Is Kallis the greatest?

Kevin Pietersen may be many things, but he is not into false flattery. When he says he rates someone, he means it.

And although he likes to make big statements, without the conditionals and weasel words of others, he usually has sound reason for what he says. There is always basis for the bluster.

But some may feel he has taken leave of his senses with the comment in his interview with Richard Hobson this morning:

 “I truly believe Jacques Kallis is the greatest cricketer ever."

Eyebrows duly raised? Let's leave out all the ancient cricketers who Pietersen may not even have considered - the Bradmans and Barneses and Trumpers and Hobbses. Let's even leave out players of more recent vintage who have dominated but perhaps slipped the infant Pietersen's attention when he was running about on the farm in Pietermaritzburg rather than watching TV - the Gavaskars, Richardses, Bothams and Soberses.

But is Kallis even the greatest of those to have played in the past decade? Is he better than Warne or Ponting or Tendulkar or Murali? Where does he sit in relation to Gilchrist or Lara or Kumble? Could Sehwag or Sangakkara or McGrath be rated higher?

Perhaps by posing these questions, it just reveals how blessed we have been to be watching cricket in the past decade. So many greats to choose from. And I'm not saying that Kallis doesn't deserve his place. He averages 55 in Test cricket, 45+ in ODIs and has 500 international wickets. He is a very very fine player. If only he had an English parent we'd have been in there and poached him...

But for Pietersen to say so definitively that he is the greatest? Well, have your say. And come back here later for the first part in a Line & Length special series on the Noughties.

Comments

[Rob]

I'm not sure I'd have him down as the greatest - although I'd always lean towards someone who's can contribute with both bat and ball, I'd still have Warne as the first name on my teamsheet.

That said, Warne, talented batsman though he was, really wasn't an all-rounder in the classic sense.

And if we narrow the question to whether Kallis was the greatest all-rounder of the decade... who really comes close, both for effectiveness with bat and ball and for consistency and commitment?

[simon]

if we are talking best all-rounder, then the answer is Gilchrist.

[Philip J Sparrow]

How many other players have such all round ability? He can score centuries quickly or studiously in Tests and ODIs, take wickets or keep it tight. Only Flintoff can come close to this and he was nowhere near as consistent.

That said, he is not a better batsman than Ponting or a better bowler than Warne; and since comparing the importance of wickets and runs is generally pretty futile, the title of greatest cricketer ever has less substantive meaning than greatest bowler or greatest batsman.

For the record, of the players I've seen Lara was the best batsman and Donald the best bowler.

[Pete Roberts]

KP's comments can't be taken too seriously , it's highly subjective as to who is the greatest player to have graced the game. Statistically Kallis has to be right up there , but the game has changed , pitches are covered and more batsmen friendly nowadays. Sobers is regarded as the finest all round player by many and I concur with that assessment. The man had everything , fantastic batspeed and the ability to bowl quickly ,off cutters , off spin and legspin - truly remarkable. Add to that his brillaint catching close to the wicket and you have the complete cricketer.
Kallis is a quality player and probably the finest batting allrounder playing today , but he's not the finest the game's seen.

[Richard S]

The greatest all rounder of the post Sobers era maybe. 55 with the bat & 30 with the ball is impressive stuff. I'd say nobody really consider's him because he has such an earth shatteringly dull personality and plays cricket like its a chore rather than fun - like most South African's.

[Mike]

It's a pointless debate, Kallis deserves his place among the greats of the game but there's no "scientific" method to accurately compare cricketers. Far too many variables to consider.

[David]

I'm sure KP must have been misquoted here! Kallis is a great all-rounder and probably the best since Imran Khan, Kapil, Botham and Hadlee.

He is also a great batsman, but surely comes behind Ponting, Tendulkar and Lara of current/recent players in the all-time pantheon.

For what it's worth, I reckon the best batsmen ever are http://www.pongocricket.com/blog.php?user=DavidGreen&blogentry_id=295

[Richie]

Kallis - too selfish to be considered great. Great players turn games singlehandedly, not just take wickets and score runs for themselves. Kallis does not deserve to be mentioned in the same paragraph as Warne, McGrath, Ponting, Sachin, Gilchrist, Murali.

Pietersen - Nice compliment, and nice timing. You may yet make it as a Brearley.

[Andrew]

The truly great players change the way the game is played. Warne revived the dead art of legspin bowling. Gilchrist showed the world how devastating attacking batsmen can be, changing the course of numerous test matches in the space of one session. Murali turned the benign art of off spin into a deadly weapon (even though I would no-ball him if I were umpiring). Mcgrath was more accurate than any bowler before him. Kallis is a great all-rounder but only the immediate family of Kallis would agree with the comment from Pieterson.

[Leesie]

10,000 runs in both forms of the game
2 ODI wickets away from 250 wickets in both forms of the game.

Name someone else with that.

Even Botham's figures next to Kallis's look mediocre.

Seriously, put country loyalties aside, Kallis is awesome.

Can you imagine if he hadn't had politicians interfering with his teams or threatening his place...

[james]

KP's opinion makes total sense to me. He has previously gone on record as being knocked out by, eg, Ponting - and who wouldn't be, when Ponting's test average is 59 or thereabouts (without even considering his record as captain). KP is just making an even judgement that if you look at Kallis' batting record (stellar, with 55 test average...one of the 'greats' on this basis alone) and combine it with his exceptional bowling figures, he must be the greatest; because most players only have one specialism to offer (batting or bowling) and of those that have two talents (eg Flintoff), the best don't even come close to Kallis' record. The logic behind KP's thinking is clear.

