Interesting article about Kallis

[honestbharani]

Both were opening batsmen. Big difference. They were deliberately there to 'take the shine, not the cover' off the ball. And with that in mind as their jobs, they excelled at it.

plus, Kallis is not exactly batting around stroke makers... Gibbs is a bit of a stroke player and maybe Smith but really, we are pushing it a lot if we start calling Dippenaar and Prince as stroke players. Kallis, as the best batsman in the side, has to take the responsibility of scoring runs in a decent clip like Sachin, Lara, Ponting etc. do for their sides.

 

[Prince EWS]

Kallis, as the best batsman in the side, has to take the responsibility of scoring runs in a decent clip like Sachin, Lara, Ponting etc. do for their sides.

No, he doesnt. Thats not his game.

Kallis doesnt play for his team any more or less than Dravid does. Dravid simply fits in better with his team because of the players around him. Its really not Kallis' fault the other batsmen play in the same vein as he does. Perhaps South Africa should change their selection policy of the fringe players to create a balance with the established players they have. I think thats what the idea behind Justin Kemp playing was, to be honest.

To say that Kallis isnt team orientated because of the style he is plays is almost as rediculous as suggesting MacGill isnt team orientated because he bowls leg spin on green tops. Kallis' batting style is based on technique, defence and picking the right balls, much the same as MacGill's bowling style is leg breaks. Hes not as naturally gifted as players like Ponting, Lara etc, who can get away with hitting just about anything anywhere they want, but thats why I admire him so much. Hes not an athletic freak with a brilliant eye, hes a cricketer who has studied the game and developed an almost perfect technique. He is evidence that concentration, mental application and hard work can be just as effective as having some talent, a good eye, and as Ian Chappell would say "dominating the bowling."

People always seem very quick to jump on the "playing your natural game is the only way to succeed" bandwagon, until someone's natural game is classed as "boring". Funny that.

 

[honestbharani]

No, he doesnt. Thats not his game.

Kallis doesnt play for his team any more or less than Dravid does. Dravid simply fits in better with his team because of the players around him. Its really not Kallis' fault the other batsmen play in the same vein as he does. Perhaps South Africa should change their selection policy of the fringe players to create a balance with the established players they have. I think thats what the idea behind Justin Kemp playing was, to be honest.

To say that Kallis isnt team orientated because of the style he is plays is almost as rediculous as suggesting MacGill isnt team orientated because he bowls leg spin on green tops. Kallis' batting style is based on technique, defence and picking the right balls, much the same as MacGill's bowling style is leg breaks. Hes not as naturally gifted as players like Ponting, Lara etc, who can get away with hitting just about anything anywhere they want, but thats why I admire him so much. Hes not an athletic freak with a brilliant eye, hes a cricketer who has studied the game and developed an almost perfect technique. He is evidence that concentration, mental application and hard work can be just as effective as having some talent, a good eye, and as Ian Chappell would say "dominating the bowling."

People always seem very quick to jump on the "playing your natural game is the only way to succeed" bandwagon, until someone's natural game is classed as "boring". Funny that.

I am not sure about what you are saying. It is true that Kallis' natural game is to be defensive, but I think amongst all the Protean batsmen, he is the best equipped to take the mantle of being aggressive to an extent. He has the talent and IMHO, he should be willing to play the role that will bring his team more success. There is no point in asking Prince or Dippenaar to be aggressive or to select positive players from domestic cricket just because they bat in a certain way. The best 4 middle order bats need to be selected and since amongst those, it is obvious Kallis is the most talented, he should be willing to play the role of the aggressor to give more options and opportunities to his side.

 

[Prince EWS]

It is true that Kallis' natural game is to be defensive, but I think amongst all the Protean batsmen, he is the best equipped to take the mantle of being aggressive to an extent.

