The great debate

Even as Ricky Ponting hangs up his baggy green, and Sachin Tendulkar struggles to accept a seemingly irreversible decline, heralding the end of one of Test cricket’s greatest generations of batsmen may seem a little premature. After all, age would appear to be having few ill affects on Jacques Kallis. But the ongoing Test series’ featuring India and England, Australia and South Africa, do have a distinct feeling of the changing of the guard about them. Once immortals have become weak links, and with every Ponting poke outside off-stump or Sachin cloth to the man in the deep the realisation that their glittering careers are staggering to a close has become ever more apparent. Thus, now would seem the perfect moment to engage in one of modern cricket’s big debates – of all the wonderful batsmen of the past twenty years or more, who is the greatest?

One of the things which has made Test cricket such a joy to watch over the past generation is the huge variety of styles exhibited by the top batsmen. Compare the enticing majesty of Tendulkar, with Rahul Dravid’s unrelenting determination. Then take Brian Lara’s bludgeoning blade and ability to score the same number of runs in a day than many can muster in months. Finally, contrast that with Ponting’s competitiveness and Kallis’s versatily. The easiest conclusion to reach is that all are legends in their own ways, and leave it at that. But that wouldn’t be much fun on a cold December evening in London.

Pure statistics rarely tell the full story, and it must be said they give us few clues as we seek to differentiate between these six bona fide greats: Tendulkar has the most hundreds; Kallis the best average. Lara has the highest score; Dravid the fewest ducks.What is striking, however, is that they fill the first five slots on the Test runscoring charts. Some might say that this is the result of more Tests being played, and of course that comes into it. But the fitness involved in remaining at world class standard for the best part of 200 Tests, as Tendulkar has done, is an incredible achievement itself. Particularly when you add in all the one-dayers and most recently IPL that the modern cricketer has to fit into their schedule.

Enough fence sitting. Time to establish who the greatest of the great is. To do so I’ll assess each of the five legends mentioned above individually, before coming to a conclusion.

My instincts tell me that Dravid is the best defensive player of the lot - he wasn’t called ‘The Wall’ for nothing, after all. Although his castle was in fact knocked down more times than anybody else in Test cricket, he was more adept at squeezing out runs for India in challenging circumstances than any of his illustrious colleagues, Tendulkar included. The best example of this was the last tour of England where India were woeful but Dravid sublime, in spite of advancing age and a top class bowling attack to cope with. Aggressive strokes are not the enduring image of Dravid, and a possible weakness is that, unlike many of his contemporaries, he was never satisfactorily able to find an extra gear when his team really needed it. A further weakness is his record against the Australians, by far the best team of his era: against them he scored just 2 of his Test hundreds and averaged below 40. But one of those was perhaps his greatest innings - 233 at Adelaide in late 2003 which set up a rare victory for India down under.

Jacques Kallis is often spoken of as perhaps the greatest all-rounder of all time, but by my criteria his place in the batting pantheon is more secure. Not only does he have a phenomenal average, but he’s still going strong, and if anything improving his game. A few years ago, he’d have been very much a junior member of this club, but right now he has a strong case to be at the top of the pile. One by one he’s dismissed almost everything which people used to see as a weakness: the lack of a double-hundred, a perhaps selfish reluctance to expand his game, and a poor record in England. If any nagging doubt remains, it is over the fact that he’s often the supporting member of a partnership rather than the enforcer. Whilst Lara, Ponting and Tendulkar take it upon themselves to take the game away from you, Kallis has often sat at the other end, accumulating centuries in the company of Gary Kirsten, Graeme Smith or Hashim Amla. Compared to the others, defining moments also fail to spring to mind: four hundreds in successive Tests against West Indies was a mighty achievement, but he’s rarely been the only man to score runs at the difficult moments.

So to the man of the moment - Ricky Ponting. Us English have a love/hate relationship with him. The way he was booed to and from the crease in England reflects how he’s respected as a batsman, but also weaknesses of character which perhaps don’t endear him to the neutral. Compared to the unflappable Tendulkar, Dravid or Kallis, Ponting has been involved in his fair share of controversial moments. Who could forget him swearing at Duncan Fletcher about England’s use of substitute fielders after being run out by Gary Pratt at Trent Bridge, or elbowing Mohammad Amir, or wagging his finger at the umpires at the MCG. As a batsman, Ponting was also the most competitive of the quintet: when in full flow, as in his match-saving knock at Old Trafford in 2005, you could see the passion for his team in every perfectly timed hook shot. But he was not without weakness. Early on his innings teams reckoned that he fell across his stumps, and he often did. Its hard to identify such a regular manner of dismissal amongst the others. But he made sure he got in and made it count when it mattered. He’s the only one of the five to have scored a World Cup final century, and he’s made England hurt on the field countless times.

