PDA

View Full Version : Kallis vs Sachin


BrianLara7
December 12, 2012, 01:46 PM
Well Kallis is unarguably the better cricketer by some distance (bowling no comparison, clearly better fielder as well) but let's compare their batting. This is about test cricket and Bangladesh/ Zimbabwe stats not included (sorry Sachin)

(146 matches) Kallis avg- 54.47 with 40 hundreds.
(177 matches) Sachin avg- 51.69 with 43 hundreds.

Am I committing blasphemy against Bhagwan by suggesting that Kallis might just be as good (if not better) batsman as Sachin?

zsayeed
December 12, 2012, 01:53 PM
Hands down Kallis - super all rounder.
And no blasphemy exists - after Sobers Era - he is the greatest.
And batting - your stats speak for themselves.
Kallis Kallis and Kallis.

And the Bhagwan bit - that is the stupid mentality that ails India.

Bhagwan hoibo 100 bochor porey - not while you are on the pitch. Doing it the other way is blasphemy!

BANFAN
December 12, 2012, 01:56 PM
If you consider contribution wise, i.e when the team needed him the most....Kallis will stand out.

Navo
December 12, 2012, 02:45 PM
If it's against Australia, I'd pick neither and go with Laxman :p

BrianLara7
December 12, 2012, 03:00 PM
If you consider contribution wise, i.e when the team needed him the most....Kallis will stand out.

It's funny how Kallis never gets the due he deserves but when you see the actual stats Kallis has played major roles in winning only test series wins in both Australia and India while Tendulkar has never been able to win a test series in Australia or South Africa even at their weakest. Cricket is a team sport, not individual gloryhunting. To me Laxman/ Dravid is a better test player because they have actually performed when it mattered and got India their few overseas wins.

Dilscoop
December 12, 2012, 04:23 PM
Sachin, Chokedulkar then, Chokedulkar now.

All Kallis needs is a WC title.

MyRoom
December 12, 2012, 05:20 PM
Obviously Kallis. Sachin is too overrated about 1/5 of his 100s came against teams like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Namibia etc. Kallis is a batting all-rounder not a genuine all-rounder like Saqibul Hasan.

BrianLara7
December 12, 2012, 05:46 PM
Obviously Kallis. Sachin is too overrated about 1/5 of his 100s came against teams like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Namibia etc. Kallis is a batting all-rounder not a genuine all-rounder like Saqibul Hasan.

Let's not get carried away, Kallis has cemented his place alongside Sobers as the greatest all rounder ever. You don't get almost 300 test wickets (more in the future) without being an all rounder, he has had some brilliant bowling performances (help win matches in India and Australia) but due to sharing the team with likes of Morkel/ Steyn, Donald and Pollock he hasn't been needed to bowl many overs. I hope Shakib can learn from him and get even close to Kallis at the end of his career.

Navo
December 12, 2012, 06:01 PM
^ Brianlara7, the question is, would Kallis have gotten into the South African team on his bowling alone? Looking back on 15+ years of international cricket, where he has bowled admirably as 4th or 5th change, his wicket tally looks impressive - but he's also bowled in 260 innings to get them. So he's been good, very good on occasion, and most importantly, he has had a long shelf life. But the point being made is whether a player would be able to make it into his team as either a bowler or as a batsman and I'm not sure if Kallis would always make it into the team purely as a bowler, given the stiff competition in South Africa. His skills are clearly not even balanced, especially considering his gargantuan batting average. However, obviously it's his overwhelming presence as a batsman and the total package he brings as a player, that makes him invaluable.

MyRoom
December 12, 2012, 06:23 PM
@Brianlara7: That line you highlighted was a serious statement from me. Kallis has 'almost' 300 not quite test wickets because he has played a staggering more than 150 TEST MATCHES and he has only three five wicket hauls whereas Shakib in just 28 test matches has already nine five wicket hauls so you see my point? there are far too many batting and bowling all-rounders and Shakib is neither a batting nor bowling specialist but a genuine proper good all-rounder who gives it his all for the team. You even answered my point for me that because South Africa has the bowlers, there's really no need for them to use Kallis which is why I've said Kallis is more of a specialist batsman than an all-rounder. Though his bowling is okay, there's still a huge difference between his bowling and batting and batting is his main strength. Shakib equally focuses on both batting and bowling he even admitted it in on one of the Cricinfo articles a long while back otherwise he would've concentrated more on his batting.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/559307.html

al Furqaan
December 12, 2012, 06:28 PM
^ Brianlara7, the question is, would Kallis have gotten into the South African team on his bowling alone? Looking back on 15+ years of international cricket, where he has bowled admirably as 4th or 5th change, his wicket tally looks impressive - but he's also bowled in 260 innings to get them. So he's been good, very good on occasion, and most importantly, he has had a long shelf life. But the point being made is whether a player would be able to make it into his team as either a bowler or as a batsman and I'm not sure if Kallis would always make it into the team purely as a bowler, given the stiff competition in South Africa. His skills are clearly not even balanced, especially considering his gargantuan batting average. However, obviously it's his overwhelming presence as a batsman and the total package he brings as a player, that makes him invaluable.

Thats a bit unfair because Kallis would walk into Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, WI, and maybe a couple other teams on his bowling alone. Gotta look at his strike rate, which isn't all that bad at under 70.

