Jacque Kallis announces retirement

zing said:
the way I look at it is, any time someone who isn't a South African mentions Kallis as an awesome player is how I know they've never seen cricket.

You can see loads of people like that here in India, who are for some reason bitter about Sachin's achievements and try downplaying it, often in comparison with players like Kallis.

Kallis is/was a very good player and I genuinely disliked him as an opposing fan because he never looks like getting out, but I've never run to switch on the TV when he was batting or bowling.

Statistically up there, of course, there is no question of that.
Click to expand...

the way I look at it is, anytime someone tries to downplay Kallis's achievements, I know they understand nothing about Cricket and form their opinions on bias and jealousy/hate rather than objectivity.

Oh and btw, my all time favourite player Dravid, no opposition fan will ever run to switch ON TV to watch him. Doesn't make him one bit a lesser cricketer and less revered in India, although belatedly. All this nonsense which people talk of Kallis only statistically up there, need to understand simple fact that, that kind of stats is not a joke and only someone who is among the very best can reach it.
 
I ask how can a player with such amazing stats be overlooked by the masses? I've never thought, 'feck! They've got Kallis! Hide!'. When Viv, Lara, Tendulkar et al came out to bat, you'd stay glued to the screen thinking they'll make a mockery of the opposition's bowling. When Imran had a ball in his hand he looked and performed like a lion heart, Ian Botham was brilliantly unpredictable...The list goes on. This man has never captured the imagination. Are the majority jealous of him? I'm sure people have feared other SA players far more - Donald, Styn, Amla to mention a few. When I was a kid my dad would talk about Sobers, I suspect most cricket lovers won't be passing on Kallis' legend to the next generation.
 
Spoony said:
I ask how can a player with such amazing stats be overlooked by the masses? I've never thought, 'feck! They've got Kallis! Hide!'. When Viv, Lara, Tendulkar et al came out to bat, you'd stay glued to the screen thinking they'll make a mockery of the opposition's bowling. When Imran had a ball in his hand he looked and performed like a lion heart, Ian Botham was brilliantly unpredictable...The list goes on. This man has never captured the imagination. Are the majority jealous of him? I'm sure people have feared other SA players far more - Donald, Styn, Amla to mention a few. When I was a kid my dad would talk about Sobers, I suspect most cricket lovers won't be passing on Kallis' legend to the next generation.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my thoughts on Kallis. Although he's a statistical great I'd not pay to go and watch him play.
 
Spoony said:
I ask how can a player with such amazing stats be overlooked by the masses? I've never thought, 'feck! They've got Kallis! Hide!'. When Viv, Lara, Tendulkar et al came out to bat, you'd stay glued to the screen thinking they'll make a mockery of the opposition's bowling. When Imran had a ball in his hand he looked and performed like a lion heart, Ian Botham was brilliantly unpredictable...The list goes on. This man has never captured the imagination. Are the majority jealous of him? I'm sure people have feared other SA players far more - Donald, Styn, Amla to mention a few. When I was a kid my dad would talk about Sobers, I suspect most cricket lovers won't be passing on Kallis' legend to the next generation.
Click to expand...


I think it's basically because of Kallis. He was always understated, he'd score a 100 and take 3 wickets but he'd do it with no fuss, no bravado and no fanfare. He didn't have the weight of expectation of a billion people behind him and he didn't start when he was 16, he never had the personality of Viv or Lara and I feel like he often held back with his bowling, which perhaps explains his longevity.

A lot has been said about Kallis' 'bubble' in recent days and I think thats right, the man just went onto autopilot taking economical wickets and scoring runs.

I dare say that whilst opposition fans might have feared the onslaught you would get from Steyn or admire Amla's more flamboyant style more if you ask Smith who the best player he's captained has been, or ask any of the countless players he's faced who South Africa's key player was over an 18 year period I think the answer would be fairly unanimous.

Yes, Kallis wins few points for style (although, his technique is pretty much excellent), but Cricket is never about style. He may not have caused the buzz that inferior cricketers like Pietersen do when they go out to bat, but he unquestionably is one of the greatest players ever to play the game. I suspect the amount of time that passes will only increase his legend
 
I don't think it's just a case of style, some players are gritty and not particularly great to watch but they draw you in. It's tough to explain it really is...
 
