Kallis epitomises value of genuine all-rounder

SC, that "perfect technique" that you mention is not really Kallis's. During the 2000/01 tour of India to SA, Kallis changed his technique where during backlift he straightened his bat in line with middle stump, bringing the bat down from behind his ear rather than third man, the walk across the stumps and even the exaggerated flick through backward square leg where the right hand finished over the left (which didn't go where it was intended to go) The reason for the change was Kallis spending hours in the field watching Sachin Tendulkar bat in Bloemfontein when he made 155 not out. Kallis had clearly changed his technique to basically copy Tendulkars. It was embarrassing to watch really because he still lacked the natural elegance of Tendulkar. However, by him modelling his batting style on Tendulkar's. it helped him score many runs. Tendulkar had used the trigger movement to walk across the stumps to counter the away swing in SA. This had become a sort of trademark for Kallis in the following years. Kallis is another product of the Sachin Tendulkar wannabe school. People compare him to Sachin but that's a joke really because Kallis never dominated the 90's bowlers like the great Aussie team including Warne & McGrath, nor did he dominate the Pakistan, West Indian or even the English attacks. Remember also that he has not played against SA. He only became consistent when the top guys retired. Like the 5 hundreds he got against the Windies with the most rubbish bowling attack in their history. Kallis has a better average than most players because he bats for that cause. As for him being a sportsman, here's a guy who has modelled his game on Sachin Tendulkars yet he doesn't clap for the great man when he reached his 50th ton. Jacques Kallis is a disgrace. Takes credit for a technique that is not his. Green with jealousy whenever Tendulkars name is mentioned etc. Tendulkar as a bowler has more variety than Kallis and could have been a great leg spinner if he tried. He just didn't feel that he needed to bowl. Maybe because he didn't have to bowl to get his name in the record books. As far as greatest allrounder is concerned, I rate Shane Warne higher than Kallis as an allrounder. He wasn't the best with the bat (Kallis is not great with the ball) but Warne changed the game of cricket with his bowling. Kallis didn't with either discipline. Hell I even rate Tendulkar as a better allrounder. So judging by this, if what everyone says about Sobers is true, then there is daylight between Sobers and Kallis. Kallis is nothing more than a Tendulkar wannabe. I am South African PS. Please have a look at Kallis's technique before the Indian tour and after.

I love these forums, but most are full of Sachin lovers that refuse to see the arguments. I am writing this just a week after Steve Waugh called Kallis the best ever with no competition coming close. With regards to Sobers I never saw him play, so cant compare the two(kallis/Sobers) from that perspective. I will come straight out and say that I believe Kallis is the greatest cricketer ever. I read all the arguments and some refer to natural talents and that Sobers was in cruise mode and those are all BS. I am South African so there might be some bias, but I think the facts back up my beliefs. Talent only gets you so far and if he was in cruise mode then I wouldn't want him on my team and he should be labeled not a team player. Either way to suggest that he didn't always try his best is ridiculous cause everyone tries to score as many runs or take as many wickets as possible every time out. As far as natural talent look a Gibbs or Simmons(aus), possibly the most talented and physically gifted players ever, but they are nowhere near best ever. Either one of those players were able to single handedly win a game.,, but you cant judge greatness on talent. The key is sustained brilliance and role you play within your team. People say Kallis scores to slow or doesn't have the flare or the stroke play of other batters, but I would argue that his role within his team and his perfect technique make him appear this way. We have all seen his inside out sixes over long off and in recent times he has upped his strike. Before he was the team and now we are better with more contributors. Every time Kallis plays the odds and the stats say that he will score more runs than Lara, Pointing or Tendulkar and as many as Sobers did, and that he will take more catches at a higher success rate than any of them and that he will take more wickets at a better strike rate than any of them. We are currently ranked #1 in test cricket which suggests we have a pretty decent team. Taking that in to consideration, if Kallis were to retire now there will never be a bigger hole left in a team than the one he would leave. And this in a team that is ranked #1. Kallis #1 name on the team sheet for any team in any country for the last 10 years. In my opinion based on pure production.

In a true cricket lovers book Jaques Kallis will always be the world's best cricketer at least of the modern era !!! If South Africa was not left in isolation then perhaps the West Indians would not have been able to dominate. Returning to Kallis... He can never be replaced. He has place on any team of the world and in any format. Batting-bowling-catching in the slips... He is the best all-round cricketer to have ever graced a cricket park and I am certainly of a privileged generation to have witnessed the genius.... Period!!!

