Hashim Amla | The Mega Discussion Thread

[Bilal7]

Second best Test batsman of his era after Sangakkara.

Better than Sangakkara. Sanga's record in England is nowhere as great as Amla's. Not sure how good Sanga has been in South Africa either.

 

[Indiafan]

Amla is the only batsman after Tendulkar who has scored runs in almost all condition and against all types of bowlers. His average is not that high considering he has played a huge number of games in SA which is one of the most difficult places for batsman but also because he has not done extreme minnow bashing in tests to inflate his average. He is far better than a lot of 50+ averaging batsman.

This (bold part) is ridiculous because thats the place he grew up playing cricket. Apart from that I would agree

 

[SL_Fan]

He's been failing due to poor form, not expectations. The team has been winning heavily even while he hasn't been scoring runs.

In that great South Africa team, he was the best batsman and the one who made it easier for Kallis, AB, Duminy, etc. Not the other way around.



Agreed. Good post.

Well that’s what I thought as well but then came across a recent piece on him and saw that he has been in a rut since mid 2014. Now that’s obviously a very long time to be “out of form” that too while in his early 30s when most if not all top bats should be at their peak.

Links

Had no idea that it was this bad tbh that's quite a lengthy drop. What’s quite striking is that it’s pretty much straight after Kallis and Smith bowed out. Now it’s no secret that Amla has a history of buckling under expectations. Has flopped in every major tourney after looking a million bucks leading up to them. Struggled with captaincy as well. So when you connect the dots fair to say that there’s probably more than just poor form at play here. Any way only time will tell I guess. He’s not even 34 yet so he should have a few more years left in him to answer those questions.

 

[Saffer_XIII]

Not a Test ATG yet. Needs to go on a little longer to be considered a Test ATG.

If he retires now, his career will be a story of 3 parts.
A poor start
An amazing run for 5 years
An end with a whimper

Generally, ATG batsmen have shown that they are more than an amazing run and have the ability to come back or adapt their game as they get older.

Can Amla become an ATG in tests? Of course, he just needs to keep scoring for another couple of years.

Please have a look at Ponting's stats in his last 3 years. An almighty whimper. Still an ATG

 

[SL_Fan]

Re Ponting that was after mid 30s tho so quite understandable. Amla has been struggling for more than a couple of years now in his early 30s.

 

[FlickedOffHips]

Please have a look at Ponting's stats in his last 3 years. An almighty whimper. Still an ATG

there's a league between Punter and Hash, along with a 6000 run difference.

 

[The_Odd_One]

This (bold part) is ridiculous because thats the place he grew up playing cricket. Apart from that I would agree

SA has the lowest batting average of all host countries for a reason. Make other batsmen play more than half of their matches in SA and see how many still average more than Amla.

 

[Big Mac]

SA has the lowest batting average of all host countries for a reason. Make other batsmen play more than half of their matches in SA and see how many still average more than Amla.

Do those batsmen get to be born and raised in South Africa like Amla?

 

[The_Odd_One]

Do those batsmen get to be born and raised in South Africa like Amla?

How many batsmen from SA who have played at least 10 matches at home (starting from 1990) average more than 50? The answer is just one, Jacques Kallis.

How many batsmen from England who have played at least 10 matches at home (starting from 1990) average more than 50? The answer is 4.

How many batsmen from Australia who have played at least 10 matches at home (starting from 1990) average more than 50? The answer is 9.

How many batsmen from India who have played at least 10 matches at home (starting from 1990) average more than 50? The answer is 9.

Just because Amla grew up playing in SA does not mean that he should not get the credit for scoring runs in tougher conditions.

 

[The_Odd_One]

there's a league between Punter and Hash, along with a 6000 run difference.

And a difference of 118 innings too

 

[Stallion__]

SA has the lowest batting average of all host countries for a reason. Make other batsmen play more than half of their matches in SA and see how many still average more than Amla.

W's have to bowl in Asia for most of their career, should they too get the brownie points?

 

[The_Odd_One]

W's have to bowl in Asia for most of their career, should they too get the brownie points?

Yes, Wasim should get brownie points but not Waqar who averaged 30+ in Asia against India, Australia, and SA. Amla is not a 30 averaging batsman in SA. He almost averages 50 in SA.

 

[FlickedOffHips]

And a difference of 118 innings too

... he doesn't have Punter's longevity.

 

[The_Odd_One]

... he doesn't have Punter's longevity.

Longevity is just one aspect of greatness. 100 tests is a pretty big sample size. Now, I am not saying that Amla is a better batsman than Ponting because that would be absurd but the criterion you are using does not make any sense. A batsman who plays less number of innings will obviously score less runs.