Kallis' overall averages indicate he's the better batsman even though he is likely to take a dip if he plays for another couple years. But I doubt any major player has choked as much as Tendulkar so that almost guarantees Kallis is the bigger better batsman.

Zeeshan
December 12, 2012, 07:50 PM
Class over KFC

Sachin

al Furqaan
December 12, 2012, 08:42 PM
Class over KFC

Sachin

Even with all his choking?

NoName
December 12, 2012, 09:30 PM
Can bat and can bowl, obviously I'd go with Kallis.

BrianLara7
December 12, 2012, 10:03 PM
^ Brianlara7, the question is, would Kallis have gotten into the South African team on his bowling alone? Looking back on 15+ years of international cricket, where he has bowled admirably as 4th or 5th change, his wicket tally looks impressive - but he's also bowled in 260 innings to get them. So he's been good, very good on occasion, and most importantly, he has had a long shelf life. But the point being made is whether a player would be able to make it into his team as either a bowler or as a batsman and I'm not sure if Kallis would always make it into the team purely as a bowler, given the stiff competition in South Africa. His skills are clearly not even balanced, especially considering his gargantuan batting average. However, obviously it's his overwhelming presence as a batsman and the total package he brings as a player, that makes him invaluable.

It seems like Kallis' massive average (highest of modern era) has created the perception of him just being a batsman who can bowl a bit. But then again Sobers was clearly a better batsman than bowler, all allrounders have their specialty and Kallis is clearly a batting allrounder. He can still hold his own as a bowler specially when you have so called top bowlers around the world who average same as him (Zaheer, Gul etc)

BrianLara7
December 12, 2012, 10:11 PM
Thats a bit unfair because Kallis would walk into Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, WI, and maybe a couple other teams on his bowling alone. Gotta look at his strike rate, which isn't all that bad at under 70.

Kallis' overall averages indicate he's the better batsman even though he is likely to take a dip if he plays for another couple years. But I doubt any major player has choked as much as Tendulkar so that almost guarantees Kallis is the bigger better batsman.

Some commentator (maybe Ganguly) said Kallis is Sachin plus zaheer. He averages higher than sachin and equal to Zaheer as bowler.. lol.

BengaliPagol
December 13, 2012, 02:56 AM
Id say more on the lines of

Dravid + Zaheer = Kallis

Jadukor
December 13, 2012, 03:26 AM
If the all-round aspect of Kallis can be ignored, from a purely batting point of view I would rate Sachin above Kallis. Sachin is a genius when it comes to batting and he is equally good in both long and short forms of the game. There is not a single shot he can't play... all kinds or sweep shots, hooks, pulls, uppercuts.. he nails every shot to perfection. These days his ability has deteriorated significantly but when he was at his prime against Wasim, Ambrose, Donald, Mcgrath, Warne and co. he had the ability to dominate attacks and dictate terms and look really good while doing it. To me a better debate would be between Lara and Tendulkar.

Kallis is a very capable and effective batsman and so is Cook. They will both be legends in their own right. Their stats might even be better than both Lara and Sachin but it's not the same when I watch Lara, Sachin bat and when I watch Kallis or Cook bat.

This is just from my own perspective but Tendulkar has been declared the best by the renowned cricketers as well:

Ricky Ponting:
'Punter' Ponting has rated Sachin Tendulkar the best batsmen of his generation, placing Tendulkar higher on the pecking order than the likes of Brian Lara, Matthew Hayden and the Waugh twins. Ponting freely admitted the diminutive batting maestro from Bombay had the ability to win any match off his own bat." I've always thought he's the best batsman I've seen or played against," said Ponting. "Looking at the way he's played of late I think he's getting somewhere back to his best again. As we've seen in the past, he's actually won games against us single-handedly on occasions."

Australian first-class cricketers:
India's Sachin Tendulkar and Australia's Glenn McGrath have been rated the best in the business in a survey of Australia's 145 first class players. Sixty eight percent of those questioned said Tendulkar was the world's best batsman ahead of Australian captain Steve Waugh (27 percent) and West Indian Brian Lara (three percent).

Steve Waugh:
"You take Don Bradman away and he (Sachin) is next up, I reckon."

Marlon Samuels:
"Sachin is the best batsman in the world. The way he lifts the team and the way he bats. Watching him play helps me in my batting."

Andy Flower:
"There's Sachin on one hand, and then there are the rest of us."

Glenn McGrath:
"For me, it's Tendulkar. Both are class acts (lara vs Tendul) but I am saying this because I have had more success against Lara than I have against Tendulkar. I think I have a fair idea of what Lara likes and doesn't like and I feel I can make his life at the crease very uncomfortable. He is vulnerable outside the off-stump early on and is not as tight as Tendulkar in defense. I would go for Tendulkar as the best in the world."


Only guy that has that kind of aura of genius about him right now is K. Pietersen

Navo
December 13, 2012, 04:06 AM
I think its necessary to distinguish between Sachin's Test career and ODI career at this point. I feel that many of the sparkling comments made about him are directed towards his ODI batting, when, for a long time he was India's greatest match winner. And you can see why - more than 18,000 runs and 49 centuries in a career that has covered over 20 years and all of that at a very impressive SR of 86+. That is longevity and brilliance. You can see why people, when he was at his best, considered him the best in the business in ODIs. (These stats are despite his failing form over the last few years)

Jadukor
December 13, 2012, 04:31 AM
I think its necessary to distinguish between Sachin's Test career and ODI career at this point. I feel that many of the sparkling comments made about him are directed towards his ODI batting, when, for a long time he was India's greatest match winner. And you can see why - more than 18,000 runs and 49 centuries in a career that has covered over 20 years and all of that at a very impressive SR of 86+. That is longevity and brilliance. You can see why people, when he was at his best, considered him the best in the business in ODIs. (These stats are despite his failing form over the last few years)

The problem is the thread opener has framed the opening question in such a way that he leaves very little opportunity for any meaningful debate. He basically wants the answer that he wants to hear which is Kallis is a better pick than Sachin.

