On the eve of the highly anticipated Australia versus South Africa Test series commencing this week, Australian coach Mickey Arthur took the opportunity to brand South African Jacques Kallis the best cricketer the world has ever witnessed after Sir Donald Bradman.
“Can you imagine putting Ricky Ponting and Brett Lee into the one player? That is the sort of thing you get with Jacques”, said Arthur on one of the most under-rated cricketers in the modern era.
The indefatigable all-rounder made his debut at the international level in the mid-nineties, and has gone from strength to strength in the most dignified manner, happy to let his performances do the talking.
Seventeen years, 155 Tests and 321 ODIs later, Kallis’ stats at age 37 are staggering – 12,641 Test runs at 56.94, along with 280 wickets at 32.63; to go with 11,498 ODI runs at 45.26 and 270 wickets at 31.69.
It’s worth pointing out that in the most challenging forms of cricket, his Test batting average is ahead of even Sachin Tendulkar (55.08), Brian Lara (52.88), Ricky Ponting (52.75) and Rahul Dravid (52.31).
Moreover, having played most of his cricket at home in conditions conducive to seam and swing bowling, he has scored most of his Tests runs batting at number four (8,525 runs at 64.58), which is an astounding achievement.
I’m not a fan of drawing comparisons between top players, but when you talk about modern day greats, Tendulkar’s name crops up more often that not.
Yes, Tendulkar’s genius and brilliance for over 20 years in the game has unmistakably cast a magical spell on the cricketing world, but if I had to pick a player to bat for my life, it would have to be Kallis (now that Dravid’s retired). He’s more of a match-winner, who values his wicket dearly compared to the Indian legend.
Kallis’ stats over the last 12 years are incredible. He’s scored the most centuries – 38, compared to Ponting’s 37 and Tendulkar’s 34 – but surprisingly, is constantly overshadowed by his illustrious peers.
To add spice to the Kallis versus Tendulkar debate (if there ever was one), one can argue that Tendulkar, who has played 36 more tests than the South African, has scored most of his runs on batting-friendly pitches in the sub-continent.
It’s worth pointing out that Kallis averages more than 58 in India, compared to Tendulkar’s 56.36 at home. Tendulkar has scored 33 of his 51 test centuries on the sub-continent, whereas Kallis has scored 22 of his 42 centuries on lively pitches in South Africa.
Additionally, as of 2011, Kallis’ second innings batting average was over 60, compared to Tendulkar’s second innings average of a measly 40 and Ponting’s robust 55.
But even the best players struggle in some parts of the world. Kallis has a moderate track record against England (42.7) and Australia (40), while Tendulkar has modest figures against South Africa (42.4) and Pakistan (42.2). Ponting struggles in India.
Another twist to this argument could be the bowlers these top batsmen never had to face.
Kallis didn’t have to take strike against the likes of Dale Steyn, Shaun Pollock or Allan Donald; Ponting never faced up to Brett Lee, Glenn McGrath or Shane Warne; and Tendulkar never had to deal with Anil Kumble, Srinath, Kapil Dev or Zaheer Khan.
The debate over who is the best can rage on, but in terms of how much value a player adds to a team, Kallis is the man. His all-round ability is simply unmatched, taking nothing away from the brilliance of Tendulkar and Ponting.
In what could be his last tour to Australia, it’s time that Kallis received some recognition for his achievements, because without a shadow of doubt, he is indeed a class above the rest.
rogers
Guest
Kallis is the best and most reliable criketer sa has had. most times he comes in at a time when he has to save the match. if he was playing with other good batsman and allowed to play his natural game, then the stats would definitely be different . give the guy credit for what he contributed.