 

[Abdullah719]

Batsmen in South Africa batting in the top 3 (minimum 20 innings):

[table= class:grid][tr][td]Player[/td][td]Mat[/td][td]Inns[/td][td]NO[/td][td]Runs[/td][td]HS[/td][td]Ave[/td][td]100[/td][td]50[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]B Mitchell (SA)[/td][td]17[/td][td]30[/td][td]2[/td][td]1430[/td][td]123[/td][td]51.07[/td][td]3[/td][td]10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]HM Amla (SA)[/td][td]47[/td][td]75[/td][td]4[/td][td]3594[/td][td]201[/td][td]50.61[/td][td]12[/td][td]19[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]HW Taylor (SA)[/td][td]16[/td][td]28[/td][td]0[/td][td]1390[/td][td]176[/td][td]49.64[/td][td]4[/td][td]8[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]D Elgar (SA)[/td][td]13[/td][td]21[/td][td]2[/td][td]938[/td][td]129[/td][td]49.36[/td][td]3[/td][td]4[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis (SA)[/td][td]25[/td][td]41[/td][td]6[/td][td]1696[/td][td]160[/td][td]48.45[/td][td]3[/td][td]11[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]EAB Rowan (SA)[/td][td]16[/td][td]30[/td][td]3[/td][td]1204[/td][td]156*[/td][td]44.59[/td][td]2[/td][td]8[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DJ McGlew (SA)[/td][td]16[/td][td]27[/td][td]2[/td][td]1104[/td][td]127*[/td][td]44.16[/td][td]4[/td][td]5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]HH Gibbs (SA)[/td][td]38[/td][td]65[/td][td]3[/td][td]2718[/td][td]228[/td][td]43.83[/td][td]9[/td][td]8[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GC Smith (SA)[/td][td]60[/td][td]99[/td][td]6[/td][td]3890[/td][td]200[/td][td]41.82[/td][td]10[/td][td]18[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]G Kirsten (SA)[/td][td]49[/td][td]84[/td][td]7[/td][td]3211[/td][td]275[/td][td]41.70[/td][td]7[/td][td]16[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]EJ Barlow (SA)[/td][td]17[/td][td]31[/td][td]0[/td][td]1284[/td][td]138[/td][td]41.41[/td][td]2[/td][td]9[/td][/tr][/table]

 

[FlickedOffHips]

Longevity is just one aspect of greatness. 100 tests is a pretty big sample size. Now, I am not saying that Amla is a better batsman than Ponting because that would be absurd but the criterion you are using does not make any sense. A batsman who plays less number of innings will obviously score less runs.

I wasn't making that point.
My point was- difference in longevity is the key differentiator between the two atm. Average is the second differentiator but we'll have to wait for Amla to finish his career before we can compare that. I suspect it will drop even lower and may end up around Laxman level. But we'll see.

 

[soso_killer]

Lack of longevity..

Longevity doesn't make a player great though, else someone like Chanderpaul would be classified as a great.
Bradman didn't have longevity either (in terms of games played). By 2010/11 it was widely established that Dale Steyn was a great, the only question was where he'd finish amongst the greats. Case in point with Amla.

What makes Amla a great for me is not stats (he's got them anyway) but how he performed against the best teams of his era.
Against the greatest side Asia has ever produced he stood tall. Took his team to within 10 deliveries of winning a series there. He dead batted everything in the second innings the Indians had no answer to him. Even the great Australian team always struggled in India. Sangakkara struggled in conditions he knows against the greatest side we'll ever see for those conditions.

When the number 1 ranking was on the line against the best English side in a very long time, again he produced the goods. Did the same in Australia, made a tough pitch and a low scoring match look like candy with a swashbuckling knock of 196.
In Sri Lanka he enabled South Africa to save a Test and secure a series win. What made the series win impressive was how it was achieved. How many teams have played for a draw from day 2 of a Test match and got away with it?
SA would have been slaughtered in the media for "negative" tactics had they failed (perhaps rightly so). But they had a game plan and stuck to it. Amla was vital in ensuring SA avoided the follow in the first innings (130 from 300+ deliveries), and another 30 odd from 150 deliveries in the second innings.

He has played so many different innings at crucial times and in different conditions. That's what makes him great for me not stats.
Two of the best number three's of the last 20 years were Ponting and Dravid, I don't know if Amla is as good as them yet. But it can't be argued that Amla is more versatile of the two. Ponting was attacking and didn't care much about saving Test matches. Dravid on the other hand was on the cautious side and didn't grab the game by the scruff of the neck. With Amla you have the best if both worlds. I'd have him ahead of them both in my starting XI. It's not to say he may or may not be better, that's a discussion for another day. With Amla you can consolidate and attack at the same time. But that's just my opinion and shouldn't be taken as gospel.

Amla does have chinks in his armour just like any other player, no disputing that either.

