• 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.

Jacques Kallis vs Allan Border

Who was the greater test batsman?

  • Jacques Kallis

    Votes: 26 49.1%
  • Allan Border

    Votes: 27 50.9%

  • Total voters
    53

subshakerz

Cricketer Of The Year
Not really though. Lara averaged in the 40s. He had no hundred against Donald and Wasim. He had to wait for the easier batting era/ weak attacks to bring his average over 40 against SA and Pakistan. He did absolutely nothing of significant in India and NZ. Lara’s legend is based his couple of great knocks vs Australia.
Sachin averaged less than 40 vs SA before the turn of the century. He had a middling record in Australia too.

If you scrutinize Sachin and Lara the same way you do Sanga, Ponting or Kallis, you’d find Lara and Sachin, especially the former get overrated a lot.
The point is that Lara and Tendulkar were both considered ATG batsmen by the turn of the century after playing in the nineties and both were averaging in the 50s. This isn't really something disputed. Sure, we can point out individual flaws in their records but unlike Sanga their record doesnt solely rely on the run buffet era.
 

Xix2565

International Debutant
Doubtful, considering how he finished. Frauds remain frauds to the end, especially if they're like Voges.
 

weeman27bob

International Regular
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
 

Himannv

International Coach
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
Good Lord, what have you been smoking?
 

_00_deathscar

International Debutant
doesnt everyone have an under 40 blip against one or two nations (rxcept tendulkar).? its not really as big a thing as people like to make out as looking at particular opposition means your sample size is reduced so it could just be a quirk that would have corrected with more games.
And Sachin only fixed his last one (South Africa) in his last series against them - at least IN the country I believe where he was just a shade under 40.
 

_00_deathscar

International Debutant
They really ought to start considering it, especially in the case of Tendulkar, I think. Any way you slice their records, I think it's very hard to create an extended peak period where Tendulkar outperforms Sanga. If you look at their whole careers then Sanga's superior run scoring average rises above as well. It's only if you give an inordinate amount of stock to Sanga's lesser productive period when he was a wicketkeeper, that I think you could possibly place Tendulkar above, or if you place an inordinate value on aggregate counting statistics of longevity/runs/centuries.
Not sure if serious…
 

subshakerz

Cricketer Of The Year
So far the general arguments across posters seem:

Border: More rounded away record, faced better bowling, batted without much support

Kallis: Averages more, was there when SA beat Australia while Border couldn't beat WI
 

ataraxia

Cricketer Of The Year
So far the general arguments across posters seem:

Border: More rounded away record, faced better bowling, batted without much support

Kallis: Averages more, was there when SA beat Australia while Border couldn't beat WI
I don't like things being compressed down into such arguments. What one should do is weigh up all factors; often nothing is particularly decisive, one option is simply better than the other if it is looked at holistically.

I've explained this incredibly horribly. Perhaps it would help if I were to say that the thing not to do is, as I did, quickly weigh them in one's head (hmm, Kallis is good. hmm, Border is good.) and use as the deciding factor the fact one should aspire to be as anti-Burgey as reasonable.
 

StephenZA

Hall of Fame Member
I don't like things being compressed down into such arguments. What one should do is weigh up all factors; often nothing is particularly decisive, one option is simply better than the other if it is looked at holistically.

I've explained this incredibly horribly. Perhaps it would help if I were to say that the thing not to do is, as I did, quickly weigh them in one's head (hmm, Kallis is good. hmm, Border is good.) and use as the deciding factor the fact one should aspire to be as anti-Burgey as reasonable.
That has as much merit as most of the arguments put forth...
 

subshakerz

Cricketer Of The Year
I don't like things being compressed down into such arguments. What one should do is weigh up all factors; often nothing is particularly decisive, one option is simply better than the other if it is looked at holistically.

I've explained this incredibly horribly. Perhaps it would help if I were to say that the thing not to do is, as I did, quickly weigh them in one's head (hmm, Kallis is good. hmm, Border is good.) and use as the deciding factor the fact one should aspire to be as anti-Burgey as reasonable.
Just trying to bring the conversation back to topic
 

BazBall21

International Regular
Sanga was mid in England, India, West Indies and South Africa. Too patchy an away record in a batting era to be rated above Sachin and Lara.
 

BazBall21

International Regular
Not really though. Lara averaged in the 40s. He had no hundred against Donald and Wasim. He had to wait for the easier batting era/ weak attacks to bring his average over 40 against SA and Pakistan. He did absolutely nothing of significant in India and NZ. Lara’s legend is based his couple of great knocks vs Australia.
Sachin averaged less than 40 vs SA before the turn of the century. He had a middling record in Australia too.

If you scrutinize Sachin and Lara the same way you do Sanga, Ponting or Kallis, you’d find Lara and Sachin, especially the former get overrated a lot.
Struggled in two of his three England tours too.
 

Top