I disagree. Its so important that he stay in and build whatever score he can. I never hear anyone telling Lara he has to put his shots away and play like Kallis when the West Indies are batting out a draw, I always just hear "The best way to get through this is for him to play his natural game. He'll get out otherwise." Same must be said for Kallis when a win is on the cards, or this recurring comment is as hypocritical as they come.

He has the talent and IMHO, he should be willing to play the role that will bring his team more success.

And that role, is however he has found batting most successful. Theres no point him attempting to up the run rate if hes going to get out for 10 off 14 balls. He obviously doesnt feel confident in playing more expansively, so he shouldnt have to. Hes their best batsman - a point that everyone seems to bring up - so he should logically be given first right to play how he feels most comfortable.

he should be willing to play the role of the aggressor to give more options and opportunities to his side.

Again, Im waiting for a technically perfect, ultra-defensive innings from Lara to bat out a draw, before I have to answer to this sort of comment.

 

[Jono]

Fair play Prince, some good points raised there.

I'm still relatively split on the issue. Kallis is still one of my favourite players and I love watching him bat, but I can see where those that claim he's selfish, or rather just plays in his own 'bubble' are coming from. With the ball though, I don't fall for this "he only bowls against minnows to keep a good bowling average" argument.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Again, Im waiting for a technically perfect, ultra-defensive innings from Lara to bat out a draw, before I have to answer to this sort of comment.

Lara probably isn't capable of those and the reality is he'd probably be more likely to get out trying to play that way than playing naturally. You've also got the fact that Lara isn't experienced in grinding out those sorts of innings anyway. With Kallis in the situations where the team is after quick runs to declare it doesn't matter that much if he does get out playing differently or is more likely to get out. He also should have the experience of upping the pace because he's played in plenty of ODIs and he'll have got to the 'slog overs' a fair few times, hell he's even played a few Twenty20 games.

 

[Prince EWS]

Lara probably isn't capable of those and the reality is he'd probably be more likely to get out trying to play that way than playing naturally.

The same can be said for Kallis in the opposite situation though.

You've also got the fact that Lara isn't experienced in grinding out those sorts of innings anyway.

And Kallis isnt experienced in tonking his way to a quickfire 50 either, unless the bowling is bad. He plays each ball on merit.

With Kallis in the situations where the team is after quick runs to declare it doesn't matter that much if he does get out playing differently or is more likely to get out.

Yes it does. No point scoring at an extra run an over for a few overs if the side is out 80 runs short of where they want.

He also should have the experience of upping the pace because he's played in plenty of ODIs and he'll have got to the 'slog overs' a fair few times, hell he's even played a few Twenty20 games.

And hes criticised in these matches for this exact same thing, so thats a very poor arguement.

 

[Scaly piscine]

The same can be said for Kallis in the opposite situation though.


Yes it does. No point scoring at an extra run an over for a few overs if the side is out 80 runs short of where they want.

You don't seem to get it, we're on about a situation where the team is going to declare within 50-100 runs with lots of wickets left. Wickets almost don't matter and so it virtually doesn't matter that Kallis is more likely to get out - the sort of situation where it's far more advantageous if he goes for it rather than potters about.

And Kallis isnt experienced in tonking his way to a quickfire 50 either, unless the bowling is bad. He plays each ball on merit

Kallis' Twenty20 strike rate is above 100 and he plays in the SA version which is a lot lower scoring than in England. This shows he is capable and he has some experience of hitting the quick runs.

 

[Prince EWS]

Kallis' Twenty20 strike rate is above 100 and he plays in the SA version which is a lot lower scoring than in England. This shows he is capable and he has some experience of hitting the quick runs.

Yes, against South African domesitc quality bowling. Not Lee, McGrath and Warne.

You don't seem to get it, we're on about a situation where the team is going to declare within 50-100 runs with lots of wickets left. Wickets almost don't matter and so it virtually doesn't matter that Kallis is more likely to get out - the sort of situation where it's far more advantageous if he goes for it rather than potters about.