There is no Doubt, Kallis is a legend and by Far the Best All Rounder in the Game by Far, No disrespect to the Runners up, Sobers comes 2nd in the order by some distance in comparison to Kallis, the reords, stats and accolades don't lie, What's the problem, Is it because he is not Englih or an Aussie that his achievements are underated, Get a reality check, he dominates and dictates the Game, Bat, Ball and on the field almost single handedly influence the outcome of the game

There's no debate, Kallis has proved that he is the best ever all rounder in the game by far, he has the ability to dictate the play with Bat, Ball and fieliding and tops the averages in all disciplines of the game, comparing with others like Sobers and Co Highlights this point even more, I'm sure even Sobers will Agree,

Very interesting forum, ive followed cricket over the last 25 years and played the game at a fair level, even got to play against a few international guys in my youth, Though i could never hold my own in such company! I would say , growing up in south africa , that i found myself surprised by how underestimated kallis used to be . Think people would prefer uncompromising players like jonty rhodes , hudson etc , guys who won or got out trying. Impression was that kallis played for averages. And for much of his early years , this was probably not without foundation. However , he has really blossomed into arguably the worlds finest cricketer over the past 15 years, getting better with age , and i wouldnt like to consider what his retirement will do to my national team . His statistics stand up against anyone frankly. But for sheer natural god given talent , sobers was a bit special ... Even kallis falls short . The question of who the greatest all rounder ever is , is further complicated by whether you look at it over a career span or over a particular period. There was a five year period for example when khan averaged mid 50s and low 20s with the ball , and its hard to imagine anyone else matching this ... But i guess this is like contrasting pele vs maradonna.. In the end, it raises more questions, rather than answers .

So you are going to blame all South Africans young and old for that? SA is a country not even a hundred years old and we got a democratic elected government without a civil war. Do we go around blaming you for oppressing and slaughtering of the natives of Australia? Please keep politics out of sport. Every country had its bad patch. Difference is they had it in a time where there was no real media tv or radio. As for Kallis he is the best all rounder in my time. Can't really say anything about Sobers caused I never saw him play. Stats don't really mean much unless you take the bowling attacks he faced in his time. Can anyone tell me the great bowlers he faced in his time? I know most of them were on his side.

Check the stats especially the strike rates of wickets taken - Kallis leads by 3 to 1!!!!! So who is inaccurate and does not know the meaning of STRIKE bowler? And it is amazing that he can still bowl as fast as 145kph. So add the batting and the fact that he is by far the better bowler and the sum of the parts is that he is better than Sobers as an all rounder. And you seem to easily discount the fact that for years Kallis carried the SA side - often the batting just crumbled around him and he alone stood firm. Compare that to the line up Sobers had to support him. Plus you do not seem to know that the SA wickets are probably the hardest to bat on compared to all other major cricket playing nations. I don't know much about Ziggy but I know enough to see that he has valid arguments and not the same old reactions from people who probaly never even saw Sobers play. Choose between the two to bat AND bowl for my life - no contest - Kallis every time.

Sam, I haven't discounted the stats at all. You applied an interpretation to them that is not correct. Simple as that. I agree that if you simply judge players by the numbers then Kallis is more impressive than Miller. On the other hand, talk to Richie Benaud, who played with Miller (and understands that context) and has seen a lot of Kallis, and you'll find Miller will rate much higher than I suspect you imagine. Much higher. It's one thing to play for years and just accumulate massive numbers but that doesn't make the player actually better than another - he just has bigger numbers. Bradman only played 52 Tests. Are you saying Kallis is better because he's played 150plus? I'm guessing no! The same applies to run aggregates etc. If you're playing to win it's not how, it's how many. If you're judging quality, however, it is more a question of how. That's what I'm saying. In the modern game statistics have grown a leg to become virtually the be all and end all of any consideration regarding ability, talent, skill, call it what you will. That saying I mentioned in another response - "There's lies, damn lies and statistics" - is not just something someone said for no reason. Beware of statistics as the sole criteria in judging merit. You also have to understand the circumstances - all of them. Otherwise we can all happily say Kallis is a superior player to Tendulkar based on their averages. Or do you judge Tests played, run aggregates, number of centuries etc.? As for the hypothetical you mentioned you do have a point of sorts. Of course, those who really appreciate Miller do so on the basis of how he performed when he was up for it. Cricket was a game to Miller, it's a way of life to Kallis. Huge difference and Miller would have hated it but, again, that may come back to the time in which he lived (WWII). Had Miller been around today his attitude may have been different. Of course, if he was around today nobody would be talking about Shane Watson, that's for sure!