Sammy
Guest
Good article.good views.you have mentioned that the avg of kallis against australia is 42 + . Australia had the best bowling line up in the world between 1995 and 2005. Kallis averaged only 42 against aussies. But tendulkars average is above sixty in australia and above 58 overall. "For everyone's kind information- cricket is not only test cricket,it has got one more form also-odi's. Take take the runs scored in odi's also and the pace with which it was scored. That is the reason why all the great cricketr's regard sachin as the best batsman the world has ever seen. You have mentioned about the grounds on which these runs are scored by the great players. For kallis South african conditions are home conditions. similarly for tendulkar ,indian conditions are home condition's. These are where the players have shaped there skills. So they will be good when it comes to these conditions. More than everything it is the number of hearts a player was able to move matters the most...why everyone is considered second when it comes to cricket. There was dravid's , gavaskar's etc who had better skills than tendulkar. But why tendulkar is regarded as the best. If you had known the answers for the above question, you would have written something like this. SACHIN IS REGARDED as the BEST "BATSMAN EVER". I do agree that KALLIS IS PROBABLY THE BEST "CRICKETER" EVER
Rav
Guest
I feel people should be more explicit in delineating Tests vs. ODIs. People always talk about Tendulkar vs. Lara - though I'm an Indian myself, I have to admit that this is a fair argument. However, that is only if ODIs are ignored, in which case Tendulkar is much better than Lara. If we look at ODI stats only, Tendulkar is far and away the best (batting order does have more of an effect on stats in ODIs, which is why overall stats will underrate batsmen who come in late - however, I still feel Tendulkar was dominant enough to earn his title), at least in the era where ODIs were commonplace. If ODIs were more frequent in Viv Richards's time he may have achieved more than Tendulkar. That said, I would say that Kallis's achievements on both sides of the ball (fielding is definitely less important/an area more difficult to differentiate players within in terms of game contribution) make him the second-best Test cricketer of all-time. Bradman, of course, is number one, having performed more than 50% (99 vs. high-50s batting average) better than his closest peers. With that level of dominance in play, Bradman was easily worth more than a good batsman + a good bowler.
thanduxolo mbhele
Guest
Come on people, stats don't lie...Kallis has a better batting average than Tendulkar, scoring more test runs doesn't automatically make you a better batsman, Sir Bradman didn't play enough test matches for him to enter the argument...for me its Kallis,tendulkar and then Ponting. Look at their batting averages please
Rana
Guest
It's 2013.At 1st kallis batting avg. is right n0w in test 56.1 and odi 45.27 and wicket number are in odi 270 and test 288.Sachin batting avg. is right n0w in test 53.87 and odi 44.83 and wicket in odi 154 and test 45.However kallis avg is n0w going d0wn as much as tendulkar.Tendulkar already leave up odi.Sachin made 51 test t0n 4m 198 test where kallis made 45 t0n 4m 162 yet 36 test or 53 ing. kallis can play 4 touching sachin's 6 t0n.N0w i am going to odi sachin made 49 odi t0n while kallis yet made 17 t0n.Yet kallis can play 145 odi to make 32 t0n.Which is quit imp0ssible also kallis age is n0w 37.But he can easily break 51 test t0n.If i c0nsider kallis w8 his wicket n0 d0ubt that kallis is better then sachin.
Steve
Guest
Sobers average vs AUS : 43.14. Overall: 57.78 surprising especially considering Kallis played Australia when they has guys like mcgrath, Gillespie, Brett Lee and Shane Warne.
Srikanthan
Guest
If you are looking at the most valuable player, no doubts about kalllis but as a batsman, he is a great but not iconic. You judge a batsman based on his perfomances against the best bowling. Overall averages mean nothing. That gets affected only a slightly based on performances against the best. If you see Kallis performances against the best attack till 2008 or so , it was OZ , his record was good not great and against the best English attack in England, his record was good not great.Remember Eng tour of 2008.He was all at sea against good swing at a good pace. Leave out Tendulkar's record of last one year, clearly ,he is hanging on inspite of age catching up. He and Lara were excellent against the best attack , OZ. Lara and Tendulkar are in a different class as batsmen. ILook at ODI s, Kallis , good but not a great batsman As a package who was the best, no doubts on that, it has to be Kallis. Was he better than Sobers, I don't think so. Sobers also averaged 58 with the bat and had more than 200 wickets in 91tests and was a brilliant fielder when fielding was not given importance and he had some great scores against the best attacks ( recall his innings against OZ 254 )
Norm
Guest
He is a fantastic player, he has a great personal record. Why not just leave it there? I can honestly say that each great player is different and I think that is the nature of the game. Obviously his success against teams has been consistant. Is that not what he was supposed to do? Does it really matter?
t.k.abdulla kunhi
Guest
While commentating during the fourth and final Test between India and Australia on Tuesday, Former India skipper Sourav Ganguly has said that South Africa's Jacques Kallis is the "most effective player" in Test cricket ahead of Indian greats Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid and Australia's Ricky Ponting. Kevin Peterson opined "Jacques Kallis is the greatest ever cricketer". When we discuss about Kallis both above mentioned opinions of two great cricketers may be considered.
k77sujith
Guest
Kallis has once again proved his value with two stubborn innings in the just-concluded Adelaide test to steer his team to safety, all this on one leg. Despite the century by Du Plessis to save the match for SA, Kallis played a huge role as well. Absolute legend. Pity, he might be forced to return due to the injury.