It's like if I came up with a thread called Shakib vs Kallis and wrote "only consider home series vs. NZ in ODI" to make Shakib's case stronger.


I simply looked at both from an overall batting point of view regardless of any particular format to make the discussion less one sided.

Gowza
December 13, 2012, 07:04 AM
i think kallis is a no brainer because of his bowling. plus kallis onsong looks so in control and so awesome to watch he makes batting look so easy when in good form. i think if you were to make an all time test XI both have a strong case on batting alone which is why i think kallis is the easy pick if you have to pick one or the other, kallis just offers more.

Maysun
December 13, 2012, 10:45 AM
I wouldn't vote on this poll just because they are two different players. One is an AR and the other is a genuine batsman who is not bad with the ball either.

But, if I was put a gun to my forehead, I'd go with Sachin.

BrianLara7
December 13, 2012, 11:34 AM
The problem is the thread opener has framed the opening question in such a way that he leaves very little opportunity for any meaningful debate. He basically wants the answer that he wants to hear which is Kallis is a better pick than Sachin.

It's like if I came up with a thread called Shakib vs Kallis and wrote "only consider home series vs. NZ in ODI" to make Shakib's case stronger.


I simply looked at both from an overall batting point of view regardless of any particular format to make the discussion less one sided.

lol, so discluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh from tests means I am biased? Well ofcourse I am, it's my fault that Sachin averages lot less than Kallis when these two "test" teams are taken out.

Navo
December 13, 2012, 01:35 PM
^ No, that's not his point. Do you want to have a debate/discussion or do you just want to make a statement/point? You seem very set on your belief that Kallis is better, so if you're opting for the latter then don't open a thread and instead send the BC Editorial Team an article explicating and analyzing why Kallis is so much better than Sachin. If it's good, it could get published.

Ultimately, people have varying parameters for greatness and it just so happens, more people feel that Sachin satisfies that than Kallis. Don't begrudge them that just because of Test stats.

BrianLara7
December 13, 2012, 05:05 PM
^ No, that's not his point. Do you want to have a debate/discussion or do you just want to make a statement/point? You seem very set on your belief that Kallis is better, so if you're opting for the latter then don't open a thread and instead send the BC Editorial Team an article explicating and analyzing why Kallis is so much better than Sachin. If it's good, it could get published.

Ultimately, people have varying parameters for greatness and it just so happens, more people feel that Sachin satisfies that than Kallis. Don't begrudge them that just because of Test stats.

I don't know why you have to so passionately defend him.. you are acting as if people on this forum are all biased fools and that's why they are picking Kallis. More people feel Sachin is better because main cricket websites and channels are all owned by Indians.. you will not find anyone hyping Kallis to be greater than Sachin regardless of the facts.

al Furqaan
December 13, 2012, 06:05 PM
If the all-round aspect of Kallis can be ignored, from a purely batting point of view I would rate Sachin above Kallis. Sachin is a genius when it comes to batting and he is equally good in both long and short forms of the game. There is not a single shot he can't play... all kinds or sweep shots, hooks, pulls, uppercuts.. he nails every shot to perfection. These days his ability has deteriorated significantly but when he was at his prime against Wasim, Ambrose, Donald, Mcgrath, Warne and co. he had the ability to dominate attacks and dictate terms and look really good while doing it. To me a better debate would be between Lara and Tendulkar.

Kallis is a very capable and effective batsman and so is Cook. They will both be legends in their own right. Their stats might even be better than both Lara and Sachin but it's not the same when I watch Lara, Sachin bat and when I watch Kallis or Cook bat.

This is just from my own perspective but Tendulkar has been declared the best by the renowned cricketers as well:

Ricky Ponting:
'Punter' Ponting has rated Sachin Tendulkar the best batsmen of his generation, placing Tendulkar higher on the pecking order than the likes of Brian Lara, Matthew Hayden and the Waugh twins. Ponting freely admitted the diminutive batting maestro from Bombay had the ability to win any match off his own bat." I've always thought he's the best batsman I've seen or played against," said Ponting. "Looking at the way he's played of late I think he's getting somewhere back to his best again. As we've seen in the past, he's actually won games against us single-handedly on occasions."

Australian first-class cricketers:
India's Sachin Tendulkar and Australia's Glenn McGrath have been rated the best in the business in a survey of Australia's 145 first class players. Sixty eight percent of those questioned said Tendulkar was the world's best batsman ahead of Australian captain Steve Waugh (27 percent) and West Indian Brian Lara (three percent).

Steve Waugh:
"You take Don Bradman away and he (Sachin) is next up, I reckon."

Marlon Samuels:
"Sachin is the best batsman in the world. The way he lifts the team and the way he bats. Watching him play helps me in my batting."

Andy Flower:
"There's Sachin on one hand, and then there are the rest of us."