Spoony said:
I don't think it's just a case of style, some players are gritty and not particularly great to watch but they draw you in. It's tough to explain it really is...
Click to expand...


Agreed, but my basic point is that watchability is a poor metric to judge a player by. It's inherently a subjective (personal preference) that is being attempted to be used to describe an objective (Kallis' ability as a cricketer).
 
Kallis might not have been the greatest on eye, everyone knows that, but that doesn't stop him from being great. A player being great or not depends on his achievements, his value to the team and his importance to opposition. On all these factors Kallis was pretty much on top. It is big insult to Kallis to say that all he has is stats. Those stats don't come in just like that. IMO, Kallis, for long time, didn't have players like ABdV and Amla for support. Sure there were Kirstens but there were Dippenaars and Mckenzies as well and South Africa's batting was never this strong. In simpler terms, it was expected that he should do role similar to Dravid+Sachin. Sure there wasn't pressure on him as is on Sachin of a nation, but on field, expectations from him were equal to task which Dravid and Sachin did. Then he was supposed to take wickets as well and bowl economically too. Here, his average and record is similar to Zaheer Khan, India's premier fast bowler. (Don't tell me that it is because Zak is Indian bowler he averages 32+, his records in Australia and South Africa are bang average).

All said and done, it is team dressing room and opposition who know true value of a player for his team and we all know where Kallis stands on that parameter. Legend and one of the greatest ever no doubt.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Agreed, but my basic point is that watchability is a poor metric to judge a player by. It's inherently a subjective (personal preference) that is being attempted to be used to describe an objective (Kallis' ability as a cricketer).
Click to expand...


Yeah I will concede that our apathy(?) for him as a player isn't based on logic. He's clearly underrated despite having a great career.
 
Spoony said:
Yeah I will concede that our apathy(?) for him as a player isn't based on logic. He's clearly underrated despite having a great career.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I think thats the point that I'm trying to make. You may not necessarily have enjoyed watching Kallis play but dismissing him as a 'statistical great' as some have done is just downright unfair to him. It suggests that he is fortunate, perhaps, that he has a record comparable to Tendulkar with the bat alone and dismisses all the work he put in to operate at this level for this long.

He has as good a case as any for being the best cricketer that any of us have seen in the flesh, and I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with saying that. Nor do I really think there's anything wrong with saying you didn't really enjoy watching him play.

I think when we get to players like Viv, Lara, Tendulkar and Kallis so little divides them that the discussion tends to get emotional.

I have to admit myself to waking up at 4 in the morning and watching Tendulkar bat one last time, would I have done so for Kallis? I doubt it. I think it is clear who the bigger entertainer was, and maybe thats enough to shade it for some.
 
I think because of his understated nature Kallis has almost gone under the radar throughout his career.

But just by his record and the value he gives a team you have to put him down as one of the greats. I mean he's not the most exciting character or cricketer but I bet every single test side of the last 20 years would've loved to have him in their side.
 
Spoony said:
I ask how can a player with such amazing stats be overlooked by the masses? I've never thought, 'feck! They've got Kallis! Hide!'. When Viv, Lara, Tendulkar et al came out to bat, you'd stay glued to the screen thinking they'll make a mockery of the opposition's bowling. When Imran had a ball in his hand he looked and performed like a lion heart, Ian Botham was brilliantly unpredictable...The list goes on. This man has never captured the imagination. Are the majority jealous of him? I'm sure people have feared other SA players far more - Donald, Styn, Amla to mention a few. When I was a kid my dad would talk about Sobers, I suspect most cricket lovers won't be passing on Kallis' legend to the next generation.
Click to expand...
He's obviously one of the best players of his generation but I'd prefer the likes of Lara, tendulkar, wRne etc in my side and would fear them far more if they played for the opposition. Those are players that IMO inspired, and took control of games.
 
When England toured South Africa in 2004/5 they never looked like getting Kallis out, apparently they just focused on trying to get him run out.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
He's obviously one of the best players of his generation but I'd prefer the likes of Lara, tendulkar, wRne etc in my side and would fear them far more if they played for the opposition. Those are players that IMO inspired, and took control of games.
Click to expand...

Yea.
 
NM said:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/706081.html
Click to expand...