 

[soso_killer]

This (bold part) is ridiculous because thats the place he grew up playing cricket. Apart from that I would agree

Not necessarily, SA bats tend to average more away than at home Kallis being the exception.
Of the good/world class bats SA has produced they all average more away. Namely: Kirsten, Smith, Amla and AB.
I have never checked the stats of SA second tier players like Gibbs, Cullinan and Prince to check how they fare away as compared to home conditions. Would be interesting to see how they did.

 

[Abdullah719]

Not necessarily, SA bats tend to average more away than at home Kallis being the exception.
Of the good/world class bats SA has produced they all average more away. Namely: Kirsten, Smith, Amla and AB.
I have never checked the stats of SA second tier players like Gibbs, Cullinan and Prince to check how they fare away as compared to home conditions. Would be interesting to see how they did.

Batting in South Africa seems to be tougher for batsmen in the top 3 as opposed to batsmen in the middle order.

Gibbs, Kirsten and Smith all average lower at home - Amla too, marginally. All bat in the top 3.

AB averages higher away but when you look at his stats in the middle order, he averages higher in SA.

Similarly, Kallis also averages higher outside SA if you look at his stats at #3, while he averages higher at home while batting in the middle order.

The likes of Cullinan and Prince average higher at home as they bat in the middle order.

So to conclude, batting in the top 3 in South Africa is a very tough job.

 

[soso_killer]

Batting in South Africa seems to be tougher for batsmen in the top 3 as opposed to batsmen in the middle order.

Gibbs, Kirsten and Smith all average lower at home - Amla too, marginally. All bat in the top 3.

AB averages higher away but when you look at his stats in the middle order, he averages higher in SA.

Similarly, Kallis also averages higher outside SA if you look at his stats at #3, while he averages higher at home while batting in the middle order.

The likes of Cullinan and Prince average higher at home as they bat in the middle order.

So to conclude, batting in the top 3 in South Africa is a very tough job.

OK I get it.

 

[Chrish]

Longevity doesn't make a player great though, else someone like Chanderpaul would be classified as a great.
Bradman didn't have longevity either (in terms of games played). By 2010/11 it was widely established that Dale Steyn was a great, the only question was where he'd finish amongst the greats. Case in point with Amla.

What makes Amla a great for me is not stats (he's got them anyway) but how he performed against the best teams of his era.
Against the greatest side Asia has ever produced he stood tall. Took his team to within 10 deliveries of winning a series there. He dead batted everything in the second innings the Indians had no answer to him. Even the great Australian team always struggled in India. Sangakkara struggled in conditions he knows against the greatest side we'll ever see for those conditions.

When the number 1 ranking was on the line against the best English side in a very long time, again he produced the goods. Did the same in Australia, made a tough pitch and a low scoring match look like candy with a swashbuckling knock of 196.
In Sri Lanka he enabled South Africa to save a Test and secure a series win. What made the series win impressive was how it was achieved. How many teams have played for a draw from day 2 of a Test match and got away with it?
SA would have been slaughtered in the media for "negative" tactics had they failed (perhaps rightly so). But they had a game plan and stuck to it. Amla was vital in ensuring SA avoided the follow in the first innings (130 from 300+ deliveries), and another 30 odd from 150 deliveries in the second innings.

He has played so many different innings at crucial times and in different conditions. That's what makes him great for me not stats.
Two of the best number three's of the last 20 years were Ponting and Dravid, I don't know if Amla is as good as them yet. But it can't be argued that Amla is more versatile of the two. Ponting was attacking and didn't care much about saving Test matches. Dravid on the other hand was on the cautious side and didn't grab the game by the scruff of the neck. With Amla you have the best if both worlds. I'd have him ahead of them both in my starting XI. It's not to say he may or may not be better, that's a discussion for another day. With Amla you can consolidate and attack at the same time. But that's just my opinion and shouldn't be taken as gospel.

Amla does have chinks in his armour just like any other player, no disputing that either.

Very well articulated.. Thanks!

 

[Bilal7]

Do those batsmen get to be born and raised in South Africa like Amla?

There are kids born in Afghanistan and Palestine too. That does not make their lives as easy as a kid born in Canada or England, does it?

W's have to bowl in Asia for most of their career, should they too get the brownie points?

They should and they do. I always give extra points to pacers from Asia, batsmen from South Africa and England and spinners from Australia and New Zealand.

Well that’s what I thought as well but then came across a recent piece on him and saw that he has been in a rut since mid 2014. Now that’s obviously a very long time to be “out of form” that too while in his early 30s when most if not all top bats should be at their peak.

