What constitutes a 'genuine' allrounder?

[Yoda_]

There is one all rounder who was generally high class at all facets. Not just a bowler who could bat ok or vice versa. Alas he never got a shot at Test cricket.

I am talking about Clive Rice. FC figures of 26331 runs at 40.95 and 930 wickets at 22.39 indicate a real talent.

Tom Moody averaged 46 in FC cricket and 30 with the ball

id suggest that's genuine all rounder echelons too. Great shout to Clive

 

[Yoda_]

Unpopular opinion bu Michael Nesser IS NOT an All Rounder. A bowler who can wield the willow? yes, but not a true batsmen imho

 

[ioppolo]

Unpopular opinion bu Michael Nesser IS NOT an All Rounder. A bowler who can wield the willow? yes, but not a true batsmen imho

Is anyone really pushing for him to be known as an all rounder?

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

Is anyone really pushing for him to be known as an all rounder?

Yes, the current trend is anyone who averages over 20 with the bat is an all-rounder

I love Nes but he's a bowler who can bat a bit, nothing more

Your batting average should be at least 30 before you're considered an allrounder

 

[Yoda_]

Is anyone really pushing for him to be known as an all rounder?

tuned in to the Vics game and heard them reference Neser as an all rounder 2 - 3 times in a 30 minute spell

 

[Richard Pryor]

Yes, the current trend is anyone who averages over 20 with the bat is an all-rounder

I love Nes but he's a bowler who can bat a bit, nothing more

Your batting average should be at least 30 before you're considered an allrounder

I feel like historically over 20 with the bar was enough for all-rounder status, but since the 2000s batting standards for bowlers have risen to the point that outside of the number 11 every bowler is most likely capable of averaging 20.

 

[DaRick]

Yes, the current trend is anyone who averages over 20 with the bat is an all-rounder

I love Nes but he's a bowler who can bat a bit, nothing more

Your batting average should be at least 30 before you're considered an allrounder

I feel like historically over 20 with the bar was enough for all-rounder status, but since the 2000s batting standards for bowlers have risen to the point that outside of the number 11 every bowler is most likely capable of averaging 20.

This is news to me.

Someone like that has always been treated as a bowler who could bat a bit - so basically a #8/#9.

Tailender techniques have improved, but only to the extent that outright rabbits (averaging <10) are increasingly rare, with Bumrah/Siraj being genuine throwbacks. Hell, even McGrath averaged around 10 for the last few years of his career.

RE the question, you'd want at least a batting and bowling average in the low 30s to be considered a genuine allrounder, with the batting average being higher.

So despite being a frustrating cricketer, Shane Watson does qualify as a genuine allrounder, whereas Mitch Marsh does not.

 

[beatnik]

When i was a wee boy, class all rounders were plentiful. Botham, Hadlee and Imran were the big 3. Akram followed soon after. Procter & Rice we unfortunately didn’t get to see much of, but wiser men than me say they were in the same class.

Kapil Dev says hi

 

[yabsy]

Yes, the current trend is anyone who averages over 20 with the bat is an all-rounder

I love Nes but he's a bowler who can bat a bit, nothing more

Your batting average should be at least 30 before you're considered an allrounder

His 1st Class average after 150 innings is 28.4 (5 - 100s), so not far off 30...He also bats at No.7 for Qld...I think it's fair to say he's in that "bowling allrounder" category

On Redmi Note 8 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[eth-dog]

I'd say if you average 25 with the bat as a bowler you should be considered a bowling allrounder. 20-25 doesn't feel like AR territory to me. As for batting/pure all rounders you'd wanna average under 40 with the ball (ideally sub 35) and get at least 10 overs per test/around 1 wicket per test. So for example, I wouldn't consider Mark Waugh an allrounder but I would consider Symonds one.

 

[Lunchtime]

Around the turn of the decade (2009-2011 or so) he basically carried NZ entirely by himself. Scored a double hundred from nowhere I think.

Never scored a double hundred in any format.

 

[Lunchtime]

Unpopular opinion bu Michael Nesser IS NOT an All Rounder. A bowler who can wield the willow? yes, but not a true batsmen imho

Agreed.

 

[Lunchtime]

Jadeja - In Test cricket he averages 38 with the bat and averages 25 with the ball.

With the bat in all forms of First-Class cricket (First-Class includes Test cricket) he averages 45 with the bat and averages 24 with the ball. Jadeja has scored 3 triple hundreds in First-Class cricket.

 

[Jack Mundy]

Tom Moody averaged 46 in FC cricket and 30 with the ball

In fc cricket Mike Gatting averaged 49 with bat and took 150 wickets at 29

 

[Jack Mundy]

Ijaz Ahmed was Pakistan's 5th bowler at the 1992 world cup, bowling over 5 overs a match. Took one wicket and went for 4 runs an over. Over his career took 5 wickets at 92, but in that world cup winning team he was an all rounder.

 

[Gough]

Ijaz Ahmed was Pakistan's 5th bowler at the 1992 world cup, bowling over 5 overs a match. Took one wicket and went for 4 runs an over. Over his career took 5 wickets at 92, but in that world cup winning team he was an all rounder.

Early in his career I remember Kepler Wessels being used as a bowler in ODIs.

 

[western royboy]

Early in his career I remember Kepler Wessels being used as a bowler in ODIs.

He was a pie floater bowler at best, bowled some horrendous offies that were almost as ugly as his batting set up when he first entered test cricket.

Sides uses to be picked as 6 batsman a keeper and 4 bowlers so before genuine all rounders were about you always had to manufacture 10 overs.

Greg Chappell was an underrated gentle medium bowler who I reckon took 5-15 on a seaming wicket against India one day, but I can also recall Hookesy, Graeme Wood and others roll out sone puss to get thru the ten post GS Chappell.

 

[ioppolo]

He was a pie floater bowler at best, bowled some horrendous offies that were almost as ugly as his batting set up when he first entered test cricket.

Sides uses to be picked as 6 batsman a keeper and 4 bowlers so before genuine all rounders were about you always had to manufacture 10 overs.

Greg Chappell was an underrated gentle medium bowler who I reckon took 5-15 on a seaming wicket against India one day, but I can also recall Hookesy, Graeme Wood and others roll out sone puss to get thru the ten post GS Chappell.

Chappell took almost 300 FC @ 29 which is genuine all rounder territory.

 

[Gough]

He was a pie floater bowler at best, bowled some horrendous offies that were almost as ugly as his batting set up when he first entered test cricket.

Sides uses to be picked as 6 batsman a keeper and 4 bowlers so before genuine all rounders were about you always had to manufacture 10 overs.

Greg Chappell was an underrated gentle medium bowler who I reckon took 5-15 on a seaming wicket against India one day, but I can also recall Hookesy, Graeme Wood and others roll out sone puss to get thru the ten post GS Chappell.

I remember that 5/15 game India were bowled out for 63 and it was all over by lunch Perth time. It was the first time I'd ever seen a team bowled out like that which is why I remember it. Funny to think at the time India wouldn't have played twenty ODIs in their history.