Records of Kallis rests his case. Desperate attempts by people to disregard him as allrounder are not going to make much damage to that. I can give similar stats to prove how Kallis has contributed more as a test batsman than Sachin, Dravid, Lara and Ponting. I wonder how many will be willing to even consider it?
He was more of a batsman obviously but he didn't need to be spearhead of bowling to prove he is an allrounder. Why would he when he is surrounded by other fast bowlers? Most of the bowling all rounders listed in that article were spearheads of their bowling attack and typically batted at 7th. If Kallis is not a test allrounder, none of those others are. By that logic, all those, Imran Khan and Hadlee and Botham etc should have proved their worth in batting by batting at top order and scoring centuries at those position to prove that they can handle the tougher part of bowling and hence can be regarded as allrounder.
Sounds silly? All the stats of Kallis having less workload in bowling than spearhead bowler and hence can't be regarded in same category is equally silly.

It is bit cringeworthy of Cricket fans, mostly subcontinental, that how desperately they are trying to find reasons to discredit one of the greatest players of last 2 decades and one of the best test allrounder ever.
 
The Man Himself said:
Records of Kallis rests his case. Desperate attempts by people to disregard him as allrounder are not going to make much damage to that. I can give similar stats to prove how Kallis has contributed more as a test batsman than Sachin, Dravid, Lara and Ponting. I wonder how many will be willing to even consider it?
He was more of a batsman obviously but he didn't need to be spearhead of bowling to prove he is an allrounder. Why would he when he is surrounded by other fast bowlers? Most of the bowling all rounders listed in that article were spearheads of their bowling attack and typically batted at 7th. If Kallis is not a test allrounder, none of those others are. By that logic, all those, Imran Khan and Hadlee and Botham etc should have proved their worth in batting by batting at top order and scoring centuries at those position to prove that they can handle the tougher part of bowling and hence can be regarded as allrounder.
Sounds silly? All the stats of Kallis having less workload in bowling than spearhead bowler and hence can't be regarded in same category is equally silly.

It is bit cringeworthy of Cricket fans, mostly subcontinental, that how desperately they are trying to find reasons to discredit one of the greatest players of last 2 decades and one of the best test allrounder ever.
Click to expand...

You seem to be labouring under the delusion that the rest of us have feck all to do and our life ambition is to champion Sachin's cause. If there's a better player than Sachin, so be it. It doesn't affect my life or anyone else here. No one here gives a shit.

This isn't the place to grind your axe.

If someone wants to bring up numbers similar to that article to show that Sachin is a wank player, I'll read it and compliment it.
 
zing said:
You seem to be labouring under the delusion that the rest of us have feck all to do and our life ambition is to champion Sachin's cause. If there's a better player than Sachin, so be it. It doesn't affect my life or anyone else here. No one here gives a shit.

This isn't the place to grind your axe.

If someone wants to bring up numbers similar to that article to show that Sachin is a wank player, I'll read it and compliment it.
Click to expand...

Where is the question of discrediting Sachin? Are you fecking dumb? I myself don't consider him better than Sachin and not better than Dravid as well for that matter. I consider all of them great players who all will seat among the very bests, forever. Each had their own specialities and people as per their personal preference will like different players. That is obvious. What is not fair is discrediting other player's achievement because he is some kind of competiton to your favourite in terms of greatness.

And feck off with your 'this isn't the place to grind your axe' bullshit. Is this RAWK version of Indian cricket fan thread for me to agree with you on all topics?
 
The Man Himself said:
Records of Kallis rests his case. Desperate attempts by people to disregard him as allrounder are not going to make much damage to that. I can give similar stats to prove how Kallis has contributed more as a test batsman than Sachin, Dravid, Lara and Ponting. I wonder how many will be willing to even consider it?
He was more of a batsman obviously but he didn't need to be spearhead of bowling to prove he is an allrounder. Why would he when he is surrounded by other fast bowlers? Most of the bowling all rounders listed in that article were spearheads of their bowling attack and typically batted at 7th. If Kallis is not a test allrounder, none of those others are. By that logic, all those, Imran Khan and Hadlee and Botham etc should have proved their worth in batting by batting at top order and scoring centuries at those position to prove that they can handle the tougher part of bowling and hence can be regarded as allrounder.
Sounds silly? All the stats of Kallis having less workload in bowling than spearhead bowler and hence can't be regarded in same category is equally silly.