James
Guest
Kallis has always had to defend in a very brittle team for the most part. More often than not he was a virtual opener as SA were always 1 or 2 down for very little.He stood like a rock while batsmen came and went at an alarming rate. Then he had to be a really 1st class medium fast bowler and stand in the slips all day long. And he is a great slip fielder.Plus he had to face all the great bowlers unlike many others. Give credit where its due. Stop all this crap about scoring quickly, turning matches etc. He is without a shadow of a doubt the finest all round cricketer in the games history.His problem is that he is quiet and not flamboyant.The classic quiet achiever. He should be 1st pick as the all rounder in any greatest team in history etc.
ak
Guest
Hi k77sujith, Spicy Article !!! Kallis is a great player. No doubt about that. But that does not mean he is a better batsman than Sachin, Ponting, Lara or Hayden. When you compare Kallis the all-rounder with these guys then Kallis is for sure the better cricketer bcoz of his bowling. A batting all-rounder's stats do look much better when compared with those of a batsman. Same is the case when you compare a bowling all-rounder's stats with that of a bowler. Now Kallis being better than Sachin, Ponting, Lara or Hayden bcoz of his additional bowling work has been debated for long. But you never compare Kallis with say Glenn McGrath. Now will you say that Kallis is greater than McGrath? Here you can say that though Kallis has so many more runs then McGrath too has 280 more wickets in about 25 less Tests. Now will you also say that Shaun Pollock, also a great player was better than McGrath bcoz he scored runs in addition to the 420 odd wickets which he has taken? But compare Shaun Pollock with Sachin, Ponting, Lara or Hayden. Can you really now call Pollock to be better than these guys? You may also say that Hadlee or Imran Khan were way better than Malcolm Marshall bcoz of the runs he scored. So don't compare the records of a batsman with those of a batting all-rounder and those of a bowler with those of a bowling all-rounder. Also I would like to add that some years ago the dream team of the last century was picked by Wisden. Imran or Hadlee did not feature in that team. But Marshall was there. Thats bcozin a dream team the batting of these two greats was not needed. Similarly if you have to pick a dream team from amongst the modern greats Kallis will feature but for his batting and not bcoz of his all-round abilities for his bowling will not be needed in a team which may feature bowlers like Warne, McGrath, Muralitharan or any one else. And I am sure Pollock will not feature in that list at all even though as per your logic he might be a better player than McGrath. Before I finish, I want to say that all the players I mentioned here are great players. No malaise directed towards anyone. Pollock is a great player too.
Johnno
Guest
Neuen Astle sure could play as could Parore both very talented. Glen Turner too , danny morrison, and willie watson. ANd I will add Brendon Mcullum how could I forget what a talant he is, he has played some scorning innings in all forms of the game right up there with gilchrist in my opinion fo wicket keeper batsmen, one of NZ best batters ever. ANd Ken RUtherford another who i don't think reached his potential for one reason or another. Martin Crowe has some amazing stats, and he made big runs vs good teams including the west indies. Talant wise he is right up there with Lara,Tendulkar, Ponting, maybe even better than all 3 such a complete player martin crowe was whose career was also dogged by injuries. Crowe made a 100 vs Pakistan in that 1992 ODI semi at eden park. If he could of stayed on in the field as captain, i think they would of won that ODI semi final. As he could of set the field more, and this was the time before as much helpers could come on at every over and give advice as is now. Neuen some phenomenal stats you bring up on Chris Cairns, thank you I didn;t know those. He was one hell off a cricketer, talented in all parts of the sport. And Chris Cairns was never as fast as Brett Lee or others, but when fit and when young he could defiantly push the 145km Barrier for sure, very similar to say a Ryan Harris in pace, and Chris Cairns had a faster and and lots of variety. Reminds me a bit of Jason Gillespie , not as much pace but just as much if not more variety. Jason Gillespie was an awesome bowler who had everything , but had to change his action to survive in the game. But Jason gillespie in the 97 Ashes series in England bowled some awesome spells, at his young best, then had to cut his pace down a bit on a consistent basis to stay in the game and change his action. But Chris Cairns as well could bat, and your stat on him his amazing. He is the best clean hitter i have seen or defiantly in top 10 and there is nothing in that top 10 all just as good. Keiren Pollard is probably the biggest hitter I have ever seen come to think about it. But Chris cairns is right up there Neuen and i mean right up there.Got that talent passed down to him from his dad , and a bit like SImon O'donnell to a natural hitter. O'donnell was one heel of an ODI all rounder too.
