontline everything for a couple of years in the early 2000s, but it wasn't sustainable. In international cricket he, was probably carrying 3 or 4 times Imrans average load per year at that stage. And we know what happened to Imran.

He was a top tier pace all-rounder at his absolute peak, and for a decent enough period to take him over Kallis being overrated on his bowling and general longevity. This is a pretty simple comparison with one right answer for Tests.

 

[subshakerz]

I dont know what this means but this makes it sound like it was more forceful than what it was given that Zia was a military dictator.

Zia was a big fan of Imran the cricketer. There was a public ceremony months after Imran had retired and Zia took him aside before the ceremony and told him that he is going to announce that you will be coming back from retirement and told him not to disappoint him by declining, leaving Imran little choice.

 

[Agonizingly Awkward]

If you think it has anything to do with Chad, then no, you didn’t. Sorry mate

What does it mean?

 

[Coronis]

What does it mean?

I’m afraid I can’t share that information.

ifykyk

 

[kyear2]

My answer to the OP is Imran on a game by game basis, and Kallis for career.

If Imran had played 166 tests, the answer would clearly have been Kallis.

If Kallis had played 88 tests, and not needed to hold back on his pace or amount bowling per game due to workload, it would have probably been Kallis.

I usually prefer amount of time played to tests played as a measure. But we can see how badly Imran crashed from workload. And we can see Kallis crashing as a bowler from workload around the time that he was smart enough to admit that it was not sustainable. And that the team would be better served in the long term by dialling it back.

Kallis cutting back on work load was actually ideal though. It lengthened his career, yet he was still always there to provide relief. And not only was his wickets always timely, the value of his wickets and scalps were insanely valuable. He broke partnerships, he didn't clean up tails.
And when he wasn't bowling, he was performing at an ATG level in the most critical fielding position on the field.

And people like to pretend he wasn't an ATG bat, but name a perceived flaw of his that isn't also associated with guys like Gavaskar.

Of the fraud 4 of the 2000's he had by far the toughest home conditions and by the end of his career he upped his scoring rate by quite a bit, especially when required.

Not to add that his skill set and numbers would transfer to any era, including today's way more than Imran's would. And that's not disputable.

I think @Migara said that only Sobers can be ahead of Imran, but Imran is way closer to the likes of Kallis and Hammond than he is to Sobers.
And in before anyone says that's ridiculous, let's compare Imran and Hammond.

Imran is ranked here 8th as a bowler, behind the likes of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, Warne, Murali and Ambrose. In the wider cricketing community you can add Lillee, Wasim and O'Reilly to that list, with arguments for Holding. Generally though he's in that group with Lillee, Donald, O'Reilly, Wasim and Holding.

Hammond we rate around 8 and 10 as a batsman, general community about the same. And he's seen in that group with Sunny, Chappell, Headley, Ponting and Pollock. Though in some circles he's seen even higher.

Basically the same, possibly slight edge to Hammond.

Imran's secondary skill is his batting, Hammond's is his catching. Only in CW is lower order batting ranked higher in terms of auxiliary skills, or factored into team construction. When one listens to former players and pundits putting together teams, far grater consideration is paid to fielding and especially catching than lower order batting.
In any event Hammond is the GOAT and at least on par with Imran, who's numbers were boosted by..... Not outs, his post bowling stint, down hill skiing and of course home advantages. Even then he had a rpi of 30, using the preferred bowling cutoffs from '74 to '88 it drops to 27. Strictly away from home, 25.

Hammond too was pretty useful, even if not all rounder standard with the ball, with a wpm of over 1 prior to returning after the war.

Went way longer than I intended, but yeah, they isn't much if anything that separates these guys as cricketers.

 

[Coronis]

Kallis cutting back on work load was actually ideal though. It lengthened his career, yet he was still always there to provide relief. And not only was his wickets always timely, the value of his wickets and scalps were insanely valuable. He broke partnerships, he didn't clean up tails.
And when he wasn't bowling, he was performing at an ATG level in the most critical fielding position on the field.

And people like to pretend he wasn't an ATG bat, but name a perceived flaw of his that isn't also associated with guys like Gavaskar.

Of the fraud 4 of the 2000's he had by far the toughest home conditions and by the end of his career he upped his scoring rate by quite a bit, especially when required.

Not to add that his skill set and numbers would transfer to any era, including today's way more than Imran's would. And that's not disputable.

I think @Migara said that only Sobers can be ahead of Imran, but Imran is way closer to the likes of Kallis and Hammond than he is to Sobers.
And in before anyone says that's ridiculous, let's compare Imran and Hammond.

Imran is ranked here 8th as a bowler, behind the likes of Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee, Steyn, Warne, Murali and Ambrose. In the wider cricketing community you can add Lillee, Wasim and O'Reilly to that list, with arguments for Holding. Generally though he's in that group with Lillee, Donald, O'Reilly, Wasim and Holding.