Ask most England players of the last twenty years for their take on the debate and they’ll say Lara. That might have been influenced by time spent watching him compile 775 runs over two innings in 1994 and 2004 - Nasser Hussain was on the field throughout both. But Lara undoubtedly had a destructive quality perhaps absent from any of the other stars of this generations: whilst you feel you can at least contain Kallis, Dravid, and even Ponting and Tendulkar, it would seem there was no way to contain an in form Lara. But he also appeared to be less consistent than the others and in some ways it could be said he cared less. As a captain he wasn’t particularly inspirational or at all successful, and he sometimes gave his wicket away when his team needed him to score tough runs.

The four listed above are all greats, but this writer thinks that one stands out above the rest. Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar. Did Tendulkar have any weaknesses? At his best, I’d argue he didn’t, other that perhaps occasionally getting trapped lbw swinging one into his pads early on. He had a majesty about him which made a Tendulkar ton easier on the eye than any of his contemporaries. And then there is the longevity. To play Test cricket for at least 23 years is an incredible achievement in itself - to put that into context England captain, Andrew Strauss, who retired after 100 Tests, did not make his debut until Tendulkar has been playing Tests for the best part of 15 years. But to play Test cricket for that long and average in the mid-50s is simply incredible. He’s also produced countless match-changing contributions - the most memorable was perhaps the to ton he scored to win the Test against England in Chennai four years ago, just weeks after the devastating bombs in his hometown of Mumbai.

Overall, I feel that in their respective primes Tendulkar was harder to contain than Kallis, more composed than Ponting, more dynamic than Dravid and more consistent than Lara. Having said that it would be easy to argue for any one of these, whose names will surely endure like those of Hobbs, Bradman, Hammond and Sobers. As the changing of the guard continues, we should also look to the future: another generation of batsmen are fast producing fantastic figures. But they will have done incredibly well to match the one which is entering its final act.

Excellent read Shelsey.

My two cents.

Lara
The best of a great bunch. Scored tons under pressure, some of them big and some of them massive. Also dominated attacks and carried the team when at the crease.

Tendulkar
Mr consistent. Was, during the 90's a dominant player who scored runs everywhere and with aplomb. In the last few years he has continued to score but has turned into an accumalator, like Kallis.

Ponting
Like Lara, dominated attacks and made match winning hundreds. Wasn't the best player of spin (not bad), which puts him behind the top two, who had no real weakness against certain bowling.

Dravid
Dravid's job was to bat all day and he did, a few times. Scored runs all round the world and had no real weakness. This should put him ahead of the rest but I never saw him lead from the front and take bowlers apart when it was needed.

Kallis
Like Dravid, is a classy player who like Shelsey says, has the best average of the lot. My problem with Kallis is, there were time when he would come in with his team in a strong position and he would proceed to plod on in his own time. Now, I do know it's test cricket but I do believe there was and maybe still is, a degree of selfisness in his batting.

I think you're spot on in your assessment, Stella.

I admit that in the process of this article (in order to avoid it becoming longer than it already is) I had to be deliberately implicit in a few of my judgements.

With Kallis I don't quite agree with Fists' excellent article from some time back suggesting that a lack of dynamism puts him on a lower plane to the rest. I don't even think he's particularly selfish (at least not now). But its certainly true (and its hard to say its his fault) that a lot of his big innings have come in support of somebody else: often Kirsten, Smith or Amla. Its also hard to think of defining innings' quite as you can for the others - more of SA's famous wins in recent years have been set up by the forementioned three than by Kallis.

Very well-written and interesting stuff, if I may say so. Remember Angus Fraser a few years back saying of the two - Lara and Tendulkar - he would have to pick Lara, as Brian would hit a good ball for four while Sachin might just block it.
Dravid, Ponting and Kallis, especially when you chuck in his bowling, are three other greats.
My personal nod would go to Lara who, apart from early on his career, was playing in a weak side but still managed to churn out quick and high-scoring innings. He probably scored a higher PERCENTAGE of his side's runs than the others.
Ponting, for a lot of his time, was coming in after one of the best and most destructive opening partnerships in Test history. A great player, though.
Tendulkar and Dravid have had each other, and others as well, to help with their batting. Kallis has had a reliable line-up too. But Lara, often, was alone.

