What constitutes a 'genuine' allrounder?

[sherb]

He took what I would consider to be the most vital wicket in the Centenary Test too (Amiss, breaking that huge partnership with Amiss).

I could be wrong, but I think he and Cosier still own the only instance of two bowlers each taking 5 wickets in an ODI innings.

I found that wicket. Go to the 9min 30sec mark.

For context, Randall and Amiss had put on 166 for the 4th wicket, taking England to 279 chasing 463. Amiss had batted 13 minutes shy of 4 hours.

 

[Jack Mundy]

I didn't say any were.

"..Average not excessively inflated by not outs either, which can happen with lower order batsmen"

 

[sherb]

To me, the ultimate definition of an all-rounder is someone who could justify their place in the side separately as a batsman and a bowler.

But that definition is so narrow and unrealistic that it really can't be used imo, as too few players would qualify.

 

[sherb]

"..Average not excessively inflated by not outs either, which can happen with lower order batsmen"

I was simply saying that lower order batsmen can have a higher number of not outs, which then pushes up the average.

This happens because they are often left unbeaten when the side gets bowled out or declares.

In Neser's case, I was making the point that he had an average of 28.3 with only 17 career not outs, as opposed to the same average with, say, 37 career not outs.

 

[Jack Mundy]

I was simply saying that lower order batsmen can have a higher number of not outs, which then pushes up the average.

This happens because they are often left unbeaten when the side gets bowled out or declares.

In Neser's case, I was making the point that he had an average of 28.3 with only 17 career not outs, as opposed to the same average with, say, 37 career not outs.

Over a few innings. Over a career with 4,000 plus runs the impact of not outs is negligible..unless you have an example?!

 

[sherb]

Over a few innings. Over a career with 4,000 plus runs the impact of not outs is negligible..unless you have an example?!

I've set out, and then further explained, my position.

I'll be leaving it at that.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

At international level, I would say a all-rounder is a match winner with bat and ball.

 

[Partridge]

Kallis the ultimate all rounder, that he is arguably the best batsman since Bradman just shows how good he was.

Great player no doubt, but that's extremely arguable. I can think of a couple of West Indians ahead of him, and one or two South Africans.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Great player no doubt, but that's extremely arguable. I can think of a couple of West Indians ahead of him, and one or two South Africans.

That’s great you can do that but the reality is that he may just well be the best bat since Bradman.

 

[matty lloyd the champ]

From a statistical point of view, how about a player with a higher batting average than their bowling average?

Some all rounders that fit this criteria include the likes of
Jadeja (38 batting vs 25 bowling)
Kallis (55 batting vs 33 bowling)
Stokes (35 batting vs 31 bowling)
Botham (33 batting vs 28 bowling)
Kapil Dev (31 batting vs 30 bowling)
Imran Kahn (38 batting vs 23 bowling)
Sobers (58 batting vs 34 bowling)
Pollock (32 batting vs 23 bowling)
Hadlee (27 batting vs 22 bowling)

It pretty much covers the list of the greats with the exception of Flintoff who marginally misses out. (32 batting vs 33 bowling)

 

[Jack Mundy]

From a statistical point of view, how about a player with a higher batting average than their bowling average?

Some all rounders that fit this criteria include the likes of
Jadeja (38 batting vs 25 bowling)
Kallis (55 batting vs 33 bowling)
Stokes (35 batting vs 31 bowling)
Botham (33 batting vs 28 bowling)
Kapil Dev (31 batting vs 30 bowling)
Imran Kahn (38 batting vs 23 bowling)
Sobers (58 batting vs 34 bowling)
Pollock (32 batting vs 23 bowling)
Hadlee (27 batting vs 22 bowling)

It pretty much covers the list of the greats with the exception of Flintoff who marginally misses out. (32 batting vs 33 bowling)

That measure favours batting all-rounders. Players like Kallis and Sobers

 

[Pistol Night]

Based on gameday thread expectations - Averaging 60 with the bat and 20 with the ball

 

[Partridge]

That’s great you can do that but the reality is that he may just well be the best bat since Bradman.