[Ramski]

No question Kallis has the stats to make a case for being the greatest. However lets step back from the stats and look at the facts, If you were picking an all time XI, would Kallis be the first name on your team sheet? Didnt thinks so. As a batsmen he is comparable to a Dravid or Boycott, both great accumulators of runs and greats in their own right but probably wouldnt even make an all time XI.

As a bowler Kallis has 250 wickets and lets be honest wouldnt be in the top 20 bowlers to play cricket never mind top 4 or 5!

Is Kallis the greatest all rounder of all time probably, is he the greatest cricketer of all time, no chance!

[ramski]

All Time XI

1 Gavaskar
2 G. Smith
3 Bradman
4 Tendulkar
5 Lara
6 R Hadlee
7 Gilchrist
8 W. Akram
9 Warne
10 Ambrose
11 McGrath

Before you start complaining, G. Smith will end his career with >10,000 test runs as an opener. Hence the choice over others.

Batting Reserves: Ponting, Viv Richards

Bowling Reserves: Murali, Marshall,

Allrounder Reserves: Kallis, Botham, I. Khan, Kapil Dev, Sobers.

[Tom]

Statistically, using the usual difference between averages method of comparing allrounders' records Kallis is currently doing better than Sir Garfield Sobers (who himself comfortably beats everyone else in test history, including the great 1980s allrounders). Possibly this is what Pietersen was basing his comment on. It is presumably difficult to argue that inflated batting averages have helped Kallis here as bowling averages should inflate proportionally. As an ODI allrounder he is completely statistically unrivaled. I can see why people may want to take style of play into account however.

[Fred]

Was there ever any doubt? To achieve what he has in both ODI's and Tests is unbelievable. Most batsman would be happy to retire with a test average in the 40s, and numerous Test bowlers have not taken 250 wickets...and at 30 apiece? In ODI's his record is just as solid. More recently he has taken this excellence into pro20 cricket. All of this has to be seen in the context of playing a lot more cricket than some of the greats mentioned here by others.

Cricket is a team sport..and yes it is great to have a player that can turn things single handedly...but the real long term success of team is based on the consistent world class performers...Kallis is truly the greatest of these.

[Steve D]

I don't disagree too much with ramski except I would pick Jack Hobbs over Gavaskar (Sir Jack averaged over 56 to the little masters 51 in tests and had a better first class average scoring 61000 first class runs) and Sobers over Hadlee (Hadlee was not as strong a batsman as Sir Gary)

[Ramski]

Fair points Steve D although im a big fan of Gavaskars as he made a significant proportion of his runs against the Great West Indian quicks of the 70s + 80s arguably the toughest era to be a batsman.

Sobers verses Hadlee is a close call, I went Hadlee based on the strength of the batting line up and the fact that bowlers will ultimately win you matches.

Point is Kallis wouldnt be in the side. Would he be in yours?

[Steve D]

I agree. Kallis wouldn't be in my all time line up. I do rate him higher than Kapil Dev and Imran Khan though as he is for my money a more complete cricketer whereas they were essentially bowling all rounders (although in reality you would be a lucky selector to have any of them at your call!!).

I have huge respect for Paddles. I grew up in Notts and saw him bowl at close hand on many occasions when him and Clive Rice destroyed oppositions with bat and ball. (we will sadly never really know how great Rice would have been at test level because of the boycott) Hadlee could move the ball both ways and had a very deceptive quicker one which got him lots of wickets. Again he is a bowling all rounder and 6 looks a bit high in the order for my money even with the illustrious names above him so I would stick with Sobers!

[prakash]

my world 11
hayden
sehwag
dravid
sachin
lara
kevin pietersen
sangakarra
kallis
warne
akram
mcgrath

these were ppl i watched play.....so iloved each one of them....the way they batted and bowled so these are my world11

and records always don't reveal how good the guy was......

and murali, gilly, duminy and ambrose make my 15... duminy coz he is the next superstar of world cricket

[kaveri]

i like the team but, maybe steve waugh instead of duminy....

[Wasim]

I can name many bowlers who were much better than Kallis & probably a couple of Batsmen like Lara & Tendulkar who might be considered better than Kallis.

But one thing is for sure....I have not seen a better "CRICKETER" than Kallis.

And history will remember him as a great Cricketer and definitely the BEST of his generation.

[Smiley the Saffer]

He may not inspire, he may not be flamboyant, he may not look the best always - but - he has buckets of talent, drive and determination. Jacques Kallis is the best cricketer in the last 25 years - his record and ability to score runs in all parts of the world - against all attacks - in all circumstances prove it- as good as ponting with the bat- better than tendulkar in the field - better than both (much better) with the ball.

Only Lara and Gilchrist to my mind rival him - Lara for his panache and genius in a weak side to salvage pride and single handedly destroy teams- Gilchrist because he is just class in every respect...

Kallis is a true matchwinner with more test and ODI man of the match awards than ponting

[Anand]

Kallis is a batting all-rounder and cannot be compared with other all-rounders of the past like kapil, imran, botham , hadlee. Kapil, Imran, botham can get into the team either as a batsmen or as a bowler. I'm pretty sure kallis would not get into the SA team if he is playing only as a bowler. I would say pieterson himself being a SouthAfrican simply made a comment to praise another southafrican.

[Anand]

Kallis is a magnificient cricketer and has accumulated great records but to make him the greatest cricketer is stretching an argument too far. It's just an opinion of another cricketer who is still midway into his career. It only shows pieterson's admiration for kallis, nothing less nothing more. There's just too many factors to consider when you talk about the greatest cricketer.