Glenn McGrath:
"For me, it's Tendulkar. Both are class acts (lara vs Tendul) but I am saying this because I have had more success against Lara than I have against Tendulkar. I think I have a fair idea of what Lara likes and doesn't like and I feel I can make his life at the crease very uncomfortable. He is vulnerable outside the off-stump early on and is not as tight as Tendulkar in defense. I would go for Tendulkar as the best in the world."


Only guy that has that kind of aura of genius about him right now is K. Pietersen

To be honest, out of all those player testimonials the only one that is "academic" is McGrath's. He gives actual reasons for his pick. Everyone else is picking based on sentiment, some of them aren't even true like Ponting saying that Tendulkar can win a match against anyone where the evidence points that he has choked against almost everyone. He's scored a boat load of runs and looked prettier than Alessandro Ambrosio while doing it, but often the context of losing the match or being a dead innings performance are overlooked by the media that BL bhai is talking about. Think of India's greatest win (Kolkata 2001) or when India needed him to fire most WC Finals 03 and 07 and then realize that Tendy didn't even play a role in any of those, just to name a few.

I haven't analyzed Kallis or Lara, but I would be super shocked to see if they were as irrelevant to their teams success as SRT has been.

MyRoom
December 13, 2012, 06:42 PM
Well one thing both of them share is a nice personality.

Jadukor
December 14, 2012, 12:35 AM
lol, so discluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh from tests means I am biased? Well ofcourse I am, it's my fault that Sachin averages lot less than Kallis when these two "test" teams are taken out.

Nope that's not the point. All i said was if you want to have a debate then frame the question in a way so that there is room for a debate. If you wanted to have a debate then why not simply ask who is the better Batsman Kallis or Tendulkar?
You didn't do that because you want to hear a particular answer. If we had the opportunity to pick a great all rounder vs a great batsman obviously we would pick a great all rounder because of his usefulness with the ball. Secondly confining it to test match only suggests you aren't sure whether you would be able to defend Kallis the ODI or T-20 batsman against Sachin in the shorter form. So as i said before you didn't have a genuine intention to have an honest debate in the first place and you are as biased as you accuse me of being.

Jadukor
December 14, 2012, 12:55 AM
To be honest, out of all those player testimonials the only one that is "academic" is McGrath's. He gives actual reasons for his pick. Everyone else is picking based on sentiment, some of them aren't even true like Ponting saying that Tendulkar can win a match against anyone where the evidence points that he has choked against almost everyone. He's scored a boat load of runs and looked prettier than Alessandro Ambrosio while doing it, but often the context of losing the match or being a dead innings performance are overlooked by the media that BL bhai is talking about. Think of India's greatest win (Kolkata 2001) or when India needed him to fire most WC Finals 03 and 07 and then realize that Tendy didn't even play a role in any of those, just to name a few.

I haven't analyzed Kallis or Lara, but I would be super shocked to see if they were as irrelevant to their teams success as SRT has been.
Whether you or I agree with what they are saying is irrelevant. Most of those players are great players and have had long international careers to know and understand what they are saying. Sentimental or not their opinion matters more than our opinion because they have played the game at the highest level with Tendulkar and it is safe to assume that they understand the game better than fans as well. Perhaps they are not as good in customizing stats-guru searches but I trust what they have to say about the game more regardless.

al Furqaan
December 14, 2012, 05:12 AM
Whether you or I agree with what they are saying is irrelevant. Most of those players are great players and have had long international careers to know and understand what they are saying. Sentimental or not their opinion matters more than our opinion because they have played the game at the highest level with Tendulkar and it is safe to assume that they understand the game better than fans as well. Perhaps they are not as good in customizing stats-guru searches but I trust what they have to say about the game more regardless.

Thats a fallacious (?) line of argument. Einstein was a brilliant physicist and therefore everything he said about physics must be true. Cricketers, it may be argued, may be even more prone to media hype than fans. These cricketers are just as aware as we are of Tendulkar's status and there is every reason to believe that can confound perception. Obviously these players were asked about SRT specifically and neither do they represent all the great players who ever faced him and nor would they say anything but flattering things. Murali is quoted as saying he had far more trouble with Lara. Another great bowler - can't remember his name might have been Shaun Pollock - actually mentioned a unheralded lower order batsman as being the toughest guy to bowl to over the likes of Lara, SRT, and others.

Cricketers also get a better look than fans at his superior technique, range of stroke play, and aestheticism and that also plays a part. In almost every junction of a major match situation, SRT has choked. Everyone remembers that valiant innings against Pakistan when his teamates all fell and that epic 4th innings chase against England in 2008 because those were so rare.

zsayeed
December 14, 2012, 10:53 AM
Kallis won the match for SA 23/158 times, and Tendulkar 14/194 times. For series, 9 and 5 respectively.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=awards_ match;player_involve=1934;player_involve=2232;temp late=results;type=allround;view=awards

BANFAN
December 14, 2012, 11:05 AM
A Fan can say the truth in Public, a player generally can't say the unpleasant truth....and you can take the risk of saying anything to Lara, but saying bad about the god...? Impossible...you invite punishment not only for you, even may be for your board or fellow players.......:)

mufi_02
December 14, 2012, 11:14 AM
Sir Brian Charles Lara ----- the legend of the legends. I would be glued to the television when he used to bat.