Links

Had no idea that it was this bad tbh that's quite a lengthy drop. What’s quite striking is that it’s pretty much straight after Kallis and Smith bowed out. Now it’s no secret that Amla has a history of buckling under expectations. Has flopped in every major tourney after looking a million bucks leading up to them. Struggled with captaincy as well. So when you connect the dots fair to say that there’s probably more than just poor form at play here. Any way only time will tell I guess. He’s not even 34 yet so he should have a few more years left in him to answer those questions.

None of what you said is true, to be honest. Harsh to say that he's "flopped" in every major tourney when he has averaged 40 or so in both the ODI WCs and averaged 40+ at a SR of 130+ in the most recent WT20.

He certainly hasn't been in a rut since mid-2014. He won South Africa a series in Sri Lanka that year, playing a major role with both his captaincy and his batting and in the first half of 2015, scored a double against the West Indies.

After that he hit an obstacle in the form of a rained out series against Bangladesh and diabolical pitches in India, had a fantastic series against England and then had this run of poor form where he just couldn't convert his starts into big scores.

If it was all down to Smith and Kallis departing, Amla wouldn't have performed in Sri Lanka or against England. Besides, like I said, Amla was easily South Africa's best batsman since 2010 (Best in the world, in fact) and he was the one relieving the pressure off Kallis and de Villiers by being such a fantastic #3. Playing the kinds of innings that he did must have also relieved a lot of pressure off his captain as well.

 

[Drreddymd]

Longevity doesn't make a player great though, else someone like Chanderpaul would be classified as a great.
Bradman didn't have longevity either (in terms of games played). By 2010/11 it was widely established that Dale Steyn was a great, the only question was where he'd finish amongst the greats. Case in point with Amla.

What makes Amla a great for me is not stats (he's got them anyway) but how he performed against the best teams of his era.
Against the greatest side Asia has ever produced he stood tall. Took his team to within 10 deliveries of winning a series there. He dead batted everything in the second innings the Indians had no answer to him. Even the great Australian team always struggled in India. Sangakkara struggled in conditions he knows against the greatest side we'll ever see for those conditions.

When the number 1 ranking was on the line against the best English side in a very long time, again he produced the goods. Did the same in Australia, made a tough pitch and a low scoring match look like candy with a swashbuckling knock of 196.
In Sri Lanka he enabled South Africa to save a Test and secure a series win. What made the series win impressive was how it was achieved. How many teams have played for a draw from day 2 of a Test match and got away with it?
SA would have been slaughtered in the media for "negative" tactics had they failed (perhaps rightly so). But they had a game plan and stuck to it. Amla was vital in ensuring SA avoided the follow in the first innings (130 from 300+ deliveries), and another 30 odd from 150 deliveries in the second innings.

He has played so many different innings at crucial times and in different conditions. That's what makes him great for me not stats.
Two of the best number three's of the last 20 years were Ponting and Dravid, I don't know if Amla is as good as them yet. But it can't be argued that Amla is more versatile of the two. Ponting was attacking and didn't care much about saving Test matches. Dravid on the other hand was on the cautious side and didn't grab the game by the scruff of the neck. With Amla you have the best if both worlds. I'd have him ahead of them both in my starting XI. It's not to say he may or may not be better, that's a discussion for another day. With Amla you can consolidate and attack at the same time. But that's just my opinion and shouldn't be taken as gospel.

Amla does have chinks in his armour just like any other player, no disputing that either.

Absolutely agree with u r points on his test match performances. He debuted in india with an ugly stance and back lift and everybody made fun of him as a quota player and barry richards was not convinced of him for a long time. He took nearly 30 tests to get into his stride and entered a purple patch where he performed very well in every country for 5 yrs. He was in beast mode against us in india in his second tour where we couldnt get him out. But he has a weakness against short ball and i never saw him score any runs against us in southafrica. Graemesmith is also one player who struggled against us big time and he didnt even score a single century against india

 

[SL_Fan]

There are kids born in Afghanistan and Palestine too. That does not make their lives as easy as a kid born in Canada or England, does it?



They should and they do. I always give extra points to pacers from Asia, batsmen from South Africa and England and spinners from Australia and New Zealand.



None of what you said is true, to be honest. Harsh to say that he's "flopped" in every major tourney when he has averaged 40 or so in both the ODI WCs and averaged 40+ at a SR of 130+ in the most recent WT20.

He certainly hasn't been in a rut since mid-2014. He won South Africa a series in Sri Lanka that year, playing a major role with both his captaincy and his batting and in the first half of 2015, scored a double against the West Indies.

After that he hit an obstacle in the form of a rained out series against Bangladesh and diabolical pitches in India, had a fantastic series against England and then had this run of poor form where he just couldn't convert his starts into big scores.

If it was all down to Smith and Kallis departing, Amla wouldn't have performed in Sri Lanka or against England. Besides, like I said, Amla was easily South Africa's best batsman since 2010 (Best in the world, in fact) and he was the one relieving the pressure off Kallis and de Villiers by being such a fantastic #3. Playing the kinds of innings that he did must have also relieved a lot of pressure off his captain as well.

