Greatest cricketer post 1990

[Mike5181]

I remind you all that "greatest" =/= "best". The 11 that have voted for Kallis should hang their heads in shame tbh.

Greatest cricketer

 

[TumTum]

Greatest cricketer

cricketer = person
cricket = sport

cricketer or person =/= cricketer's/person's achievements or stats

Who did you vote for? Steven Smith?

 

[Athlai]

Murali, McGrath, Kallis, Warne, Lara and Tendulkar all deserve to be mentioned IMO.

Went with Murali because of what he did for Sri Lankan cricket, a more significant influence than any other cricketer IMO.

 

[Anil]

mcgrath, murali and tendulkar for me...can't split them...

 

[bagapath]

lol - we somehow manage to find a reason to drag Malcolm Sami in every thread.

imran khan manages to do that too

 

[Flem274*]

Pollock.

 

[Teja.]

Do people forget that Pollock could bat and Kallis could bowl?

Haha, you'd think.

Kallis 5 votes behind. Should be 20 votes ahead with him and Pollock sharing 90% of the votes.

 

[ankitj]

I know Kallis is under-rated and all that. But imagine these cricketers up for sell for your team to play a 5-test series. Those who have voted for Kallis will really bid the highest for him? Find it hard to believe tbh.

 

[andyc]

I know Kallis is under-rated and all that. But imagine these cricketers up for sell for your team to play a 5-test series. Those who have voted for Kallis will really bid the highest for him? Find it hard to believe tbh.

Don't see why not. You'd be guaranteed at least two-three hundreds and maybe 7-10 wickets. Each to their own obviously, but Kallis is an absolute weapon for any team.

Also realise that your post might have been alluding to the fact that Kallis hasn't played many 5 Test series, but that's not exactly his fault, and I don't see any reason why playing an extra one or two Tests would change much.

 

[ankitj]

No, it's actually got nothing to do with 3 or 5 tests.

 

[Jono]

Allrounders aren't always more valuable than specialists. Shane Watson right now is not a better cricketer than AB Devilliers.

 

[Athlai]

Yes he is.

 

[Ruckus]

Good point.

 

[Jono]

Yes he is.

On what basis?

 

[Mike5181]

Shane Watson is an opener though. Its a tougher and more important role. Though still D>W

 

[Jarquis]

Allrounders aren't always more valuable than specialists. Shane Watson right now is not a better cricketer than AB Devilliers.

Yeah, but there you're comparing a batsman who is averaging about 300 this year with an allrounder who averages ~50 with the bat and struggles to get through 20 overs.

This comparison is Sean Pollock who has a Test career bowling average ~2-3 runs higher than McGrath but averaged 20(?) more with the bat? A player who is comparable on bowling alone to McGrath in ODIs but who averaged double the amount with the bat.
The same goes for Kallis and others like Sachin/Lara. Comparable as a batsman alone, but when you consider their bowling, it's no contest.

 

[Furball]

And you haven't even mentioned Kallis' excellent slip catching.

As a complete package, Kallis is the greatest cricketer of the last 20 years.

 

[Jono]

The two best cricketers since the 90s hey?

You'd think South Africa would have won more often then

 

[Migara]

Allrounders aren't always more valuable than specialists. Shane Watson right now is not a better cricketer than AB Devilliers.

AB de Villiers is an specialist all rounder. Don't forget that he keeps too.

 

[Furball]

AB de Villiers is an specialist all rounder. Don't forget that he keeps too.

Kevin Pietersen is a specialist all rounder. Don't forget that he bowls too.