It is bit cringeworthy of Cricket fans, mostly subcontinental, that how desperately they are trying to find reasons to discredit one of the greatest players of last 2 decades and one of the best test allrounder ever.
Click to expand...


I simply posted an article. People are going to have different views. You are looking for reasons to get upset. Cool off, or go argue with the author. I can't be bothered.
 
NM said:
I simply posted an article. People are going to have different views. You are looking for reasons to get upset. Cool off, or go argue with the author. I can't be bothered.
Click to expand...

:lol: So where did I blame you? I didn't know that purpose of posting a link is for everyone to either conform with it or avoid discussing it. I was naive to think that in a discussion forum you are supposed to discuss.
 
The Man Himself said:
Where is the question of discrediting Sachin? Are you fecking dumb? I myself don't consider him better than Sachin and not better than Dravid as well for that matter. I consider all of them great players who all will seat among the very bests, forever. Each had their own specialities and people as per their personal preference will like different players. That is obvious. What is not fair is discrediting other player's achievement because he is some kind of competiton to your favourite in terms of greatness.

And feck off with your 'this isn't the place to grind your axe' bullshit. Is this RAWK version of Indian cricket fan thread for me to agree with you on all topics?
Click to expand...

I just told you that no one here gives a shit about that.
 
I do think Kallis is a bit underrated here but many people using stats blindly to push Kallis' case is mindless. I don't remember people rating Border more than Gavaskar just because he went past him for the most runs scored.
 
zing said:
I just told you that no one here gives a shit about that.
Click to expand...
No one? Speak for yourself. Just because you are delusional and biased beyond belief doesn't mean everyone is.Also, you and majority not giving shit about one of the greatest player of generation is not going to stop me from voicing my opinion.Upto you to respond or ignore.
 
The Man Himself said:
No one? Speak for yourself. Just because you are delusional and biased beyond belief doesn't mean everyone is.Also, you and majority not giving shit about one of the greatest player of generation is not going to stop me from voicing my opinion.Upto you to respond or ignore.
Click to expand...
...
 
This is a bizarre thread, the article is interesting but its unfair to Kallis to compare him to some of the best bowlers of his generation he's not that. Would you say Matthew Hoggard is not a bowler, no that would be ridiculous. I imagine in England's 4 man attack he had a similar amount of bowling, he often seemed to be only a new ball bowler.

I just don't think you can say Kallis with nearly 300 test wickets is not an allrounder, its astonishing.
 
Fiskey said:
This is a bizarre thread, the article is interesting but its unfair to Kallis to compare him to some of the best bowlers of his generation he's not that. Would you say Matthew Hoggard is not a bowler, no that would be ridiculous. I imagine in England's 4 man attack he had a similar amount of bowling, he often seemed to be only a new ball bowler.

I just don't think you can say Kallis with nearly 300 test wickets is not an allrounder, its astonishing.
Click to expand...

i think the point being made in the article was he shouldn't be compared to the likes of Imran, Botham and Sobers. I certainly agree that he isn't as good as Sobers and Imran were... The other stuff is up for debate.
 
NM said:
i think the point being made in the article was he shouldn't be compared to the likes of Imran, Botham and Sobers. I certainly agree that he isn't as good as Sobers and Imran were... The other stuff is up for debate.
Click to expand...


Why shouldn't he be compared? He was a better batsman than all of them?
 
Fiskey said:
This is a bizarre thread, the article is interesting but its unfair to Kallis to compare him to some of the best bowlers of his generation he's not that. Would you say Matthew Hoggard is not a bowler, no that would be ridiculous. I imagine in England's 4 man attack he had a similar amount of bowling, he often seemed to be only a new ball bowler.

I just don't think you can say Kallis with nearly 300 test wickets is not an allrounder, its astonishing.
Click to expand...
Hoggard got through plenty of overs with an old ball. Whenever a right handed batsmen looked set against us Vaughan would have him bowl a lengthy spell outside off stump.

On topic - There's a fair few South African cricket fans who won't miss Kallis. I can't think of another player I've heard accused of 'playing for himself' as frequently as him.
 
Fiskey said:
Why shouldn't he be compared? He was a better batsman than all of them?
Click to expand...

Fiskey said:
Other than Sobers.
Click to expand...