jinesh
Guest
gr8 article and u hav opened the pandora's box as they wud say... kallis i feel is so under rated ..sachin,lara,punter,dravid were alwys listed above him...i felt he was under used as a bowler..i thnk injuries have also contributed to tis...i wud rate kallis as the best ever in the current scenario simply cos of the value he adds 2 the team..i thnk its unfair to compare statistics cos it does nt say anythn about the pitch,the bowling attack,the match situation..ther r so many thngs 2 thnk of.. cant beleive y ppl r ratin kallis low cos he's nt tat flamboyant..thnk its very harsh...he s a valuable player n i cant thnk of too many fast bowlin abttin all rounders..he s a gem...
Neuen
Guest
Those are and were some great players. Astle was another one who's stats did not do him justice. Parore use to be my one of my favorite players. Unfortunately NZ cricket were held back when they did a thing called bio mechanic. Hand speed power and efficiency hitting through the ball with power and heavy bats. Things like footwork was lost and the coached that for 10 years ion the clinics. Vincent was one who went through that as well as Bell, Papps, SInclair, Spearman and many others. Richardson missed it and how good did he turn out to be. They stopped teaching that around 2008 but it will take some time to get them back on the 92 era. You mention those semi finals. Lets not forget that they won the ICC championships where Cairns turned a hopeless situation into a win against Pakistan. Cairns was a late bloomer hence the stats do not do him justice but have a look at this. Cairns last 22 Tests fetched him 88 wickets at less than 27 a piece, at a strike rate of a wicket every 48 balls - that's nearly as good as Malcolm Marshall, and better than Richard Hadlee and Glenn McGrath. He missed 62 tests through injury! But Cairns have ended his carreer with a 6000 run 400 wickets double. How many have achieve that?
Johnno
Guest
Neuen great analysis. Glad other cricket fans have recognised that Chris Cairns was a really good player. Another one I will add, and he also is another one whose statistics may not do him justice but when he was on fire and in his prime man he could play. And yes another kiwis. Kiwis seem to produce so many all roudners it seems. And this Jacob Oram. He is not the best of all time but he can sure play, when at his best. He is when he puts the foot down very fast pushes the 140-145km mark, gets very good bounce, and has an outswinger. Also is a big strong man a very good hitter of the cricket ball , and big game player. The kwis if one looks at them as a coutnry as a whole and we have had this chat many times. They are a country that really punches above it's weight in many sports. They have made many ODI semi finals at world cup time eg like at 2011 world cup. But last 30 years have produced a lot of talented and world class cricketers. Here is well a few Richard Hadlee, Shane Bond, Martin Crowe, Ian Smith "smithy" lol , Chris Cairns, Jacob Oram, Chris Harris, Dan Vettori, Steve Fleming, John Wright, Mark Greatbatch, Nathan Astle, Gavin Larsen, Grant Elliot, Lou Vincent, and many more. A talanted sports country no doubt,
Neuen
Guest
I loved Chris Cairns. He stats did not really show the type of guy he was. He was the inspiration in that NZ side with a cool head on his shoulders and always brought out the best when NZ looked done and dusted. Him and Harris always started those from the rear comebacks. Shaun Pollock was another talented player who did not live up to his potential batting wise so to speak. But in cricket you start with both one will take a bit of a backseat. His batting did a bit. Kallis was quick when he was younger and the South Africans believe if your quick and and big your on the front line. He did a lot of bowling against the top order hence those wickets he took was mostly top order batsman. I do believe spinners have it sometimes a bit easier as they come in at times where the quicks have demolished the top order where they wrap up the tail. One moment I enjoyed of Pollock was against NZ where 27 was needed of the last 6. Prince took a single Pollock on strike. First one he knocked for 6. 2nd ball 2 then it was 18 needed of 3. He knocked 6 6 and Nash bowled the last ball in the block hole luckily. Just showed what he could do. I believed he did NZ in Australia by smashing 27 of 1 over with 4 sixes in a row. That inside out hitting from him was one of his strengths. Peter Pollock was another great bowler and batsman so was Mike Proctor. Just look what he did to Hampshire. http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1970S/1977/ENG_LOCAL/B+H/HANTS_GLOUCS_B+H_22JUN1977.html Unfortunately most of that 69/70 side were robbed of their legend status. I think Shane Warne could have been another great all rounder. He had it in him but just a rush of blood when batting cost him most of the times. Brett Lee was born in the wrong era. Donald, Lee and Akthar would have wreaked havoc in cricket before the restrictions were brought in. A