He has flopped in all major tourneys.

Link

Last T20 WC his numbers are inflated by a 56* in a dead rubber game against us after SA were already knocked out. Can’t recall any inning of note from him in any of the ICC tourneys.

Since Aug 2014

Link

Piled on the runs against Windies and Eng at home but other than that nothing much to show for in the other six series. So fair to say that the struggle post Kallis/Smith is very much real. As I said let's see how things go from here he's got at least a couple of years left in him. Not even 34 yet.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Amla is a class act but has been missing more often than not in tournament matches.

 

[Hasan123]

You guys play don't play anywhere near as many tests as you should be. The English and Indians play 15-16 matches a year and South Africa barely play 10. This is why this silly threshold of 10000 runs is not something most people use to judge a batsman.



Great post. I'd have him ahead of those two as well if he bounces back from this set-back and helps yet another South African team to the #1 ranking. Better than Dravid across formats for sure.

Amla over Punter and Dravid? Are you actually being serious?

 

[Rayyman]

Amla over Punter and Dravid? Are you actually being serious?

Punter is better than Amla across formats, but Dravid is only better than Amla in Test matches.

 

[Hasan123]

Punter is better than Amla across formats, but Dravid is only better than Amla in Test matches.

Agree with this, Im assuming because he said across all formats he is including tests as well.

I rate Amla very highly in tests but in odis not as highly

 

[Buffet]

What makes Amla a great for me is not stats (he's got them anyway) but how he performed against the best teams of his era.

Against the greatest side Asia has ever produced he stood tall. Took his team to within 10 deliveries of winning a series there. He dead batted everything in the second innings the Indians had no answer to him. Even the great Australian team always struggled in India. Sangakkara struggled in conditions he knows against the greatest side we'll ever see for those conditions.

Which teams will be contender for that apart from the one your are mentioning?

Pakistani team in 80s under IK comes in my mind. PPers can throw other teams as contender here.

 

[Ab Fan]

Longevity doesn't make a player great though, else someone like Chanderpaul would be classified as a great.
Bradman didn't have longevity either (in terms of games played). By 2010/11 it was widely established that Dale Steyn was a great, the only question was where he'd finish amongst the greats. Case in point with Amla.

What makes Amla a great for me is not stats (he's got them anyway) but how he performed against the best teams of his era.
Against the greatest side Asia has ever produced he stood tall. Took his team to within 10 deliveries of winning a series there. He dead batted everything in the second innings the Indians had no answer to him. Even the great Australian team always struggled in India. Sangakkara struggled in conditions he knows against the greatest side we'll ever see for those conditions.

When the number 1 ranking was on the line against the best English side in a very long time, again he produced the goods. Did the same in Australia, made a tough pitch and a low scoring match look like candy with a swashbuckling knock of 196.
In Sri Lanka he enabled South Africa to save a Test and secure a series win. What made the series win impressive was how it was achieved. How many teams have played for a draw from day 2 of a Test match and got away with it?
SA would have been slaughtered in the media for "negative" tactics had they failed (perhaps rightly so). But they had a game plan and stuck to it. Amla was vital in ensuring SA avoided the follow in the first innings (130 from 300+ deliveries), and another 30 odd from 150 deliveries in the second innings.

He has played so many different innings at crucial times and in different conditions. That's what makes him great for me not stats.
Two of the best number three's of the last 20 years were Ponting and Dravid, I don't know if Amla is as good as them yet. But it can't be argued that Amla is more versatile of the two. Ponting was attacking and didn't care much about saving Test matches. Dravid on the other hand was on the cautious side and didn't grab the game by the scruff of the neck. With Amla you have the best if both worlds. I'd have him ahead of them both in my starting XI. It's not to say he may or may not be better, that's a discussion for another day. With Amla you can consolidate and attack at the same time. But that's just my opinion and shouldn't be taken as gospel.

Amla does have chinks in his armour just like any other player, no disputing that either.

The side you are talking about is regarded as one of the greatest in Asia because of their batting lineup not because of their bowling.It was a good Indian attack but nothing sort of excellent.Its their batting which makes it one of the greatest Asian side ever.

I would rather go to the extent and say that the current Indian bowling is better than that one as far as the home conditions are concerned.

Ofcourse not taking any due from Amla here but claims like standing tall vs greatest Asian side ever is just overrating things.

 

[Abdullah719]

154 with five sixes... back in form in ODIs after a lean patch.

 

[Bilal7]

50 international tons as well. Hopefully, he gets back to his supreme best after this super knock.

 

[Mamoon]

Good dead rubber innings.