On topic - Sachin is a better batsmen. Almost a perfect batsmen when you bring in all textbook stuff. Kallis is the better overall and more useful player. But the comparison doesn't go as one is a genuine batsmen while other the greatest current AR.

Lara and Sachin would be better comparison.

zsayeed
December 14, 2012, 11:20 AM
Lara - 12/134 ; Tendu - 14/194 Match winning MoMs.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=awards_ match;player_involve=1934;player_involve=1982;play er_involve=2232;template=results;type=allround;vie w=awards

Navo
December 14, 2012, 01:49 PM
I don't know why you have to so passionately defend him.. you are acting as if people on this forum are all biased fools and that's why they are picking Kallis. More people feel Sachin is better because main cricket websites and channels are all owned by Indians.. you will not find anyone hyping Kallis to be greater than Sachin regardless of the facts.

And I am uncertain why you (and some others) are so passionately trying to demean his achievements or trying to play up some sort of Indian conspiracy.

Would you say that the UK's Telegraph was also an 'Indian agent'? Let's look at what they had to say about Tendulkar:

Sachin Tendulkar's five greatest innings
Sachin Tendulkar has become the most prolific run-scorer in the history of Test cricket. Here are five highlights from the Little Master's Test career.

1) 119 not out, England v India, Old Trafford, 1990.
In England, this series will always be remembered for Graham Gooch's 333 in the first Test at Lord's. But that was not the only remarkable batting feat of the summer. For a 17-year-old playing in alien conditions, and under the most intense pressure, Tendulkar's century at Old Trafford was arguably even more impressive than Gooch's achievement. India were struggling to avoid defeat on the final day at 127 for five, but Tendulkar batted for four hours with the tail to guide his side to safety. It was his first Test century, and confirmed the arrival of a special talent.

2) 114, Australia v India, Perth, 1992.
Back in the days before Perth became just another batting track, Australia's quick men would start salivating as soon as their plane crossed into Western Australia. In 1992, the WACA was as its most lethal, but Tendulkar's innings of 114 brought Craig McDermott and Merv Hughes to their knees. With wickets tumbling at the other end, Tendulkar, still only 19, met the challenge head on. The Australian public have loved him ever since.

3) 169, South Africa v India, Cape Town, 1997.
Another epic counter-attack in hostile conditions. South Africa racked up 529 in the first innings before their stellar seam attack reduced the tourists to 58 for five. Tendulkar, then approaching his peak, wasted no time in taking the fight back to the Proteas. In partnership with Mohammad Azharuddin, Tendulkar hit 26 boundaries in his century, almost all of them absolute crackers.

4) 155 not out, India v Australia, Chennai, 1998
Many of Tendulkar's finest innings were played outside of India, or in a losing cause. But his greatest series came at home, against the world's best team, and ended in a glorious victory. With Shane Warne bowling around the wicket and into the rough, Tendulkar used his eye, his feet and his innovative stroke play to destroy the greatest slow bowler in history. Warne would later admit Tendulkar's fireworks left him clueless and the Australian named Tendulkar as No 1 in his list of 50 greatest cricketers.

5) 136 v India v Pakistan, Chennai 1999.
India were set an unlikely 271 for victory, which seemed impossible when they collapsed to 82 for five. Chronically hampered by a back injury, Tendulkar stood firm and refused to accept defeat. Through dogged will and astonishing skill, he coaxed India close to the winning line before falling to Saqlain Mushtaq. Tendulkar's wicket prompted an Indian collapse, and another superhuman effort ultimately ended in defeat.

Source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/india/3210194/Sachin-Tendulkars-five-greatest-innings-Cricket.html)

This, mind you, is just in Tests. The moniker 'Choke-dulkar' hardly seems appropriate now does it? That brings me back to the point that I was making that at his best - which he is far from now - there was good reason why everyone thought he was the best in the world.

BrianLara7
December 14, 2012, 03:15 PM
lol, seems like we also got some bhagwan bhakts over here too. Saying Sachin is better than Kallis in tests is one thing (however wrong it is) but trying to "prove" Sachin is not Chokedulkar is just LOL. Even Indians fans (knowledgeable) ones don't rate him as a match winner ahead of Dravid/ Laxman.

al Furqaan
December 14, 2012, 05:37 PM
Navo its not about the telegraph being an Indian agent. Its about something being repeated so that everyone believes it...the telegraph really does believe that Tendy is some demi-god.

5 innings (and you could probably add another 10 or 15 more) are hardly amazing in a career spanning 300+ innings. I'm sure batsman like Laxman and Ponting, perhaps even Dravid could easily match that. But they don't get the attention because they didn't start when they were 16, don't have the eye-catching stroke play, and don't have the cult status.

BrianLara7
December 14, 2012, 06:32 PM
Navo its not about the telegraph being an Indian agent. Its about something being repeated so that everyone believes it...the telegraph really does believe that Tendy is some demi-god.

5 innings (and you could probably add another 10 or 15 more) are hardly amazing in a career spanning 300+ innings. I'm sure batsman like Laxman and Ponting, perhaps even Dravid could easily match that. But they don't get the attention because they didn't start when they were 16, don't have the eye-catching stroke play, and don't have the cult status.

Tendulkar's cult following and the fact that he is a money machine (for websites, newspapers, bcci, news channels etc) doesn't hurt either. Every single Indian commentator (and plenty foreign ones) rarely utter a single word against him while they would jump on the failures of Ponting/ Kallis and trumphet Tendulkar.

