Jaques Kallis. The best ?

[Richard Jenkins]

Jaques Kallis looks the best cricketer i've seen for a while and his technique looks really good. Is he the worlds best cricketer? He certainly seems to have put Flintoff into the shade and he seems to have scored runs at will apart from a duck in the first test.
He's scored 448 runs and taken a couple of important wickets for miserly amounts. Is he the best player now? can anyone else claim to have this rich form? Strauss? Lara? Tendulkar? The australian batters?

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Kallis would cerainly be in my world 11

[Maranello]

Based on form over the past 2-3 years, and class (so rules out the "flash-in-the-pan" or "too-early-to-tell" candidates) Kallis is no doubt one of the world's premier batsman. However, IMO he is not alone at the summit, and is joined by a certain Rahul Dravid, every bit as classy, as correct and as dominant as Kallis, and maybe more of a match winner. Kallis does bowl too, so yes, maybe he is the world's best cricketer. However, Dravid has done it for longer, and in more crucial games, where his contributions have often saved or won the day for his team.

[Milo]

He's started to convince me now that he is a very good bat. He's in the Boycott mould though - he will never underachieve. He doesn't throw his wicket away and I'm not sure he plays for the team that often. Many one dayers (the semi final of the ICC trophy in SL a prime example) he has refused to take the risks when six an over are required and the games have been lost as a result.

His bowling is adequate but nothing to write home about. Technically very sound, but as a like for like player I'd still take Dravid. As for best player in the world - not for me I'm afraid. Too many players have scored a lot of runs in the last three years (Ponting, Hayden, Lara etc) for Kallis to be singled out.

[Zainub]

Difficult to say is he's the best cricketer in the world or not, one thing is for sure though, he is the most inform batsmen in the world right now. No doubts about that.

From what I have seen it looks like England have made up their minds that once this guys is going to pass 30 odd he'll be invincible to get out - they seem more happy to give him a single , get him off strike, and bowl at the other guys and try and get them out. I don't think that is quite the way to go about it - England should ball closer to his body and make him play more..or whatever, I just have this impression they haven't attacked him enough, but I understand, the form he is now, even his defensive pushes are going right from the middle of the stick as far as mid on- hard to find a weakness when some one is in such imperial touch...but..some how though, they must figure out a way to get him out cheaply, if they wanna keep their series hopes alive.

[Chuck Palumbo]

He certainly is on the top of his game at the moment. The one doubt in him though is his record against Australia- he averages 32 against them compared to his career average of 55 so that is something he has to put right before the end of his career if he is going to be rated alongside his generation's greats as Tendulkar,Lara and Dravid have all done something significant against them.

[Nandos the Gooner Mark II]

Australia on top form can make any player seem ordinary. But Kallis just keeps improving. His wicket is a prized possession these days. It must be time for Australia and South Africa to lock horns again soon, and I have no doubt he will prosper.

[vvvrulz]

Well for me, that is the acid test. If he can worry the Australian, i'll then admit he is one of today's finest.

[Rachael]

Atherton was asked about his weaknesses on Talksport and said that technically he has none. The fact that England's best strategy for taking his wicket was to bowl 6 ODI wides an over kinda supports the view that they don't see a weakness either.

That's good enough on the technical front for me.. especially as his key strengths seem to me to be more on the mental front: he appears to come from the Steve Waugh school of beligerence... which even if allied to a dubious technique would be one hell of a strength.. and when allied to exemplary technique is surely grounds for deification.

With that said... I don't think anyone disputes that Lara, whilst technically inferior, is a more impressive batsman: I've heard nothing to suggest that Kallis is even close to the same league when it comes to improvisation, touch and sheer intuitive genius - but then it seems unlikely that any batsman, ever, has been a match when it comes to finding a single off ANY ball to ANY field setting.

Equally.. I don't think anyone is suggesting that Kallis, whilst perhaps mentally stronger, could ever be as impossible to bowl to as Tendulkar... who would appear to lack Lara's silkiness... but at times be able to play the most incredibe of orthodox shots with seeming impunity off even near perfect deliveries - but Tendulkar has surely been the best in more than a generation at that.

Nice triumvirate, really: each exemplifying one major dimension of a complex craft.

[Maranello]

Nice summary Rachael, but what about Rahul Dravid. A Test average which, at almost 58, is lower only than Bradman, Barrington, Hammond and Sobers in the history of the game*. His average is 3 runs more than Kallis (almost 6%), and is continually increasing. He is India's premier batsman, has been for 3 years now - not a mean feat when your teammate is SRT!

Postscript:
I feel I am moved to copy in Dravid's Wisden cricinfo profile here, for those who seem to be under any misapprehensions about this player:

Rahul Dravid, a cricketer who seamlessly blends an old-world classicism with a new-age professionalism, is the best No. 3 batsman to play for India – and might even be considered one of the best ever by the time his career is done. He already averages around 60 at that position, more than any regular No. 3 batsman in the game’s history, barring Don Bradman. Unusually for an Indian batsman, he also averages more overseas – around 60, again – than at home. But impressive as his statistics are, they cannot represent the extent of his importance to India, or the beauty of his batsmanship.

When Dravid began playing Test cricket, he was quickly stereotyped as a technically correct player capable of stonewalling against the best attacks – his early nickname was ‘The Wall’ – but of little else. As the years went by, though, Dravid, a sincere batsman who brought humility and a deep intelligence to his study of the game, grew in stature, finally reaching full blossom under Sourav Ganguly’s captaincy. As a New India emerged, so did a new Dravid: first, he put on the wicketkeeping gloves in one-dayers, and transformed himself into an astute finisher in the middle-order; then, he strung together a series of awe-inspiring performances in Test matches, as India crept closer and closer to their quest of an overseas series win.

Dravid’s golden phase began, arguably, in Calcutta 2001, with a supporting act, when he made 180 to supplement VVS Laxman’s classic effort of 281 against Australia. But from then on, Dravid became India’s most valuable player, saving them Tests at Port Elizabeth, Georgetown and Trent Bridge, winning them Tests at Headlingley, Adelaide, Kandy and Rawalpindi. At one point during this run, he carved up four centuries in successive innings, and hit four double-centuries in the space of 15 Tests, including in historic away-wins at Adelaide and Rawalpindi. As India finished off the 2004 Pakistan tour on a winning note, on the back of Dravid’s epic 270, his average crept past Sachin Tendulkar’s – and it seemed no aberration.

Dravid’s amazing run was no triumph of substance over style, though, for he has plenty of both. A classical strokeplayer who plays every shot in the book, he often outscores team-mates like Tendulkar and Laxman in the course of partnerships with them, and while his pulling and cover-driving is especially breathtaking, he has every other shot in the book as well. He is both an artist and a craftsman, repeatedly constructing innings that stand out not merely for the beauty of their execution, but for the context in which they come. By the time he entered his 30s, Dravid was already in the pantheon of great Indian batsmen, alongside Tendulkar and Sunil Gavaskar. What else could he achieve? Anything.

*criteria: over 5,000 Test runs, to discuss only the all-time greats only

[vvvrulz]

For me, it will be interesting to see whether Dravid can continue his form from those three very good years, or will he be on the decline, much like Michael Vaughan is (though Vaughan had captaincy to contend with).