Just a note, Kallis has the fastest test fifty.

When he wants to he can knock it about, the problem with deciding between each of these players is not how different they are, but what context did they fill for their respective teams' requirements.

How does one compare a Ricky Ponting to a Kallis, or a Lara to a Dravid?

Each team has a different make up, therefor they have different requirements from their players.

When Amla became a regular feature in the SA team and got established around 2007/2008 it had an influence on Kallis who for years had to be the mainstay for SA cricket.

In the last six years, batting with Amla, he played 94 innings, scored 20 centuries, 16 fifties, improved his strike rate from 42 to 52 and increased his average from 55 to just under 60.

In my mind Kallis is only getting better, whereas the other greats have slowly faded away.

With the emphasis now placed more on T20 and ODI cricket rather than Test Cricket, the chances of another truely great batsman at a test match level is likely to become rarer.

For me, Lara is the stand-out of the five. Maybe the stats don't show it very well (other than the record individual innings scores), but I think he was the one that was really touched by genius. A flawed character and sometimes a frustration (did I just decribe Kevin Pietersen?), but when he was up for it he was more destructive than just about anyone the game has ever seen (Bradman and perhaps Viv Richards excepted, and even then Viv didn't have the same insatiable apetite for big scores as Lara).

Tendulkar's career stands out for th absurd longevity - debut at 16 and still playing just short of his 40th birthday. Over such a spell he's maintained amazing consistency - OK, there have been a couple of wobbles, but he's then come back to very near his best. This time though it may seriously be the last hurrah.

I put those two a level ahead of the other 3 - absolute legends as opposed to all time greats (although when you add in what a good bowler Kallis was for 3/4s of his career, he probably becomes a legend as well - just one that didn't excite in quite the same way as Lara).

Slightly disagree with GBs comment above - I think we still have several great batsmen who are more interested in Test cricket than in ODI and T20. Cook, Clarke, Pujara, Smith, Amla all have the mentality and the technique better suited to the longer game (indeed, I think it's 50 over ODIs that are the form of the game that is struggling more - lacks the crash bang attraction of T20 or the technicality of Tests)

For me, Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara are in the same league, Kallis, Dravid and Ponting very close but eventually second.
Tendulkar, as has been mentioned here already, has been brilliantly consistant across a terrificly long career that in itself is a wonder for a modern day cricketer. His stats are just brilliant, and has scored runs in all conditions against all types of bowling.
Prince Brian Charles was that, an absolute royal prince. He often batted like one, never really playing workman like, although I do remember his innings of 125 against India to save a match. Anyone remember his last test series? Decline, what decline?
Kallis has been scoring big runs consistently for South Africa and often the SA batting revolved around him. Although he could smash any of them any time, he kept that pat of the game under too much check. I remember the 1998 Champion's Trophy, Kallis treated Murali like a club bowler. I also remember Kallis' rather strange innings in the 07 WC after Smith and ABdV setup the foundations for a very dificult chase.
When Shelsey said Kallis' big knocks came in the shadow of other big performance, I have to say perhaps you should take a more detailed look at his record against India!. He particularly enjoys torchering our bowlers! and many times all by himself, even when not really fit.
Dravid unlike Kallis, had a natural problem shifting gears but he did work on that aspect of his game, scored runs across conditions and bowling types. But as pointed out, his record against could have been better, then remember his other big knock came in the best supporting in his career where he played role many times.
Ponting too has been a superb batsman with a big match temprament. But he wasn't the best player of spin bowling.

Admittedly looking only at Tests, Kallis's 100s against India were all either in defeat (Eden Gardens '04) or when someone else scored big.

Shelsey the last series in South Africa, Kallis saved one test all by himself, and not many had scored big for SA there.
That Eden hundred came in a defeat, but he again played quite a classy innings, SA's bowling or the rest of the batting wasn't up to the mark to save the game, but it was a terrific effort from Kallis.

Shelsey, basically it was if Kallis failed SA lost.

Do you know how many times Kallis had to bat out to save a test? last time india was here Kallis scored 2 hundreds and he was basically the only one scoring from SA.

