What's new

Brian Lara vs Jacques Kallis

Hasan123

Hasan123

Test Star
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Runs
38,432
If you had to pick one who would you pick as a batsmen? Not interested in what Kallis offers as a bowler and fielder only interested in there batting here.
 
HaHaHa ... bro, you're serious? Brian Lara ranks alongside Sobers, Viv and Sachin as one of the best batsman of the post war era. You'll find dozens upon dozens of ex players who have rated Lara along with Sachin, the best batsman of his era. Kallis isn't even anywhere close. As a matter of fact, Ponting himself is a far superior batsman than Kallis. Ponting, like Lara and Sachin, could take apart bowling attacks at will, something Kallis could never do.
 
Last edited:
Hitman said:
HaHaHa ... bro, you're serious? Brian Lara ranks alongside Sobers, Viv and Sachin as one of the best batsman of the post war era. You'll find dozens upon dozens of ex players who have rated Lara along with Sachin, the best batsman of his era. Kallis isn't even anywhere close. As a matter of fact, Ponting himself is a far superior batsman than Kallis. Ponting, like Lara and Sachin, could take apart bowling attacks at will, something Kallis could never do.
Click to expand...

And if some people have a problem with my bringing Sachin's name, let's remove his name for your pleasure. Kallis is still nowhere close to the other two batsman I've mentioned, Lara and Ponting.
 
Hitman said:
HaHaHa ... bro, you're serious? Brian Lara ranks alongside Sobers, Viv and Sachin as one of the best batsman of the post war era. You'll find dozens upon dozens of ex players who have rated Lara along with Sachin, the best batsman of his era. Kallis isn't even anywhere close. As a matter of fact, Ponting himself is a far superior batsman than Kallis. Ponting, like Lara and Sachin, could take apart bowling attacks at will, something Kallis could never do.
Click to expand...


Lol just wanted to see what people thought. I can remember there was a thread about who is better between Kallis and Ponting, some were saying Kallis.
 
Hasan123 said:
Lol just wanted to see what people thought. I can remember there was a thread about who is better between Kallis and Ponting, some were saying Kallis.
Click to expand...

Not a chance, at least according to me.
 
Lara was better but Kallis is pretty close behind.
 
Kallis played some notable knocks in latter part of his career particularly between 2010-2012.

He was also consistent performer for the team for a long time and has a great record in Asia.

Never mind, I still take Lara over Kallis and that too in both formats.
 
For batting and batting alone I would pick Lara.

Kallis would be useful of there was a need for a fifth bowler.
 
Remember those days when I used to root for Lara when playing against Australia

"Anyone but Aussies" was the logo some cricket fans lived by those days didn't matter who gets them

Haha fun memories and lots of disappointment along the road as well
 
Last edited:
Team players are of greater value.
If cricket was an individual sport then Lara.
However cricket is a team sport where you have to build partnerships with mediocre players from time to time. It's those partnerships that put you in a position to win matches. Useless milestones don't.
Kallis for me any day.
 
Kallis was the more effective test bat.

In pure effectiveness, Kallis has a claim to be the greatest ever. But he didn't have the most balanced records or was the best against the best bowlers.

Quality wise, he is a level below the Lara league.

Lara will be regarded as the better bat and rightly so but don't let perceptions mock someone like Kallis.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
Kallis was the more effective test bat.

In pure effectiveness, Kallis has a claim to be the greatest ever. But he didn't have the most balanced records or was the best against the best bowlers.

Quality wise, he is a level below the Lara league.

Lara will be regarded as the better bat and rightly so but don't let perceptions mock someone like Kallis.
Click to expand...

lara was a genius. plyed some magical innings. kallis was one of the most consistent batter of all time. he couldn't have played innings like lara, but he was consistent thoughout his carrer. his peak was for 12 years only behind sachin.
it depends on you what kind of batsman you want in your team. only a team consists of atg players, then i will choose lara and ponting over kallis and sachin. but if it is a normal/general team i will pit kallis and sachin over lara and ponting.
 
Lara.There is only one batsman in that era who was better than Lara and that was Tendulkar.Kallis doesnt even come close.
 