Don't get me wrong I love Kallis - and I reckon he was somehow underrated during most of his career - but I can't quite put him ahead of Lara or Viv.

 

[eth-dog]

Don't get me wrong I love Kallis - and I reckon he was somehow underrated during most of his career - but I can't quite put him ahead of Lara or Viv.

I can, easily. Maybe not Viv as I'm too young but Lara faded at the end of his career.

 

[Lunchtime]

I can, easily. Maybe not Viv as I'm too young but Lara faded at the end of his career.

2004, 2005 & 2006 calendar years for Lara in Test cricket:

Innings: 56
Not Outs: 1
Ducks: 7
Runs: 3037
Average: 55.21
50s: 6
100s: 11
50+ Scores: 17
Highest Score: 400 not out

Final 3 years - Lara certainly did not fade at the end of his career.

 

[eaglevision]

I can, easily. Maybe not Viv as I'm too young but Lara faded at the end of his career.

If I were picking a world XI that I’d seen play, Kallis would be the first player I’d pick.

There are arguments for Murali over Warne, Sangakkara over Gilly, Tendulkar, Ponting or Lara over Smith but Kallis is without peer, he is the all rounder.

 

[eth-dog]

If I were picking a world XI that I’d seen play, Kallis would be the first player I’d pick.

There are arguments for Murali over Warne, Sangakkara over Gilly, Tendulkar, Ponting or Lara over Smith but Kallis is without peer, he is the all rounder.

I'd go:

G Smith (c)
Cook
Sangakkara
Kallis
Ponting
Lara
Gilly (+)
Warne
Steyn
Murali
McGrath

 

[eaglevision]

I'd go:

G Smith (c)
Cook
Sangakkara
Kallis
Ponting
Lara
Gilly (+)
Warne
Steyn
Murali
McGrath

Dravid
Tendulkar
Ponting (c)
Smith
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Warne
Steyn
Ambrose
McGrath

Unlucky:
Cummins
Khan
Akram
Sangakkara
Murali

I know the Tendulkar opening is controversial but he has to be in the team.

 

[eth-dog]

2004, 2005 & 2006 calendar years for Lara in Test cricket:

Innings: 56
Not Outs: 1
Ducks: 7
Runs: 3037
Average: 55.21
50s: 6
100s: 11
50+ Scores: 17
Highest Score: 400 not out

Final 3 years - Lara certainly did not fade at the end of his career.

Sorry, was thinking of Sachin

 

[Lunchtime]

Sorry, was thinking of Sachin

2011, 2012 & 2013 calendar years for Tendulkar in Test cricket:

Innings: 41
Not Outs: 2
Ducks: 0
Runs: 1389
Average: 35.61
50s: 9
100s: 1
50+ Scores: 10
Highest Score: 146

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Don't get me wrong I love Kallis - and I reckon he was somehow underrated during most of his career - but I can't quite put him ahead of Lara or Viv.

I loved Viv as well.

 

[sr36]

Starc has style and looks like he could be a lot better than he is, to me he looks like he sort of plateaued and never really reached the level he was capable of. He has genuine ability

Starc hits it beautifully, but he doesn't move his feet so he's in trouble when the ball is moving.

 

[BGman]

There are plenty of 'white ball' allrounders but what constitutes a 'genuine' allrounder?

My take is it is a red ball cricketer that has the ability to be picked alone for either his batting or bowling.
Many rate Kallis one of the best all time all rounders, but would you pick him alone for his bowling as his record is not all that earth shattering. Certainly would for his batting which was up there with histories best..

 

[Jack Mundy]

My take is it is a cricketer that has the ability to be picked alone for either his batting or bowling.

Michael Bevan

 

[eth-dog]

My take is it is a red ball cricketer that has the ability to be picked alone for either his batting or bowling.
Many rate Kallis one of the best all time all rounders, but would you pick him alone for his bowling as his record is not all that earth shattering. Certainly would for his batting which was up there with histories best..

So what, Sobers is the only true all rounder in history?