guy who robbed himself of being a good allrounder was Hansie Cronje as he started to trade his performance in for rupees. Klusener was another guy who did both well. He dropped his pace and looked at his baseball swing later on which also dried up some of his wickets but India will one what he could do when he was still steaming in. Think it also silly from people to compare Kallis with Sobers. Same as it is silly comparing Tendulkar with Lara. If anyone try to do that I always say takes Lara's best knocks and Tendulkars best knocks watch them and come back and say this one is better. Would be impossible. Same with Ponting who is a guy when he was inform took advantage the most out of it with a lot of runs match after match. Dravid underrated as well. He threw the anchor and Ganguly, Tendulkar and co can have some fun. So its really difficult to compare batsman especiallly looking at the role they played in the team. Coming back to that Kallis, Sobers issue Sobers avg 27 coming in any position from 1 to 3, Kallis avg almost 50 in that same positions. It does not make him better just that test cricket have a role to fill and if he succeeds in what is asked he will become great. Ask them to fill another guys role and if they succeed they become legends. Kallis was more comfortable with the new ball than Sobers but it does not make you better. Its like saying one is better than the other because he had a better blocking technique. That would bring Gavaskar into with his 36 no of 60 overs chasing over 300 for victory in a one day game but we will leave that for another day. Another all rounder missed by India was Kapil Dev. But you can not compare them if they played a different role in the batting line up. If we voted the best batsman concerning entertainment then I would vote for Murali and Gough as the 10 to 15 balls they mostly faced brought some great entertainment both of them with that smile on their faces.
k77sujith
Guest
Well said Dev. Kallis is indeed tops.
Johnno
Guest
Incredible stats Neuen. I would also like to point out that Shaun Pollock is a very talented all rounder. If Richard Hadlee should be classified as an all rounder then so should Shaun Pollock. Pollock has made hundreds im not sure if he did make a hundred. And Pollock was a lovely batsman like his uncle, very elegant had all the shots Shaun Pollock. Good bowler too. But in many ways i thought he was a more talented batsman, had a really complete technique, and solid driver of the ball had all the shots. Kinda reminded me of Matt Hayden a bit solid in all area or a David Boon just solid , not a smasher but so elegant and solid and natural batter. Mitch Johnson and Stuart Broads, Brett Lee batting impress me a lot too , surely they are as good with the bat as Hadlee. And one all rounder that I can not believe is getting more hang time is Chris Cairns. When Chris Cairns is fit he is one of the most talented if not the most talented cricketer i have ever seen seriously. Chris Cairns I have never i repaet never and this includes Kevin Peterson, I have never seen a batsman destroy Warney the same way chris Cairns did. Chris Cairns was natural athlete big and strong was a very good rugby player too used to love leading the aka in the dressing room apparently . Chris Cairns series in 2000 vs the aussy team in there prime in NZ was just about the best solo series i have ever seen. NZ had a good team but all there bowlers went down injured which was sad as they had a good team. You name it they went down, Vettori, Shaun O'connor, and a few quicks Simon Doull, Geoof Allot all out. He carried NZ in that series. Made some big scores , some stats on Chris Cairns. He is also one of only seven players to have reached the all-rounder's double of 200 wickets and 3000 runs. Out of these seven players, Cairns reached the double 2nd fastest (58 Test) behind Ian Botham. And also Chris Cairns was injury prone his whole career, Like Shane Bond was injured a lot we were not able to see Chris Cairns always at his best. But when fit wow could sure play cricket. He is the biggest natural hitter of a cricket ball i have seen. Just anywhere anytime, when they stay hit they stay hit. And he did it too all bowling . He used to irritate Mcgrath a lot too, as he wouldn't take any crap as did Warne he used to get under his skin as well, one of few players who did. And he was a very good bowler too able to take big wickets at big moments of game and used to get a roll on was hard to top. 7/27 his best figures , and always bowled well to aussies. And was still very fast even though he had to slow his pace down at young age. But wow Chris Cairns was packed with natural cricketing ability got it off his dad Lance Cairns former NZ black cap. Like his dad Lance Cairns who was a massive hitter as big as they come Simon O'donnel style Chris Cairns sure knew how to hit a 6. A very talented cricketer in all areas of the game full stop.
k77sujith
Guest
Wow Neuen, these are phenomenal stats...this should also put the debate to bed. Thanks.