DON'T get fooled by Lara's lower average. Kallis average is vastly inflated by lots of not outs. Lara has better runs/innings than Kallis (51.52 compared to Kallis' 47.46). Lara has more double centuries and a couple of triple centuries. Lara scored big knocks regularly(has double centuries against 5 nations). I really can't see why anybody would choose Kallis over Lara, Lara scored bigger knocks, scored more runs per innings and has a VASTLY better strike rate.
 
I think this thread will overwhelmingly conclude Lara, like myself.

I have a feeling the minority of Kallis fans will pull out stats... but don't give me stats man! Lara was the best batsman I have seen in my life, perhaps some modern players will surpass him, but not Jacques Kallis. I was a fan of Kallis, but he did not have the sheer genius of Lara.
 
FreePalestine said:
I think this thread will overwhelmingly conclude Lara, like myself.

I have a feeling the minority of Kallis fans will pull out stats... but don't give me stats man! Lara was the best batsman I have seen in my life, perhaps some modern players will surpass him, but not Jacques Kallis. I was a fan of Kallis, but he did not have the sheer genius of Lara.
Click to expand...

Kallis has better overseas records but in overall run/innings Lara is better. Kallis average is hugely inflated by not outs. Also Kallis has very poor strike rate compared to Lara who could change the entire game in a single session
 
sajeebmcj said:
lara was a genius. plyed some magical innings. kallis was one of the most consistent batter of all time. he couldn't have played innings like lara, but he was consistent thoughout his carrer. his peak was for 12 years only behind sachin.
it depends on you what kind of batsman you want in your team.
Click to expand...

Absolutely Kallis over Lara in my team. Team will win more matches & series.

Pure batsmanship - Lara over Kallis.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
I really can't see why anybody would choose Kallis over Lara,
Click to expand...
.

Consistency. That helps you to avoid losing series and winning series as well. That's what Kallis did so many times. Him not having big scores and yet averaging so high means he was always among runs and helping his team on consistent basis to not lose and also win series.
 
Joseph Gomes said:
DON'T get fooled by Lara's lower average. Kallis average is vastly inflated by lots of not outs. Lara has better runs/innings than Kallis (51.52 compared to Kallis' 47.46). Lara has more double centuries and a couple of triple centuries. Lara scored big knocks regularly(has double centuries against 5 nations). I really can't see why anybody would choose Kallis over Lara, Lara scored bigger knocks, scored more runs per innings and has a VASTLY better strike rate.
Click to expand...

kallis was not a number 6 -7 in test. he played in 3 and 4. being notout have nothing to do in test.
 
Yeah weird comment.. not sure how not outs should count against number 4 batsman
 
The thing about Kallis is, you need a very specific team make-up for his style of batting to work. Stick Kallis in most other teams, and he will be like Chanderpaul for the West Indies; consistent but largely ineffective. And in many games in the first half of his career, South Africa got stuck with draws which should have been wins, especially vs Eng and NZ, because everyone was so slow. I remember Klusener used to have to come in and slog balls just to get things moving.

Stick Kallis in the South Africa side of the second half of his career, though, and Kallis suddenly seemed more conducive toward wins (and clutch draws) than most greats. And having Amla and AB on either side of him made him up the tempo of his play as well.

That helps you to avoid losing series and winning series as well.
Click to expand...

Kallis didn't face Mcgrath much, but there was one series in particular I remember. This is way back in 97/98, and his first tour of Australia. South Africa collapse in their final inning, with only Kallis holding on. He makes a slow as hell ton - it took him about six hours - blocking for hours against Warnie and Mcgrath. He eventually got out, but the draw was secured. And he did this often. Certain losses were turned into draws.
 
Steve Waugh and Dravid both had SRs in 40s and still won plenty of games for their teams. You don't need any specific team to accommodate the quality test player unless you are going at Bycott run rate of 30s..

Kallis gets underrated due to perception bias.. Plain and simple!

Remember there was an interview of Ponting were he said that Kallis would receive lot more recognition if he were for other team.
 
Last edited:
Chrish said:
Steve Waugh and Dravid both had SRs in 40s and still won plenty of games for their teams. You don't need any specific team to accommodate the quality test player unless you are going at Bycott run rate of 30s..

Kallis gets underrated due to perception bias.. Plain and simple!

Remember there was an interview of Ponting were he said that Kallis would receive lot more recognition if he were for other team.
Click to expand...

yes. in 99-oo series in india when south africa defeated india 2-0,kallis was probably man of the series. he bated at 25-30 strike rate won the series for south africa.
if he were from another country, he would get more recognition.
 