Hammond we rate around 8 and 10 as a batsman, general community about the same. And he's seen in that group with Sunny, Chappell, Headley, Ponting and Pollock. Though in some circles he's seen even higher.

Basically the same, possibly slight edge to Hammond.

Imran's secondary skill is his batting, Hammond's is his catching. Only in CW is lower order batting ranked higher in terms of auxiliary skills, or factored into team construction. When one listens to former players and pundits putting together teams, far grater consideration is paid to fielding and especially catching than lower order batting.
In any event Hammond is the GOAT and at least on par with Imran, who's numbers were boosted by..... Not outs, his post bowling stint, down hill skiing and of course home advantages. Even then he had a rpi of 30, using the preferred bowling cutoffs from '74 to '88 it drops to 27. Strictly away from home, 25.

Hammond too was pretty useful, even if not all rounder standard with the ball, with a wpm of over 1 prior to returning after the war.

Went way longer than I intended, but yeah, they isn't much if anything that separates these guys as cricketers.

Does this happen often?

 

[subshakerz]

Does this happen often?

The sad thing is virtually nothing he wrote is new in any way but literally the same arguments he has been posting dozens of times.

 

[Coronis]

The sad thing is virtually nothing he wrote is new in any way but literally the same arguments he has been posting dozens of times.

I completely agree with the first paragraph btw.

 

[subshakerz]

I completely agree with the first paragraph btw.

I know we have argued it before several times.

And I bumped up.my rating of Kallis' bowling based on not considering his latter years as much.

 

[kyear2]

Imran actually was a frontline bowler though, he's closer to McGrath/Marshall/Hadlee than he is to 4th options like Kallis. There's nothing in Kallis's record that suggests he could have been a lead pacer like say Donald/Ntini/Steyn. You can't penalise Imran on that hypothetical of a potentially less worn out Kallis.

Why would you even be trying to compare Imran to Kallis as bowlers. Don't get the logic behind that.

One was leagues ahead as a bowler, the other as bat. And despite what Imran's average briefly was during certain windows, he never approached that level as a batsman.

 

[subshakerz]

Why would you even be trying to compare Imran to Kallis as bowlers. Don't get the logic behind that.

One was leagues ahead as a bowler, the other as bat. And despite what Imran's average briefly was during certain windows, he never approached that level as a batsman.

No it's why comparing career length and size of a Frontline bat shouldn't be done with a Frontline pace.

 

[Migara]

BTW, Is that the reason you rate him higher than Don?

Nope. I rate Sobers over him. Last time I check, Sobers didn't take to politics.

 

[kyear2]

RPI is affected by not outs. He had a lot of not outs.

He had charisma. He ran your boys at their absolute best to draws and you needed cheating to get out of the hole. That is what Imran had. You guys are absolutely bitter about how Imran gave your best sides in the history a run for the money, despite not having the best side that played for his country.

And he became the PM. That is charisma plus if you want to consider.

Yes, his numbers were boosted by no's.

Anytime anyone says cheating when referring to Pakistan as a defence is when one stops staking them seriously.

No one is bitter about anyone.

Lillee and Thompson embarrassed us in the 70's, Punter destroyed us, so did McGrath. Wasim used to give us fits. When people start using those arguments it's more of a projection of their perspectives and just telling on themselves.

We appreciate an enjoy competition, I've argued for Hutton and Barry Richards just as much if not more than any West Indian, so keep your xenophobic opinions to yourself please and thanks.

 

[kyear2]

Does this happen often?

Sadly quite a bit, but I try to fully flesh out my thoughts.

Don't think anything stated was objectively incorrect, you're free to point out where it was.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah yeah, being PM of a nation with a nuclear arsenal doesn't need much charisma than leading a cricket side.

What is your point here?

 

[Bolo.]

The only reason Kallis played much more tests is because a) SA just played more cricket tours than Pakistan and b) Imran had gaps in his career but these were either very young age, WSC, freak injury or early retirement.

Give his cumulative workload is less relevant since as a bat he has the advantage of being able to sustain a peak longer and hence a test career too. The only reason Imran's career is longer is because he became a full bat by the end of it and started unusually young but it's not because of him not being able to sustain workload. He has several 4 to 6 test series where he delivered with both bat and bowl in his career.

I feel like I talk about Imran a lot on CW. Close to 100% of the time, I'm defending or praising him. Except in conversation with you, when I'm attacking him close to 100% of the time..

Are you running a psy-op to make me hate Imran?

 

[subshakerz]

I feel like I talk about Imran a lot on CW. Close to 100% of the time, I'm defending or praising him. Except in conversation with you, when I'm attacking him close to 100% of the time..

Are you running a psy-op to make me hate Imran?

Lol sorry. Anyways you did move me a bit on Kallis so congrats

 

[CartyDurham]

Kallis imo.