Navo
December 14, 2012, 06:53 PM
lol, seems like we also got some bhagwan bhakts over here too. Saying Sachin is better than Kallis in tests is one thing (however wrong it is) but trying to "prove" Sachin is not Chokedulkar is just LOL. Even Indians fans (knowledgeable) ones don't rate him as a match winner ahead of Dravid/ Laxman.

To both Al_furqaan and BrianLara7, I felt compelled to comment as I felt people were being unduly harsh in their criticism. I never said that he was necessarily better in a tough spot that Laxman or Dravid. (Coincidentally my first post in this thread indicated that I would choose Laxman over both Kallis and Tendulkar if the match was against Australia.)

I, in fact, made no comparison with anyone. I merely stated that there is substantial evidence indicating that Tendulkar, at his best, was not a choker. (Whether he should continue to play now that he is past his best is another matter entirely.) The evidence that I have provided above is just from Tests and as we all know his impact on ODIs for India in the '90s and the early 2000s is even greater - which altogether influences other players' impressions of him. (Who was the first to get to 200 again?) There's a reason why other international players rate him so highly, even more than his colleagues Laxman, Dravid, Ganguly & co. and its not just his bushel of runs and attractive stroke play. The Telegraph is also certainly not a paper that tends to praise players easily or effusively (as we have come to discover through Scyld Berry's articles) We have to consider all of this when reflecting on a player's achievements and failures - not just cold stats.

And BrianLara7, since when is "Indian (knowledgeable) fan opinion" considered concrete, non-refutable evidence? If we go by their opinion that he isn't a match winner, then surely we also must also abide by the popular opinion in many parts that Jacques Kallis is a 'selfish' batsman who merely seeks to inflate his stats and 'never really dominated the game' (Ian Chappell)? I think these allegations are preposterous.

I think both are great batsmen and would try my best to fit them both in my All Time XI. I also actually agree with your assessment that overall, he'd be considered a better cricketer than Tendulkar - but that still doesn't diminish Tendulkar's accomplishments as a batsman or the fact that he has bailed out India in the past, in all forms of the game.

al Furqaan
December 14, 2012, 07:35 PM
I have never doubted his ODI stature. Id rate him as the best after Viv and given the quality of bowlers he faced probably equal to the Vivster

BrianLara7
December 14, 2012, 08:07 PM
I have never doubted his ODI stature. Id rate him as the best after Viv and given the quality of bowlers he faced probably equal to the Vivster

Epic failures in World cup finals 2003, 2011. He is a monstrous run scorer (in both formats), but a great match winner he is not.

Gowza
December 14, 2012, 08:16 PM
depends if you're picking on talent and enjoyment of watching or purely on result. if you're going for result then obviously the man with the greater ouput is the better pick, the one who has got his team out of the most jams in those tough situations. i think kallis gets a bit overlooked because people see him more of a slower batsman but if you watch him play you'll see he's got some of the best cover drives you'll have ever seen and is so in control of them it's ridiculous, almost like he's batting against school boys. also depends if it's a one-off match or a series or a team touring for a year...maybe you'd take tendulkar in a one-off match, for a tour or longer maybe kallis...

Gowza
December 14, 2012, 08:32 PM
just looked up statsguru and in matches won kallis has a 64.98 average and tendulkar has a 64.43 so really not much difference when the team wins.

zsayeed
December 14, 2012, 10:02 PM
just looked up statsguru and in matches won kallis has a 64.98 average and tendulkar has a 64.43 so really not much difference when the team wins.

Yes, but that set contains only 66 matches out of 194 matches played by tendulkar and 76 out of 134 for kallis. kallis has contributed more to his team's wins.

Jadukor
December 14, 2012, 10:30 PM
Yes, but that set contains only 66 matches out of 194 matches played by tendulkar and 76 out of 134 for kallis. kallis has contributed more to his team's wins.
this is a very old argument actually... remember Tendulkar and Ganguly carried a pretty crappy team on their shoulders for a decade. Fifties from Tendulkar were not enough..he basically needed to seal the game off himself. There were many matches where both of them took matches close only to see the rest of the batting collapse under pressure which is a bit like what happens to Shakib these days. He fought many lone battles which went in vain because the team couldn't back up the performance. Kallis on the other hand never had to carry the team. He had good players surrounding him both with the bat and ball throughout his career.

zsayeed
December 14, 2012, 10:37 PM
this is a very old argument actually... remember Tendulkar and Ganguly carried a pretty crappy team on their shoulders for a decade. Fifties from Tendulkar were not enough..he basically needed to seal the game off himself. There were many matches where both of them took matches close only to see the rest of the batting collapse under pressure which is a bit like what happens to Shakib these days. He fought many lone battles which went in vain because the team couldn't back up the performance. Kallis on the other hand never had to carry the team. He had good players surrounding him both with the bat and ball throughout his career.

Kallis won the match for SA 23/158 times, and Tendulkar 14/194 times. For series, 9 and 5 respectively.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=awards_ match;player_involve=1934;player_involve=2232;temp late=results;type=allround;view=awards

your logic may explain the number of MoMs as well perhaps. MoMs probably go to winning team 90% of the time. Perhaps. but no it doesn't explain.

but upon a rethink, of kallis's team's 76 wins Kaliis was MoM 23 times, while tendulkar 14/66. therefore, it does not explain.
thats 30% for kallis vs 20% for tendulkar.