Buffet said:
Absolutely Kallis over Lara in my team. Team will win more matches & series.

Pure batsmanship - Lara over Kallis.
Click to expand...

Yep, the Windies would have won more games with Kallis alongside players such as Chanderpaul, Sarwan and Gayle. Kallis knew how to extract runs and partnership from his mates without making them inferior.
There was a stage when Amla couldn't score runs unless Kallis was at the other end. It's this reassurance that would have made players like Sarwan and Chanderpaul into match winners and team players.
Lara was a great player in his own right but he was a lose canon.
 
TestMatch said:
The thing about Kallis is, you need a very specific team make-up for his style of batting to work. Stick Kallis in most other teams, and he will be like Chanderpaul for the West Indies; consistent but largely ineffective. And in many games in the first half of his career, South Africa got stuck with draws which should have been wins, especially vs Eng and NZ, because everyone was so slow. I remember Klusener used to have to come in and slog balls just to get things moving.

Stick Kallis in the South Africa side of the second half of his career, though, and Kallis suddenly seemed more conducive toward wins (and clutch draws) than most greats. And having Amla and AB on either side of him made him up the tempo of his play as well.



Kallis didn't face Mcgrath much, but there was one series in particular I remember. This is way back in 97/98, and his first tour of Australia. South Africa collapse in their final inning, with only Kallis holding on. He makes a slow as hell ton - it took him about six hours - blocking for hours against Warnie and Mcgrath. He eventually got out, but the draw was secured. And he did this often. Certain losses were turned into draws.
Click to expand...

Actually that's incorrect. SA had virtually no middle order for most part of Kallis career.
It was Kallis who kept SA competitive. When you got Kallis out teams would feel like they won the match. Which was true, SA heavily relied on Kallis-Kirsten before Smith came along (Amla and AB came into their own around 08).
SA was prone to Pakistan type of collapses hence Kallis was moved from no.3 to 4, having Kirsten and Kallis in the shed was game over.
Kallis shined when SA was weak and strong. He fits any team for me.
 
soso_killer said:
Actually that's incorrect. SA had virtually no middle order for most part of Kallis career.
It was Kallis who kept SA competitive. When you got Kallis out teams would feel like they won the match. Which was true, SA heavily relied on Kallis-Kirsten before Smith came along (Amla and AB came into their own around 08).
SA was prone to Pakistan type of collapses hence Kallis was moved from no.3 to 4, having Kirsten and Kallis in the shed was game over.
Kallis shined when SA was weak and strong. He fits any team for me.
Click to expand...

We would've won a series in SA in 2010 if not for that guy Kallis. Guy was like a rock and defied us in the 2nd innings.

He wasn't as attacking as his peers but to say he lacked any impact is far from the truth.
 
Kallis was an incredible Test bat but Lara edges it for me. Lara (and probably Kohli now) was the only batsman in that era who you could rely on to win you a Test match from a seemingly impossible position. Neither Kallis, Tendulkar or Ponting had that trait in them. They could play a really awesome innings, but they couldn't win you a 4th innings game by scoring 150+ batting with the tail. Lara was someone who could do that. His ability to play extreme innings under pressure is something to behold. Plus flamboyance always trumps grit. Lara was super flamboyant while Kallis was all grit. Both traits to cherish though.
 
Massive myths being propagated here.

Punter had 30 freaking tons in winning causes.
Kallis had 22 of them in wins.
Tendulkar had 20 of them in wins.

While Lara had a grand total of 8 tons in wins.

I often see a lot of fans getting swayed by the style of play which results in a degree of bias. Dravid and Kallis played attritional cricket, but it would be daft to say they lacked impact. Similarly just because a batsman was flamboyant doesn't mean he had the most impact. Consistency matters a lot in test cricket.

I know being in a stronger team helps you in getting more tons in winning causes. Still Sachin played with a weak bowling attack for the most part and yet produced a ton in winning cause every ten matches as opposed to Lara in more than every 17 matches with having Ambrose and Walsh in the bowling ranks.
 
shariqnoor said:
Kallis was an incredible Test bat but Lara edges it for me. Lara (and probably Kohli now) was the only batsman in that era who you could rely on to win you a Test match from a seemingly impossible position. Neither Kallis, Tendulkar or Ponting had that trait in them. They could play a really awesome innings, but they couldn't win you a 4th innings game by scoring 150+ batting with the tail. Lara was someone who could do that. His ability to play extreme innings under pressure is something to behold. Plus flamboyance always trumps grit. Lara was super flamboyant while Kallis was all grit. Both traits to cherish though.
Click to expand...