 

[Smbhayi]

50 international tons as well. Hopefully, he gets back to his supreme best after this super knock.

mission accomplished

"I hope it will be a long Test career, and maybe if I can score 50 centuries in my career, no-one will question my technique," Amla
The Tale of Hashim Amla

 

[soso_killer]

The side you are talking about is regarded as one of the greatest in Asia because of their batting lineup not because of their bowling.It was a good Indian attack but nothing sort of excellent.Its their batting which makes it one of the greatest Asian side ever.

I would rather go to the extent and say that the current Indian bowling is better than that one as far as the home conditions are concerned.

Ofcourse not taking any due from Amla here but claims like standing tall vs greatest Asian side ever is just overrating things.

Lot's of Western players struggled there, ask Ricky Ponting to name a few. Remember the scoreboard pressure those guys created. A guy like Sehwag was capable of winning matches on his own scoring 300 in a single day. Giving his bowlers 4 days to take twenty wickets with attacking fields.
India had a very capable attack for those conditions. If it was so easy, why did Sanga struggle there?

 

[soso_killer]

Which teams will be contender for that apart from the one your are mentioning?

Pakistani team in 80s under IK comes in my mind. PPers can throw other teams as contender here.

Pakistan had a good side in the 80's but that Indian side for me is the best side will ever see. Dominated an ATG team. Yes Australia were foriegn to those conditions, but we're talking about an ATG side here.

 

[The_KING]

Don't understand the need to bump this thread after every match.

 

[Bilal7]

Pakistan had a good side in the 80's but that Indian side for me is the best side will ever see. Dominated an ATG team. Yes Australia were foriegn to those conditions, but we're talking about an ATG side here.

The Pakistan of the 80s and 90s were the better test teams. India is nigh impossible to beat in India but that is due to the conditions in the country rather than Indian teams being particularly great.

I agree though that Amla during that 2010 tour of India was a one-man batting lineup. Averaged over 400! He's had iconic series in Australia, England, India and South Africa, which is a pretty legendary achievement. Can't think of many ATGs who have thrived in all four of those countries.

 

[Bilal7]

mission accomplished

What a lovely quote.

 

[soso_killer]

The Pakistan of the 80s and 90s were the better test teams. India is nigh impossible to beat in India but that is due to the conditions in the country rather than Indian teams being particularly great.

I agree though that Amla during that 2010 tour of India was a one-man batting lineup. Averaged over 400! He's had iconic series in Australia, England, India and South Africa, which is a pretty legendary achievement. Can't think of many ATGs who have thrived in all four of those countries.

I was referring to India in Asia, not not all conditions.
When all conditions are taken into account perhaps the Pakistan side of the 80's is better due to a well all rounded attack.
However India in Asia was a different beast. Best side ever for those conditions IMHO. Sehwag 90 odd in Chennai chasing 370 odd is one of the best innings I've ever seen irrespective of conditions. Elsewhere that innings is worth 150+ that's how good it was.

 

[TahirFan]

Hashim Amla really struggling these days..

Another failure

 

[shah_1]

Really struggling

He needs to retire

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

His test form has gone south. Still a gun odi player.

 

[Hasan123]

Lol this thread shouldn't be bumped after every Amla low score.

 

[TahirFan]

And another low score

 

[Hitman]

He doesn't even average 50 now in Tests.

 

[Mamoon]

His biggest fan on PP has always been adamant that you cannot be an ATG Test batsman if you don't average 50+, so this is an extremely slippery slope for him.

 

[Mamoon]

A good Test batsman who had a brilliant peak for 3-4 years and an average Limited Overs batsman. On top of that, a pathetic captain with no charisma and leadership qualities.

That is Amla's legacy. Nothing more than a South African great, and probably not even amongst their top 5 cricketers of all time.

 

[Ab Fan]

Since 2015, he has been just a shadow of himself missing out on some big tours of India, Australia and now New Zealand. SA would find it hard in England if Amla doesn't show up there.

Anyways, he has been among some of the rare players to have impacted a complete series on whole in countries like Australia, India and England (the big3).Not many can do that. Even Smith missed out in India.He deserves due for that.A great test Player nevertheless.

 

[JibranAnsari]

His peak is over , time to retire i think

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Amla is finished. I definitely don't count him as an ATG. ABD, Kallis, Steyn, Pollock are all better cricketer than Amla. I would rate Graeme Smith higher for being a great captain + clutch opener. Amla is just a SAF great.

 

[Protea Fan]

He is definitely going through his worst phase of carrier

But i have a gut feeling that this is just a lean patch and he has got the goddamn technique to rectify the errors

He's 33, almost the similar age of murali vijay so seriously some more cricket left in him

After 10-20 years when we look back to the player mighty amla he deserves a better overall stats than the current one

 

[leatherface58]

He is not done yet. He is definitely on a decline but he has a century this year. He probably needs to be rested and play domestic for a few months to ease up on the pressure.

