Vote for Five Cricketers of the 2000s + 2010s

[StephenZA]

I know majority have him in their list. But sometimes wonder what more Kallis could have done? A man that is, in RSA at least, considered the greatest SA cricketer ever. That is a pretty hefty tree to be on top off.

 

[CricAddict]

I know majority have him in their list. But sometimes wonder what more Kallis could have done? A man that is, in RSA at least, considered the greatest SA cricketer ever. That is a pretty hefty tree to be on top off.

I almost had him in my team. Just replaced with ABDV since Kallis couldn't crack T20s. Even if it is a format which is looked down, it is still some sort of cricket which AB excelled at while Kallis couldn't.

 

[StephenZA]

I almost had him in my team. Just replaced with ABDV since Kallis couldn't crack T20s. Even if it is a format which is looked down, it is still some sort of cricket which AB excelled at while Kallis couldn't.

You realise that Kallis has a higher avg in T20's than ABdV? Never mind the bowling.

 

[srbhkshk]

I know majority have him in their list. But sometimes wonder what more Kallis could have done?

Could have been Indian or Australian. :P

 

[StephenZA]

Could have been Indian or Australian. :P

Pretty much... English possibly acceptable as well.

 

[CricAddict]

You realise that Kallis has a higher avg in T20's than ABdV? Never mind the bowling.

I just checked their stats in cricinfo and pretty much surprised that ABD has such a low average in T20Is. But having seen them play, I don't think anyone will contest that Kallis is a better T20 player than ABD.

 

[ankitj]

I mean, if you're excluding McGrath as he played a lot in the 1990s, why are you keeping Kallis in there when he had 5 years in the 90s?

I chose a criterion for myself. Those who played beyond 2010 while debuting in 90s are eligible for this vote. It's arbitrary but needed something. 2000 is a tricky boundary. Lot of greats played a lot on either side of it. 1990 or 2010 are less tricky boundaries.

 

[StephenZA]

I just checked their stats in cricinfo and pretty much surprised that ABD has such a low average in T20Is. But having seen them play, I don't think anyone will contest that Kallis is a better T20 player than ABD.

My point though. It is all about perception and excitement, even outside T20. Unfortunately Kallis is never going to fulfil those criteria, regardless of his actual accomplishments.

 

[TheJediBrah]

With both Gilchrist and McGrath there is eligibility question because of number of years. McGrath certainly makes top 5 of 1990 to 2010 however. Gilchrist - I don't know, it depends on how much premium you put on the fact that he kept wickets along with being a good batsman. Even if you limit to exact years when Gilchrist played (1998-2008?), I would put Ponting, Murali, McGrath, Kallis, Warne, Lara ahead and Gilly misses out. Not quite Tendulkar because that period includes his 5 year long slump.

This is just insanity to me. Gilchrist should be ahead of everyone, including McGrath (except debatably Kallis). He was (and still is) the greatest wicket-keeper batsman ever by some distance. Heck, even if he didn't keep at all and was just a pure batsman doing what he did he would be up there.

Each to their own though.

 

[srbhkshk]

This is just insanity to me. Gilchrist should be ahead of everyone, including McGrath. He was (and still is) the greatest wicket-keeper batsman ever by some distance. Heck, even if he didn't keep at all and was just a pure batsman doing what he did he would be up there.

Each to their own though.

Why should he be ahead of Kallis?

 

[ankitj]

This is just insanity to me. Gilchrist should be ahead of everyone, including McGrath. He was (and still is) the greatest wicket-keeper batsman ever by some distance. Heck, even if he didn't keep at all and was just a pure batsman doing what he did he would be up there.

Each to their own though.

What's with this absolutism? It's not insanity. You lose your mind so easily.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Why should he be ahead of Kallis?

Dunno hard to judge that one. Kallis is definitely a challenger. As I said earlier, Gilchrist, Kallis and McGrath are the 3 who are on their own tier for this period.

I'm sure these kinds of discussions re. Kallis have been done to death (not as much of a match winner, came across as selfish etc.) and I have no interest in kick starting another one. I'll just leave it at "yeah sure he's great too". Actually I'll change my post too.

What's with this absolutism? It's not insanity. You lose your mind so easily.

I said it sounds like insanity to me, not that it drives me insane lol, and it's hardly absolutism. I specifically said "to me". IMO only player that's been more dominant at his chosen role than Gilchrist is Bradman. Even McGrath has had guys like Hadlee and several West Indians that have been just about as good.

 

[ImpatientLime]

i think that says more about the lack of great wicketkeeper batsman than anything else.

if the greatest ever left arm wrist spinner played throughout the 00s would we be having the same conversation?

being the greatest at his craft does not make him a better of more valuable cricketer than others by default.

 

[Burgey]

No it doesn’t, but he plainly was

 

[ImpatientLime]

plainly more valuable than match winning bowlers like mcgrath, warne, murali and steyn?

 

[_00_deathscar]

I know majority have him in their list. But sometimes wonder what more Kallis could have done? A man that is, in RSA at least, considered the greatest SA cricketer ever. That is a pretty hefty tree to be on top off.

Not been such a bore with bat and/or ball.

 

[sledger]

Anderson
Flintoff
Pietersen
Cook
Lara

 

[TheJediBrah]

i think that says more about the lack of great wicketkeeper batsman than anything else.

strange assumption to make. You're saying that you think it's just a coinidence that there haven't been any similarly great wicketkeeper batsmen in 150 years of Test cricket?

if the greatest ever left arm wrist spinner played throughout the 00s would we be having the same conversation?

horrific analogy. Because every team needs a left-arm wrist spinner? wow

being the greatest at his craft does not make him a better of more valuable cricketer than others by default.

That's clearly debatable, but I'll give you credit for this sentence being the only one of your post that has a shred of merit.

 

[harsh.ag]

McGrath was more valuable to Australia than Gilly and so was Ponting. Warne maybe, maybe not. So, anyone saying Gilly has to be there, should at the very least be including McGrath and Ponting as well.

 

[srbhkshk]

So, anyone saying Gilly has to be there, should at the very least be including McGrath and Ponting as well.

Don't give them ideas.