Lara was a gun but how many 4th innings knocks Lara has played?

Also the 153* nearing the end saw some epic choking by Lara.

When he was close to victory, Lara started edging balls. It was his good luck, a dolly was dropped in the slips off McGrath's bowling. Another ball flew in slips but Warne couldn't get to it (this can't be called a drop catch technically).

It was a mind blowing knock no doubt (probably the greatest ever alongside Laxman's 281) but how many times could he do that? Even this one needed a fair share of luck to close out.

Also Kohli is not even in the same planet as Sachin, Ponting and Kallis in tests as of now. Those 3 were highly effective batsmen. Let's see if Kohli can build upon his new found form and consistency.
 
shariqnoor said:
Kallis was an incredible Test bat but Lara edges it for me. Lara (and probably Kohli now) was the only batsman in that era who you could rely on to win you a Test match from a seemingly impossible position. Neither Kallis, Tendulkar or Ponting had that trait in them. They could play a really awesome innings, but they couldn't win you a 4th innings game by scoring 150+ batting with the tail. Lara was someone who could do that. His ability to play extreme innings under pressure is something to behold. Plus flamboyance always trumps grit. Lara was super flamboyant while Kallis was all grit. Both traits to cherish though.
Click to expand...

So much for relying that Lara doesn't have more than 4-5 tons in matches won against non-minnows in his entire long career. He had weak batting unit, but you can't ignore that he had Ambrose and Walsh playing with him. You can hardly rely on Lara for the situations you are mentioning. His record supports this.
 
People question Sachin match wining ability but Lara and kallis(bat) weren't any better
 
as a batsman Lara, as a player Kallis. Kallis is a complete package, gun batsman, gun slip fielder and useful 4th bowler. I'd like to have him more than Lara.
 
As a package, Kallis > every top batsman ever.

Goes without saying.

But that ain't what this thread about.
 
Yeah including Kohli with the likes of Sachin, Lara and Punter was baffling to say the least..
 
Kallis. Lara's batting style was too flamboyant and risky and wouldve worked had he played for an ATG side like Ponting did. Kallis was an all-weather batsmen with impeccable defence who batted according to the needs of the team. Great batsman. Vastly underrated on PP!
 
Lara was a superior batsman but I will take Kallis over Lara in my team. Kallis was more consistent and reliable.
 
Lara's batting style was too flamboyant and risky and wouldve worked had he played for an ATG side like Ponting did
Click to expand...

It's the other way around. If Lara were in a ATG side, he could afford to bat slowly and cautiously. But with wickets tumbling, and few batsmen able to stick around, he often pushed madly for runs.
 
TestMatch said:
It's the other way around. If Lara were in a ATG side, he could afford to bat slowly and cautiously. But with wickets tumbling, and few batsmen able to stick around, he often pushed madly for runs.
Click to expand...

Flip side - ATG side can absorb some one going missing most of the times and still benefits from gun innings in middle. An average side will end up losing most of the games when main batsman goes missing.

Kallis kind of batsman will score runs more often without making those big innings occasionally. An average side , which is too dependent on single batsman, will prefer consistent runs rather than scores of 20,30,23, 34,45,200.... Don't take examples literally, but you get the gist.
 
That's an interesting question actually.. what type of batsman would be more beneficial to a weak team?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Is Imran Khan the greatest Test cricketer since 1970?
Replies
51
Views
1K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
Ball Blazer
Kevin Pietersen undermines Joe Root's record, says batting is easier today than before
Replies
63
Views
781
kron
K
B
Which cricketing nation produces the most talent?
Replies
44
Views
1K
BunnyRabbit
B
mominsaigol
Why do some Test greats struggle in White-Ball cricket and vice versa?
Replies
65
Views
2K
kron
K
atreus
  • Poll Poll
Ricky Ponting vs Hashim Amla – Who was the superior Test batter?
Replies
39
Views
1K
atreus
atreus
Back
Top