 

[Bilal7]

Stuck in a rut. More mental than physical, but age definitely has had an impact given that he relied on his reflexes more than someone like Kallis and isn't as fit as someone like AB.

Hope he has one last hurrah in him though. Deserves to go out on a high given the excellent person that he is.

 

[Square Drive]

Big knock around the corner.

Can still get 10k Test runs. He will be back.

 

[dildildalwalla]

Reports of Amla's demise are ab it premature. It was just 5 innings ago when he scored a century and a little over a year ago when he scroed a double in a match saving effort against a very good England side.

What we're seeing is a dip in form as Amla ages but like any great, I'm sure he will show yet mroe resilience, come through this bad patch and have another couple of eye catching innings in him.

 

[Varun]

I notice his average is under 50 now.

As is Kohli's.

 

[TahirFan]

Another failure.

 

[Adil_94]

Amla will retire with an average under 50.

 

[Napa]

Probably over the hill. From Cricinfo "5 Number of away Test series Hashim Amla has now gone without making a hundred. His last hundred outside South Africa came in Colombo in 2014 when he made an unbeaten 139. Since that match, Amla has made only 389 runs in 20 innings at an average of 20.55. In a period of five years up until the Colombo Test in 2014, Amla had made 2249 runs at 77.55 with ten hundreds and five fifties in 19 away Tests."

 

[Rayyman]

Needs to take a whole series off. Just some time off from the game. Definitely has the years left in him. Only 33-34 so 2-3 years of cricket are still there. He is still super-fit too. Wish him all the best.

 

[Ozymandiasza]

I honestly don't think we'll see Amla near his peak again. The show is over. I only wish to see a few more glimpses again before he retires

 

[Adil_94]

If Amla doesnt get to 10k runs and retires with an average of 47-48 is he an ATG ? [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

 

[Mamoon]

If Amla doesnt get to 10k runs and retires with an average of 47-48 is he an ATG ? [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

He has had an outstanding Test career with impactful runs against all the top sides away from home. IMO, he is the most accomplished Test batsman after Sangakkara if we look at the last 10 years. He is probably an ATG Test batsman, but perhaps the only criticism is the lack of longevity. He has declined a good 3-4 years earlier than he should have.

As far as his average is concerned, it is interesting to note that averaging over 50 has always been a bit of struggle for him. It wasn't until 2012 when he finally managed to get it above that mark, and now since 2016-2017, he has been struggling again, which explains his short peak at the top.

Nonetheless, this is a very tough one for his biggest fan on PP. He has always been adamant that you cannot be an ATG in Tests if you don't average 50, and he also takes pride in the fact that he doesn't change his opinion, so he will either have to concede that Amla is not ATG or he will have to concede that you don't have to average above 50 to be an ATG.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

If Amla doesn't average above 50 when he retires, he's not an ATG. Not that it makes him a bad player, Mahela and Clarke were great players as is Amla. But not ATG. You can only make exceptions for openers for the average issue like Graeme Smith or Alastair Cook. However Amla is not an opener in test, so no excuse for him.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Many don't consider Clarke an ATG because he doesn't average 50 in tests and yet he had some of the best knocks against the best test bowling attack of his time. I find it difficult to rate Amla ahead of Clarke, who i think was massively underrated.

 

[Chrish]

Have a feeling won't hang around for too long, like he did with the captaincy

 

[Bilal7]

He has had an outstanding Test career with impactful runs against all the top sides away from home. IMO, he is the most accomplished Test batsman after Sangakkara if we look at the last 10 years. He is probably an ATG Test batsman, but perhaps the only criticism is the lack of longevity. He has declined a good 3-4 years earlier than he should have.

As far as his average is concerned, it is interesting to note that averaging over 50 has always been a bit of struggle for him. It wasn't until 2012 when he finally managed to get it above that mark, and now since 2016-2017, he has been struggling again, which explains his short peak at the top.

Nonetheless, this is a very tough one for his biggest fan on PP. He has always been adamant that you cannot be an ATG in Tests if you don't average 50, and he also takes pride in the fact that he doesn't change his opinion, so he will either have to concede that Amla is not ATG or he will have to concede that you don't have to average above 50 to be an ATG.

Not tough at all. Amla has been a great player in both tests and ODIs but if he doesn't put in any more great performances from here on out, he won't reach that Sanga, Dravid, Kallis, Sachin, Lara and Younis level. If he comes back from this and becomes part of a second South African team that becomes #1 in the world, he'll go down as an ATG. If you remove minnows, his average rises and he hasn't had the luxury of flat pitches or minnow-bashing. No shame if this is the end for him, he's done more than 99% of cricketers already.