Before Smith and Amla, Kallis was the one to steady the ship. After he got a steady batting order he has been very dominating. He generally bats quicker than Amla when they are together. He probably bats the fastest the batting line up now. Maybe AB overshadows him there, but even AB plays 33 of 200 innings every now and then.

Almost all the test where we should have lost and didn't Kallis played a dominant roll in it. He started his career like that against Australia. Not even the great Australian attack could keep him from standing out the whole final day and a big part of the day before.

Who else in that list have saved so many tests? I don't think even them all put together has single handedly saved so many tests.

Test cricket isn't just about winning, it is also about not losing and grinding it out and no one grinds it out better than Kallis.

Up until recently SA always had the worst batting line-up of the big teams. We basically just had Kallis and then people there to support him.

People say that Kallis have a selfishness about him, but he just did what his coaches instructed him to do. Don't go out. Everyone bats around him. We had this discussion numerous times in SA, but the truth is we folded once he went out. Go look at the score cards and see that when Kallis got out, it was basically our tail that accumalated runs and saved blushes for the top order.

Why do you think people think SA produced such high quality all rounders. Because our bowlers were forced to bat that much. Pollock, Boucher, Klusener all had to bat to save some face for our top order.

Also remember that SA is by far the best bowling pitches and Kallis played half of his games here.

I am not saying Kallis is the greatest, but I do think he is (still) understated

Well put FerN, Kallis has been without doubt the most influential South African cricketer of the last 10+ years. Him doing what he does allows those around him to flourish and be better players. He has played perfectly to instruction and halted many a batting collapse, saved a test, kept SA in tests and when needed gone after the bowling.

Dravid is lauded as being 'the wall' meanwhile Kallis did exactly that and more but is constantly questioned? For example 2012 his 201* vs India was at a strikerate of 72, his 105 vs Pakistan at a SR of 71 etc. The evidence is there, as soon as he had better players around him so did his average and SR increase. Similarly Ponting and Tendulkar's batting stats decrease over the last few years as good players around them move on.

He did all he did while bowling, usually coming in early as SA has hardly had a reliable opening partnership and half the time on green SA tracks. Perhaps if he'd played 50% of his matches in India his strike rate would be higher and he may have already passed Sachin in total runs scorred? Who knows? But currently he is on course (assuming he plays as many innings as Sachin) to pass Sachin's runs total.

It's funny how people will try their hardest to pick at his record. How can a player with 44 100's and 57 50's, the highest average (pretty much worth a 50 every 1.5 innings) have no match winning or match defining innings? What utter rubbish!

I am not saying he is the best of the lot but come on! Give the guy a break!

Dravid's job was to stay in and allow Tendulkar etc to play their shots. Kallis' job, at times, was to come in and play the number four type knock and in truth, he often declined the invitation.

Bearing in mind what he brings to the table with his bowling I'd pick Kallis over any of the modern greats, and to be honest the way he is going at the moment on his batting alone I'm beginning to think I'd still pick him.
Utterly brilliant cricketer.

Stella wrote:Dravid's job was to stay in and allow Tendulkar etc to play their shots. Kallis' job, at times, was to come in and play the number four type knock and in truth, he often declined the invitation.

Dravid in a sense was very lucky in that he had those other great players around him (Sehwag, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly) who could play the attacking style of batting. In contrast there really wasn't another great batsman in the SA team apart from Kallis himself, so hence his decision more times than not to play the role as the team's main anchor when they were batting.

Diggers wrote:Bearing in mind what he brings to the table with his bowling I'd pick Kallis over any of the modern greats, and to be honest the way he is going at the moment on his batting alone I'm beginning to think I'd still pick him.
Utterly brilliant cricketer.

We are talking batting only though.

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:Dravid's job was to stay in and allow Tendulkar etc to play their shots. Kallis' job, at times, was to come in and play the number four type knock and in truth, he often declined the invitation.

Dravid in a sense was very lucky in that he had those other great players around him (Sehwag, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly) who could play the attacking style of batting. In contrast there really wasn't another great batsman in the SA team apart from Kallis himself, so hence his decision more times than not to play the role as the team's main anchor when they were batting.

Dravid was luvky but I don't agree with Kallis being the only player they had. The Saffa's have had there fair share of players who could block, Kirsten, Smith, Rhodes but Kallis was the best and more talented and therefore should have played for the team on a few occasions.

MMax

I sort of agree with you that Kallis is given a harder time than some, perhaps simply because his style of play is less inspiring than all bar Dravid of the 5 named.