Needing 100 runs is a lot different to needing 10 runs. 100 runs is a lot easier said than done, IMO, especially in the second innings where the pitch can be a bit dodgey. Kallis basically acts as "insurance" to make sure they dont fall short of their target. And again, this line of arguement would only work had Lara batted out a draw in a Kallis-like fashion. Lara going out there, and playing like Lara, when the Windies are attempting to bat out a draw, is no less selfish than Kallis going out there and batting like Kallis when 100 runs in quick time are needed. And also, if wickets dont matter at all and you are in persuit of quick runs, why send Kallis out to bat? Obviously the captain believes someone should anchor the innings, and thats why hes out there.

 

[Autobahn]

You don't seem to get it, we're on about a situation where the team is going to declare within 50-100 runs with lots of wickets left. Wickets almost don't matter and so it virtually doesn't matter that Kallis is more likely to get out - the sort of situation where it's far more advantageous if he goes for it rather than potters about.

Well i think he's the insurance option basically so the innings don't implode and leave the saffers in a worse state, plus at the end he was trying to score, but whereas pollock had McGill over the wicket, kallis had to deal with warne pitching into the rough from around the wicket, and only about 3 or 4 batsmen in the world are good enough to smack warne around from out of the rough.

Kallis' Twenty20 strike rate is above 100 and he plays in the SA version which is a lot lower scoring than in England. This shows he is capable and he has some experience of hitting the quick runs.

Against lesser attacks no doubt.

 

[open365]

No, he doesnt. Thats not his game.

Kallis doesnt play for his team any more or less than Dravid does. Dravid simply fits in better with his team because of the players around him. Its really not Kallis' fault the other batsmen play in the same vein as he does. Perhaps South Africa should change their selection policy of the fringe players to create a balance with the established players they have. I think thats what the idea behind Justin Kemp playing was, to be honest.

To say that Kallis isnt team orientated because of the style he is plays is almost as rediculous as suggesting MacGill isnt team orientated because he bowls leg spin on green tops. Kallis' batting style is based on technique, defence and picking the right balls, much the same as MacGill's bowling style is leg breaks. Hes not as naturally gifted as players like Ponting, Lara etc, who can get away with hitting just about anything anywhere they want, but thats why I admire him so much. Hes not an athletic freak with a brilliant eye, hes a cricketer who has studied the game and developed an almost perfect technique. He is evidence that concentration, mental application and hard work can be just as effective as having some talent, a good eye, and as Ian Chappell would say "dominating the bowling."

People always seem very quick to jump on the "playing your natural game is the only way to succeed" bandwagon, until someone's natural game is classed as "boring". Funny that.

In that post you;vechanged my opinion of Kallis,very good post.

 

[Scaly piscine]

You do not need an insurance policy when you're scoring a quick 50-100 with virtually your whole team left to bat. These are not a set of robots going out to bat set on auto-destruct like some weird version of Battrick, if by some freak they manage to lose 5 wickets for nothing then the batsmen will actually decide to bat a bit more defensively. As everyone keeps saying Kallis is not the only 'grafter' in the SA team and most batsmen don't just bat one way ALL the time.

 

[marc71178]

And if they lose 5 wickets for nothing then there's little left in the way of batting talent...

 

[Scaly piscine]

And if they lose 5 wickets for nothing then there's little left in the way of batting talent...

If you're not going to take the risk in case of a Battrick type collapse you may as well not bother declaring anyway.

 

[Prince EWS]

You do not need an insurance policy when you're scoring a quick 50-100 with virtually your whole team left to bat.

Why is that? On a deteriorating 4th or 5th day pitch, against a good attack, 50-100 runs is a lot easier said than done. If all the batsmen just tried to slog the bowling Afridi style, and it didnt pay off, the team would be put in a very bad position. The South Africans finished their innings 6 down with Pollock and Kallis at the crease. What if Kallis had got out thrid ball trying to put MacGill over the rope? Its not like they still had 4 or 5 wasted recognised batsmen left in the sheds at the end of their innings - they had Botha, Nel and Langeveldt.