He's far better than a Mahela and comfortably ahead of Clarke. Their away performances leave much to be desired and Amla, despite his decline in form has performed all over the world.

 

[JaDed]

Last of those well behaved and talented players that played for the team and were modest.

Don't think we will see those qualities in batsmen anymore unless KW plays top knocks away from home.

 

[Mamoon]

Not tough at all. Amla has been a great player in both tests and ODIs but if he doesn't put in any more great performances from here on out, he won't reach that Sanga, Dravid, Kallis, Sachin, Lara and Younis level. If he comes back from this and becomes part of a second South African team that becomes #1 in the world, he'll go down as an ATG. If you remove minnows, his average rises and he hasn't had the luxury of flat pitches or minnow-bashing. No shame if this is the end for him, he's done more than 99% of cricketers already.

He's far better than a Mahela and comfortably ahead of Clarke. Their away performances leave much to be desired and Amla, despite his decline in form has performed all over the world.

He has no chance of overtaking Sachin, Lara and Dravid (due to lack of longevity), but he is comfortably better than Younis irrespective of his overall average, which has obviously taken a hit in comparison to Younis because he doesn't have the luxury of playing his home matches on UAE pitches. A far superior player of pace and lateral movement, and equally good vs spin. No comparison between the two. We are talking different levels here.

 

[Bilal7]

He has no chance of overtaking Sachin, Lara and Dravid (due to lack of longevity), but he is comfortably better than Younis irrespective of his overall average, which has obviously taken a hit in comparison to Younis because he doesn't have the luxury of playing his home matches on UAE pitches. A far superior player of pace and lateral movement, and equally good vs spin. No comparison between the two. We are talking different levels here.

All ATG players are on the same level, even though individual players may be slightly better than each other. Younis is an ATG and on the level of Dravid and yes, Sachin, as far as test cricket is concerned.

Amla isn't there yet and he needs a big series against England and later against Australia to firmly establish himself as an ATG.

So Younis > Amla as of now. Amla is better against pace and equally good versus spin like you said but Younis has the better numbers which, like it or not, matter a whole lot in a sport where runs and wickets win you matches.

 

[Chrish]

Last of those well behaved and talented players that played for the team and were modest.

Don't think we will see those qualities in batsmen anymore unless KW plays top knocks away from home.

Pujara ??

 

[JaDed]

Pujara ??

Away nope.

 

[Ozymandiasza]

Many don't consider Clarke an ATG because he doesn't average 50 in tests and yet he had some of the best knocks against the best test bowling attack of his time. I find it difficult to rate Amla ahead of Clarke, who i think was massively underrated.

Agreed, I dislike an Aussie as much as the next person but Clarke was excellent. I'd place him in the same category as G. Smith; tough and unlikable but people you'd like in your team.

 

[Chrish]

Away nope.

too early to speculate..

 

[Ozymandiasza]

Away nope.

I honestly think it's open at this stage. Call me a fool, but I rate Pujara higher than Kohli in tests. In fact, I remember calling for him to be captain. Regardless, his peak years are +- now. Let's judge after that.

 

[Arsalan Pro]

In poor form nowadays, used to be a beast with the bat.

 

[Mamoon]

All ATG players are on the same level, even though individual players may be slightly better than each other. Younis is an ATG and on the level of Dravid and yes, Sachin, as far as test cricket is concerned.

Amla isn't there yet and he needs a big series against England and later against Australia to firmly establish himself as an ATG.

So Younis > Amla as of now. Amla is better against pace and equally good versus spin like you said but Younis has the better numbers which, like it or not, matter a whole lot in a sport where runs and wickets win you matches.

Oh dear. ) Another gem Bilal, but this one has to take the cake.

Tendulkar in his 20's averaged almost 60 in the 90's with 20+ tons in 60 odd Tests. On the other hand, Younis could not get established in Test cricket till 2005 where he was almost 30, because he repeatedly got found out by the likes of Pollock, Donald, Ambrose, Walsh etc. Looked like fish out of water against McGrath and Warne in the 2002 series in SL/UAE.

Amla is a level above Younis, and Tendulkar is about two/three levels above him. And no, not all ATG players are at the same level. Some are top-tier ATGs; some are lower-tier ATGs.

 

[Hasan123]

Younis up there with Sachin? Some people ) )

 

[R0H1T]

Since 2015, he has been just a shadow of himself missing out on some big tours of India, Australia and now New Zealand. SA would find it hard in England if Amla doesn't show up there.

Anyways, he has been among some of the rare players to have impacted a complete series on whole in countries like Australia, India and England (the big3).Not many can do that. Even Smith missed out in India.He deserves due for that.A great test Player nevertheless.

They need ABDV, simple as that, as Cook looks like a walking wicket & an iffy number 3 will make it doubly impossible for them to compete in England, let alone win the series.