He's also the lowest profile in the Engilsh media (and obviously this board is baised towards a British perspective) - SRT and Dravid have the vocal adoration of the Indian public, Ponting was an archetypal Aussie with a love/hate relationship with the English (we love him for captaining Australia to three Ashes series losses ) and Lara was the supreme record breaker, in particular against (or in) England.

As I said above, for me he's not quite at the level of Tendulkar or Lara as a pure batsman, but add in his bowling, where at one stage of his career he reached a Test ranking of #7, and you are talking about one of the very best there's ever been.

Stella wrote:

Diggers wrote:Bearing in mind what he brings to the table with his bowling I'd pick Kallis over any of the modern greats, and to be honest the way he is going at the moment on his batting alone I'm beginning to think I'd still pick him.
Utterly brilliant cricketer.

We are talking batting only though.

Depends if you also include those other great all-rounders in the 1970's and 1980's as being in the modern era. If so, I would go for Imran Khan rather than Jacques Kallis as Imran could bat anywhere in the top order whilst opening the bowling for his county Sussex and his country Pakistan. Also going back to the 1960's, SA had another great all-rounder by name of Eddie Barlow who could open the batting, bat in the middle order and be a main part of SA's pace/seam bowling unit.

Fair enough, Im sticking with Kallis I think but as others have said you can make a case for all of them. I suspect JK will finish his career with more test 100's than any other player and at a higher average than the others whilst being close to Tendulkars most runs made. Not the prettiest of the bunch to watch though but there are no marks for artistic impression in cricket.

Stella wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:Dravid's job was to stay in and allow Tendulkar etc to play their shots. Kallis' job, at times, was to come in and play the number four type knock and in truth, he often declined the invitation.

Dravid in a sense was very lucky in that he had those other great players around him (Sehwag, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly) who could play the attacking style of batting. In contrast there really wasn't another great batsman in the SA team apart from Kallis himself, so hence his decision more times than not to play the role as the team's main anchor when they were batting.

Dravid was luvky but I don't agree with Kallis being the only player they had. The Saffa's have had there fair share of players who could block, Kirsten, Smith, Rhodes but Kallis was the best and more talented and therefore should have played for the team on a few occasions.

But I don't really put guys like Kirsten, Smith in the category of great batsmen. Smith is a great captain and Rhodes is a great fielder but being these doesn't mean that they also great batsmen.

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:Dravid's job was to stay in and allow Tendulkar etc to play their shots. Kallis' job, at times, was to come in and play the number four type knock and in truth, he often declined the invitation.

Dravid in a sense was very lucky in that he had those other great players around him (Sehwag, Tendulkar, Laxman, Ganguly) who could play the attacking style of batting. In contrast there really wasn't another great batsman in the SA team apart from Kallis himself, so hence his decision more times than not to play the role as the team's main anchor when they were batting.

Dravid was luvky but I don't agree with Kallis being the only player they had. The Saffa's have had there fair share of players who could block, Kirsten, Smith, Rhodes but Kallis was the best and more talented and therefore should have played for the team on a few occasions.

But I don't really put guys like Kirsten, Smith in the category of great batsmen. Smith is a great captain and Rhodes is a great fielder but being these doesn't mean that they also great batsmen.

My point is, he had players around him that provided stability. He in turn should have on occasions, played the role of getting runs on the board, to set up a win. That's why IMO players like Lara, Ponting and the young Tendulkar are above him. Lara had Shiv and Hooper but he was the lone star who still played to the game.

This sort of argument brings you full circle to why some people rate players like KP so highly as they make some really flashy "match winning" innings. It doesnt take into account the number of times they tried to play the same sort of innings and failed as clearly its a lot easier to remember the times that it came off.

No, it separates the very good from the great.

Thats utterly dependant on what you feel defines greatness. Its still subjective.

Ok, it separates Lara from Kallis.

I sound like I'm not a fan of Kallis but I am, and rate him as the best batting allrounder in my era. Also, a terrific slipper.

I dont think it seperates them, it jus shows you appreciate a particular strength of Lara's or Pontings over strengths that Kallis has in his game....like being more consistent. Consistency may not be a sexy word in sport but its incredibly useful.
But its true Lara could be a genius and on sheer natural talent is probably at the top of the list.

Stella wrote:Ok, it separates Lara from Kallis.

I sound like I'm not a fan of Kallis but I am, and rate him as the best batting allrounder in my era. Also, a terrific slipper.