As everyone keeps saying Kallis is not the only 'grafter' in the SA team and most batsmen don't just bat one way ALL the time.

Kallis is the best "grafter" though, as his average suggests, so he should be allowed that role. I dont see Warne bowling from the less-spin friendly end and leaving MacGill to use the footmarks "because hes their best bowler and should be able to adapt." As for "playing one way", Kallis can increase the scoring rate - just not to astronomical proportions against good attacks on 5th days pitches.

If you're not going to take the risk in case of a Battrick type collapse you may as well not bother declaring anyway.

You do take the risk - you just dont make every single batsman in the side do so.

 

[Cloete]

*round of applause for Prince*

Have to say I have agreed with almost everything you've said so far, definitely made some very good points!

 

[marc71178]

If you're not going to take the risk in case of a Battrick type collapse you may as well not bother declaring anyway.

Relevance?

 

[Langeveldt]

If Kallis wasn't so selfish he'd be averaging in the low fourties, and I doubt South Africa would have won any more matches than they have done..

Interesting how a defensive batsman these days is called a selfish one? If quick runs were needed why was kallis sent in?

 

[honestbharani]

I disagree. Its so important that he stay in and build whatever score he can. I never hear anyone telling Lara he has to put his shots away and play like Kallis when the West Indies are batting out a draw, I always just hear "The best way to get through this is for him to play his natural game. He'll get out otherwise." Same must be said for Kallis when a win is on the cards, or this recurring comment is as hypocritical as they come.



And that role, is however he has found batting most successful. Theres no point him attempting to up the run rate if hes going to get out for 10 off 14 balls. He obviously doesnt feel confident in playing more expansively, so he shouldnt have to. Hes their best batsman - a point that everyone seems to bring up - so he should logically be given first right to play how he feels most comfortable.



Again, Im waiting for a technically perfect, ultra-defensive innings from Lara to bat out a draw, before I have to answer to this sort of comment.

Again you are confusing the issue. Lara has not played too many brilliant defensive innings. Kallis has played a few very good aggressive innings. So, on the basis of history, it is obvious that Kallis HAS the ability to play the sort of aggressive (maybe that word is too strong, I mean a positive) innings that I am talking about. Secondly, in today's game, draws are rare. And as such, I would always rate a strokeplayer in the De Villiers mould higher than a Dippenaar. The intent of the game has changed. We can no longer go by the Boycott theory of having 2 dashers and 4 or 5 defensive players in the top 7. I think in today's age, it is imperative to have 3 or 4 positive players and have 2 or 3 defensive players around whom they can bat. Given all this, I still think Kallis should try to play more positively. I am not asking him to hit sixes every over here, juz simply play his strokes more often. The important point is he HAS those strokes. Whereas someone like Lara or Tendulkar may or MAY NOT have the defense and the patience required to play the grafting knocks that you want so much.

 

[Top_Cat]

Kallis saves games for South Africa. Lara wins games for the WI. His 153* in 1999 against the Aussies could well have been the opportunity to bat out the day and save the game but he went for the win instead and, aside from an unfortunate drop by Healy late in the piece, was THE reason the WI even got close. Sometimes, in attacking too much, a rash shot from him can get him out, trigger a collapse and a loss but he's won so many other games, one cane forgive him for trying a little bit too hard on other occasions. Even then, that 153* was the perfect example of how to mix excellent technical defence with some great attacking strokes and gonads the size of the WI to boot.

Whereas someone like Lara or Tendulkar may or MAY NOT have the defense and the patience required to play the grafting knocks that you want so much.

But they do. They just choose to keep trying for the win, no matter how hopeless the situation. Other Indian players are the same. Could you imagine if it was Kallis instead of Laxman out there batting in 2001 against the Aussies? I imagine it would have been a draw instead of an incredible win.