Kallis was kicking b..tt for his team's wins.

al Furqaan
December 15, 2012, 01:28 AM
Epic failures in World cup finals 2003, 2011. He is a monstrous run scorer (in both formats), but a great match winner he is not.

2 WC finals failures is not enough to indict on its own. And I don't have the time to sift through 500 ODIs to figure out if he's a choker who scores barge-loads of irrelevant runs or not.

That said when I did do some research - arbitrary as all studies are - a while back and when I'm done with the Lara and Kallis portions, I'll post the findings. It might actually support Tendulkar's case.

Jadukor
December 15, 2012, 02:31 AM
your logic may explain the number of MoMs as well perhaps. MoMs probably go to winning team 90% of the time. Perhaps. but no it doesn't explain.

but upon a rethink, of kallis's team's 76 wins Kaliis was MoM 23 times, while tendulkar 14/66. therefore, it does not explain.
thats 30% for kallis vs 20% for tendulkar.

Kallis was kicking b..tt for his team's wins.

Well Kallis is a great bowler as well so being an all rounder he has a much better chance of getting mom compared to someone solely depending on runs and not wickets.

World Champs
December 16, 2012, 02:10 AM
your logic may explain the number of MoMs as well perhaps. MoMs probably go to winning team 90% of the time. Perhaps. but no it doesn't explain.

but upon a rethink, of kallis's team's 76 wins Kaliis was MoM 23 times, while tendulkar 14/66. therefore, it does not explain.
thats 30% for kallis vs 20% for tendulkar.

Kallis was kicking b..tt for his team's wins.
Kallis had bowlers like steyn, donald and pollock in his team and won more. India on the other hand didn't had the bowlers of this caliber. Its a team game after all. I don't think Kallis would have won these games with an bowling attack comprising of agarkar, Prasad etc.

I agree with everyone on Kallis is a better overall cricketer, but when it comes to batting I would rate him just slighlty behind Sachin or Ponting or Lara. These guys has scored more against better bowling attacks. India used to be just like 1 man team in the 90's. Everyone knew that if you get Sachin out, India will/can fold out cheaply. But this was not the case with Kallis. So you can imagine the pressure that Sachin had carried every form of the game.

People can have their opinion but It doesn't look good when you try to bash one great player in order to prove that other is better.

Dilscoop
December 16, 2012, 01:42 PM
Kallis had bowlers like steyn, donald and pollock in his team and won more. India on the other hand didn't had the bowlers of this caliber. Its a team game after all. I don't think Kallis would have won these games with an bowling attack comprising of agarkar, Prasad etc.
In that case, Kallis didn't have David, Laxman etc saving his choking butt in every other test. Tendulkar had all the luxury in the world to bat with some of the most solid batsmen in the world.

I don't like it when people use player's teammates to lower their accomplishments. That's not valid in my book.

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 03:01 PM
Kallis had bowlers like steyn, donald and pollock in his team and won more. India on the other hand didn't had the bowlers of this caliber. Its a team game after all. I don't think Kallis would have won these games with an bowling attack comprising of agarkar, Prasad etc.

I agree with everyone on Kallis is a better overall cricketer, but when it comes to batting I would rate him just slighlty behind Sachin or Ponting or Lara. These guys has scored more against better bowling attacks. India used to be just like 1 man team in the 90's. Everyone knew that if you get Sachin out, India will/can fold out cheaply. But this was not the case with Kallis. So you can imagine the pressure that Sachin had carried every form of the game.

People can have their opinion but It doesn't look good when you try to bash one great player in order to prove that other is better.

Whereas it is difficult to boil down a player's lifetime into a few numbers - yet we do. Always. In doing so we take the ego out of the analysis altogether and we deal with numbers. The bias may be in how the study is set up - but no where else. Even we chose the same criteria for analysis - the criteria for analysis chosen may be biased.

Let me look at the analysis from a simple point of view. I am sure there will be some interpretation of the results based on the numbers. Here is my interpretation first, then my analysis later.

Conclusion:

Kallis is the epitome of consistency whether his team loses or not. And his performance never deviates on account of his team mates - neither does South Africa depend solely on his performance. He is a complete professional - perform no matter what.

Tendulakar, being given the god ranking - his failure = team's failure. His moniker has probably done more disservice to his team then service.

Here is why:

Let's take a look at the following for each player for Tests only:

a) Player's winning runs in winning cause
b) Team's winning runs in winning cause
c) Take the ratio of a and b.

Do the same for team's draw/loss/tie

So here is the input:
1. Kallis winning runs: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/45789.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=1;team=3;template=results;type=batting;view= match
2. SA's runs in the wins as a team: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=2232;result=1;size=100;team=3;templa te=results;type=team;view=match
3. Kallis' runs in team loss/draw/tie http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/45789.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=2;result=4;team=3;template=results;type=batt ing;view=match
4. SA's runs in loss/draw/tie: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=2232;result=2;result=3;result=4;size =200;team=3;template=results;type=team;view=match
5. Tendulkar's winning runs: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=1;template=results;type=batting;view=match
6. India's run in their wins: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=1934;result=1;size=200;team=6;templa te=results;type=team;view=match
7. Tendulkar's runs in a loss/draw/tie: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=2;result=4;template=results;type=batting;vie w=match
8. India's runs in draw/loss/tie: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=1934;result=2;result=3;result=4;size =200;team=6;template=results;type=team;view=match

Import into excel and calculate player's runs as a fraction of team runs for test match and the same for the matches lost/drawn/tied.