I would argue that Khan averaged 50+ for over 10 years while averaging under 20 with the ball at the same time. That alone makes him better thank Kallis IMO.

Khan was also a much better bowler than Kallis ever was.

That's why I have him in the next group with the likes of Dev and Hadlee.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Hoggard got through plenty of overs with an old ball. Whenever a right handed batsmen looked set against us Vaughan would have him bowl a lengthy spell outside off stump.

On topic - There's a fair few South African cricket fans who won't miss Kallis. I can't think of another player I've heard accused of 'playing for himself' as frequently as him.
Click to expand...


Well he was certainly playing for himself in his final test.
 
They're all great players, but the article is arguing that its wrong to consider Kallis an allrounder, that's what I arguing against.
 
NM said:
I would argue that Khan averaged 50+ for over 10 years while averaging under 20 with the ball at the same time. That alone makes him better thank Kallis IMO.

Khan was also a much better bowler than Kallis ever was.

That's why I have him in the next group with the likes of Dev and Hadlee.
Click to expand...


That period of time sounds like perhaps comparable with Bradman to how good a cricketer can play, I haven't seen much of it unfortunately.
 
If we are to compare limited time averages, Kallis does average around 70 during some period. Means nothing. I would put Sobers as the best and Imran and Kallis thereafter on all time great allrounder list, with Imran slightly ahead. It is joke to even put Kapil Dev the fixing bastard in same list as Kallis for comparison of all time greats.
 
Fiskey said:
They're all great players, but the article is arguing that its wrong to consider Kallis an allrounder, that's what I arguing against.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that bottom line. It's silly to say he's not an all rounder but the bowling figures have been sized up by the sheer number of matches he played. I did not know for instance that Kallis bowled 10 overs an innings on average and averages 1.75 wickets in a test match.

His bowling average is good but it looks like he didn't bowl a lot.

I was under the impression he bowled a lot more than that.

Looked up Flintoff's numbers for comparison and he's bowled 50% more.

He's bowled 5k balls less than Kallis in half the number of matches Kallis played.
 
The Man Himself said:
If we are to compare limited time averages, Kallis does average around 70 during some period. Means nothing. I would put Sobers as the best and Imran and Kallis thereafter on all time great allrounder list, with Imran slightly ahead. It is joke to even put Kapil Dev the fixing bastard in same list as Kallis for comparison of all time greats.
Click to expand...


You ignored half the stat. That stat certainly doesn't "mean nothing". You are more biased towards Kallis than the rest of us are against him.. And then have gone off on people who disagreed with you.

See Zing's post - it sums up why a lot of people will not see him as a great bowler.
 
NM said:
You ignored half the stat. That stat certainly doesn't "mean nothing". You are more biased towards Kallis than the rest of us are against him.. And then have gone off on people who disagreed with you.

See Zing's post - it sums up why a lot of people will not see him as a great bowler.
Click to expand...

See, everybody has their favourite players. I don't have problem with people not liking Kallis, why would I? My issue is with people not recognising how good he was and giving not enough 'objective' reasons for supporting their side. I have friends who say, "hate Kallis, but he was a legend without doubt." Nothing to argue there but discrediting him is similar to what some were doing to Sachin after he retired.

He didn't bowl that much and there are multiple reasons for it
1) When you have likes of pollock/Donald/Ntini first and Steyn/Morkel later, he wasn't 'needed' to bowl long overs. He was fitter and bit faster version of Watson. Someone you can't relax against as a 'change' bowler and had enough accuracy to keep nicking important and timely wickets. It would be interesting if someone can bring stat of how many 'batsmen wickets' (1-7) were among those 292.
2) He had bit of trouble with lower back injury which meant team had to handle him carefully as a bowler. He had to remodel his bowling action to avoid stress and related injuries. SA couldn't afford to lose him if he got injured in bowling.
Considering this, 292 wickets are lot and at a decent average. I don't think it matters how many matches he played for those wickets, as long as the average is good. Show me another bowler who being a support bowler got so much wickets. How many matches he played doesn't matter, strike rate of 69 is still a decent one for a change bowler.

I don't know how one can use stat of not having bowled much against him. All those who bowled more per innings than him, 1) surely had more chance of taking wickets as well? 2) didn't spend as much time batting as much as him. Why no stats are being given how many balls he batted which these other 'great' allrounders haven't?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.