Not as talented as Shane Watson who if it wasn't for those injuries would surely have achieved more in the game by now. He may even have played in the 2005 ashes series and negated Andrew Flintoff's influence in that test series as the primary all-rounder.

I do appreciate the dig in knock and consistency, just giving my reasons to why I rate Kallis slightly below the mentioned three. Those three could dig in or set up a win, and still maintain a high average whereas Kallis does normally played in his own sedate manner, even when coming in at 160 - 2 on a flat track.
Saying that, he has batted more positively of late.

Stella wrote:I do appreciate the dig in knock and consistency, just giving my reasons to why I rate Kallis slightly below the mentioned three. Those three could dig in or set up a win, and still maintain a high average whereas Kallis does normally played in his own sedate manner, even when coming in at 160 - 2 on a flat track.
Saying that, he has batted more positively of late.

Perhaps this is because Kallis simply doesn't have the same range of attacking shots/isn't as effective at them as those 3 other great players.

Stella wrote:I do appreciate the dig in knock and consistency, just giving my reasons to why I rate Kallis slightly below the mentioned three. Those three could dig in or set up a win, and still maintain a high average whereas Kallis does normally played in his own sedate manner, even when coming in at 160 - 2 on a flat track.
Saying that, he has batted more positively of late.

Fair enough

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:Ok, it separates Lara from Kallis.

I sound like I'm not a fan of Kallis but I am, and rate him as the best batting allrounder in my era. Also, a terrific slipper.

Not as talented as Shane Watson who if it wasn't for those injuries would surely have achieved more in the game by now. He may even have played in the 2005 ashes series and negated Andrew Flintoff's influence in that test series as the primary all-rounder.

Watson? Good player but IMO not in Kallis' league.

Stella wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:

Stella wrote:Ok, it separates Lara from Kallis.

I sound like I'm not a fan of Kallis but I am, and rate him as the best batting allrounder in my era. Also, a terrific slipper.

Not as talented as Shane Watson who if it wasn't for those injuries would surely have achieved more in the game by now. He may even have played in the 2005 ashes series and negated Andrew Flintoff's influence in that test series as the primary all-rounder.

Watson? Good player but IMO not in Kallis' league.

Of course he is in terms of talent and pure cricketing ability as Shane Watson was born to play cricket. It is just injuries that have held back his achievements in the game until the last few years.

Ave less than 38, and only two hundreds, now i know that you are taking the pee.

But an impressive all-rounder indeed.

But if Watson has he said may not bowl again in Tests, should he play as a bat.

Not imo.

skyeman wrote:But if Watson has he said may not bowl again in Tests, should he play as a bat.

Not imo.

Yes imo as Australia are currently lacking genuine batsmen of test match quality WITH experience now that Ponting and Hussey are no longer there.

Stella wrote:I do appreciate the dig in knock and consistency, just giving my reasons to why I rate Kallis slightly below the mentioned three. Those three could dig in or set up a win, and still maintain a high average whereas Kallis does normally played in his own sedate manner, even when coming in at 160 - 2 on a flat track.
Saying that, he has batted more positively of late.

of late?

He has upped his strike rate to 52 in the last four years, in fact he has had a similar strike rate to Amla in the last 4 years whom everyone lauds as a batsman.

I think people find it difficult to rate Kallis, purely because like most South Africans we shirk the limelight.

Biltong wrote:

Stella wrote:I do appreciate the dig in knock and consistency, just giving my reasons to why I rate Kallis slightly below the mentioned three. Those three could dig in or set up a win, and still maintain a high average whereas Kallis does normally played in his own sedate manner, even when coming in at 160 - 2 on a flat track.
Saying that, he has batted more positively of late.

of late?

He has upped his strike rate to 52 in the last four years, in fact he has had a similar strike rate to Amla in the last 4 years whom everyone lauds as a batsman.

I think people find it difficult to rate Kallis, purely because like most South Africans we shirk the limelight.

Not me, Biltong.

Jacques Kallis' greatness is really hindered by the fact that for the longest time, he played in an era with a weak SA batting line-up that got over-rated. e.g Kirsten, with his strike-rate of 46, is seen as being the guy rollicking while Kallis could build his innings.

To answer the OP. The Prince was an phenom, the leading talent. Followed by Ponting, Kallis & Dravid.

Tendulkar? I didnt rank him because I personally find it very difficult to rate him...