Here are the findings:
Kallis scored 6109 runs out of 39677 in their wins in 76 tests : 15%
Kallis scored 6788 runs out of 44604 in their non-wins in 81 tests: 15%!

Tendulkar scored 5670 runs out of 37685 in their wins in 66 tests: 15%!
Tendulkar scored 3110 runs out of 66249 in their non-wins in 127 tests: 5%!!!

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff430/zsayeed/kaltend.jpg

Now,
Does the above make Tendulkar God-like from the wins ratio. No, Kallis has the same ratio relative to the rest of the team's batting. Neither did Tendulkar, on the average, contribute a superhuman number of runs in the team's winning cause.

On the other hand, Kallis - being the professional - never wavered from his contribution of the 15% even when the going was tough. Whereas, Tendulkar failed in those events when his team did not win. That is the price of god-like reverence and god-like dependence.
God failed = Team failed.

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 03:28 PM
^ addendum to JK and ST's stats
Including Lara tests to the similar assessment.
http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff430/zsayeed/jkstbcl.jpg

ST's run % stands out in the non-wins.

Lara Input for Tests:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=1;team=4;template=results;type=allround;view =match
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=1982;result=1;size=100;team=4;templa te=results;type=team;view=match
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=2;result=4;team=4;template=results;type=allr ound;view=match
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;p layer_involve=1982;result=2;result=3;result=4;size =100;team=4;template=results;type=team;view=match

And yes, Lara taking a greater share of runs than Kallis. Marginally, but yes.

BrianLara7
December 16, 2012, 05:52 PM
Sir God with all his greatness failed to manage even one series win in Australia/ South Africa playing for so long... while devotee Kallis managed a win in Australia and India and actually played major role in the victories. India could have won first series in Australia if Sir god didnt choke for once and actually played a big innings when it mattered to win a match (Mcg 2nd innings 2011 while chasing target under 300)

BengaliPagol
December 16, 2012, 05:59 PM
Everyone knew that if you get Sachin out, India will/can fold out cheaply. But this was not the case with Kallis. So you can imagine the pressure that Sachin had carried every form of the game.

Replace the words 'Sachin' with 'Shakib' in the quote above and replace the word 'India' with 'Bangladesh'.

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 06:22 PM
Replace the words 'Sachin' with 'Shakib' in the quote above and replace the word 'India' with 'Bangladesh'.

Actually no. Shakib is a lot better than Tendulkar as far as serving the country is concerned. Since BD win in tests is not statistically significant, I resort to ODIs.

Here is the tragedy - Shakib has contributed more with the bat to the team's effort when the team has lost:

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff430/zsayeed/shakib.jpg

By his own stat, irrespective of the rest of the team, Shakib scores 33.7 on average in wins and 51.2 in BD's losses.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/56143.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=1;template=results;type=allround;view=match
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=runs;pl ayer_involve=48277;result=1;size=200;team=25;templ ate=results;type=team
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/56143.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=2;template=results;type=allround;view=match
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=runs;pl ayer_involve=48277;result=2;result=3;size=200;team =25;template=results;type=team

BengaliPagol
December 16, 2012, 06:27 PM
^this implies the fact that the only time BD win is when all the batsmen in the team perform. If Shakib is left to score all the runs then we can assume that we have lost the match. Consistency is our problem

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 06:30 PM
^this implies the fact that the only time BD win is when all the batsmen in the team perform. If Shakib is left to score all the runs then we can assume that we have lost the match. Consistency is our problem

I added a bit of addendum to my post on Shak's average for loss win. Adversity brings out the best in him. Please note the 33 (in win) vs 51 (in loss) average.

BengaliPagol
December 16, 2012, 06:36 PM
It unbelievable to think that there are 7 batsmen in the team to score runs and Shakib scores almost 1/4 of the teams total when the team loses. That means the other 6 batsmen score 3/4 of the teams runs in a losing cause. Pretty shocking actually. It shows that we lose matches due to the low contribution from other batsmen.

Also zsayeed bhai can you do one on Tamim if you dont mind? I just want to have a clear figure on how much we actually rely on him vs how he actually performs in wins/losses.

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 06:50 PM
^ Here you go.
http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff430/zsayeed/tamim.jpg
Tamim averages 38 when team wins and 25 when team loses.

Team with Tamim:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=runs;pl ayer_involve=48391;result=1;size=200;team=25;templ ate=results;type=team

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=runs;pl ayer_involve=48391;result=2;result=3;size=200;team =25;template=results;type=team

Tamim in wins:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/56194.html?class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=start;r esult=1;template=results;type=allround;view=match

BengaliPagol
December 16, 2012, 06:56 PM
I think Tamim and Shaks stats link up. The only time BD win is rest of the players (other than Shakib) perform. So when Tamim performs and other players perform we will most likely put up a good score. If everyone gets out then Shakib is left to score the runs therefore Shakib has an inflated average on a losing cause.

zsayeed
December 16, 2012, 07:00 PM
Yes, and the bottom line is Shakib's life with Bangladesh cricket is a tragedy. He plays extra hard when team is losing. Commendable but cause for a lot of heart ache on his part.