Well, Imran was a special case. Bolwing all rounder he may be,but for the last ten years of his career he also averaged 50 with the bat

Truly remarkable player the classic all rounder who can do it all, including a great pair of hands at slip. His averages speak for themselves, especially batting, his bowling of constant out swingers on a length is also very handy and makes him one the best ever. Unfortunately I feel Kallis is the last of a dying breed the all rounder, now as the article points out most players are either one or the other in terms of bowler or batter and then specialised training loses one skill somewhat. Then whatever all rounder does exist usually only plays in T20 / IPL plus most the all rounders nowadays cannot score the masses of runs Kallis has, hell most of Australia's top order can't to be fair. On a final note, his wife is super hot and I have had even more respect since witnessing this, well played Kallis, well played.

you might want to say legion (D) short of a D. ;)

Kallis is a 'ledge' (short for legend). A thorn in the side of every team that opposes him. Many have come and gone during his time.

Yeah, I am sorry, but I cannot agree with your reasoning. Dravid and Kallis have records equal to the best that ever played the game, because they didn't hug the limelight with their down to earth and calm personalities they don't get the attention richly deserved over long careers. But as I said earlier, the value of Kallis is richly entrenched in the minds of South African pundits and supporters, the rest...well it is just subjective opinions.

Brilliant Sheek It is the one thing that people always forget about Dolly. He would have been in his prime in the fifties. What the world saw, was a player towards the end of his career. True great.

Kallis always came across as "very good" to me. And still does. Not "Great". Somewhat similar to Dravid. Very good cricketers who through sheer grit and determination fulfilled their potential to the utmost. For some reason I find it difficult to conceive of them as "Great" (their great stats notwithstanding)

Rusty, To be fair, nobody doubts the numbers, it's the context that raises questions. This is why some, like me, play down Kallis in comparison, say, to Sobers. If, however, every player was judged purely on the numbers then Kallis rates very highly indeed. In any case he rates very highly just because of those numbers. Sobers, for example, rates highly not just because of his great stats but the manner in which he created them. Sobers could take great bowlers apart whereas Kallis tends to accumulate. Mind you, he accumulates pretty darn well. PS I'll happily quote Kallis in any discussion about Tendulkar (who I rate extremely highly, by the way) not necessarily because I think he's better but for the fun it brings. By the way, in that comparison, I'm not necessarily saying Kallis is less of a player than Tendulkar. As you say, follow the numbers and Jacques is in front (182no didn't hurt). Numbers by themselves, however, are only part of the story. In truth, if the Fairy Godmother turned up tomorrow and said, "You can play 52 Tests and average 99 or play 153 Tests and average 57 - with 43 hundreds" I'd probably take Kallis numbers over the Don. One, because it means I'd play more Tests and make more hundreds and two, I wouldn't have to be a recluse for the rest of my life.

Kallis is an all-rounder and as a batsmen started averaging 50 around the age of 28 which is when batsmen mature. I would think in terms of all round worth to a team he is at least as valuable as the other guys.

With due regard to Kallis the reason all these articles are popping up are because his rise and sustained form coincide with the fading away of Ponting, Tendulkar and the retirement of Lara. As late as 12 Dec 2003 Kallis averaged sub 50 (touching 50 for a fleeting while a few months earlier) He is in top form, rarely injured and enjoying the relatively better pitches of the 2000s. Even SA and Aussie pitches aren’t what they used to be in the ‘90s. His strike rate too was abysmal then. It has improved thanks to ODIs and T20s. Tendulkar in the ‘90s and Lara in the 2000s were in poor teams –but they were natural stroke makers. Even in his recent innings of 182, Amla was going at a better clip with his 311. So, the recency bias is at work here. In terms of pure batsmen Tendulkar/Lara at the top for me, Ponting a level lower, and Kallis a shade lower still.