Which Team Has The Most Allrounder's????

[cricket player]

which team has the most all rounders

to me it is pakistan with 4

 

[Prince EWS]

Well, Zimbabwe used to have a few, but theyve all gone now...

I think its South Africa really. Hall, Kallis, De Bruyn, Pollock, Boje all in their best test lineup. Thats 5.

NZ have a few when it comes to ODIs though. Oram, Cairns, Styris, Harris, Vettori - and if you take the allrounder term lightly, you also have Mills, Astle and McMillan.

 

[bryce]

.
and if you take the allrounder term lightly, you also have Mills, Astle and McMillan.

also bowling all-rounders adams and franklin

 

[wahindiawah]

And had the answer to the question not been Pakistan, Cricketplayer wouldn't have come out with such a post!

 

[shaka]

NZ have a few indeed, Oram, Vettori, Franklin, (Mills), McCullum, Astle, Cairns, McMillan, Harris

 

[Prince EWS]

also bowling all-rounders adams and franklin

I forgot about Adams, but as for Franklin, he seems to have been cast aside as a one day player, and I dont think he lives up to the allrounder status in tests.

 

[marc71178]

which team has the most all rounders

to me it is pakistan with 4

IMO there's probably not even 4 genuine all rounders in World Cricket.

 

[Linda]

I agree. I think the term "allrounder" is thrown around too much. Just because someone CAN bowl, doesnt mean they should.

 

[shaka]

There are different forms of all rounders, ie excellent fielders / batsman (e.g. Rhodes, Gibbs, H. Marshall etc), keeoer batsman (McCullum and Gilchrist etc), both should also be considered

 

[bryce]

I forgot about Adams, but as for Franklin, he seems to have been cast aside as a one day player, and I dont think he lives up to the allrounder status in tests.

give him a couple of years, he bats at 5 for his state.

 

[Prince EWS]

Im aware of that, but most NZ batsmen do!

I dont know whats going on there, but they seem to have way too many bowlers in the country, and not enough batsmen.

Thus, many of the bowlers have to concentrate on their batting as well, and their bowling suffers at the expense of batting that is never going to pass mustard.

 

[Prince EWS]

Just becuase someone isnt very good, it doesnt mean they are not an allrounder! Just like batsmen and bowlers, you have good and bad allrounders.

Anthony McGrath is a prime example. Obviously he is not picked for his batting or bowling alone, and in ODIs, you couldnt say one was better than the other (but in tests Im pretty confident his batting would be considered better than his bowling).

 

[bryce]

there is a big wave of good young batsman coming through and there's not as many bowler dominated domestic games anymore, unlike past years.

 

[Prince EWS]

Well then these batsmen should be given a go in the stats teams, and James Franklin, Daniel Vettori, Kyle Mills etc should be sent down to number 7 or 8.

Let me ask you this: Are there batsmen in club cricket that would bat above Franklin if picked?

If the answer is yes, then this bowler-dominated NZ domestic comp is a fault of the selectors. You should not have a player at 5 that cant hold their place as a batsman.

If the answer is no, then it is simply a case of lack a talent.

I dont know which is worse though, really...

 

[bryce]

the problem is the batsman are coming from specific places, i.e: canterbury(in abundance), central districts and to a lesser extent auckland; nd, otago and wellington do not really have good young batsman but are more made up of seasoned experienced ones.

 

[bryce]

don't get franklin's ability with the bat wrong,

Franklin Batting in State Championship Last Season,
379 runs@34.45, H/S:108*

Franklin Batting in State Shield Last Season,
207 runs@51.75, H/S:67*

he has also scored a fair few runs for NZ 'A' including a century, his batting seems to be fairly underrated.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think it'd be South Africa.
I consider Hall and Pollock to be genuine allrounders. Considering how little South Africa has utilized Kallis' bowling of late I'm hesitant to slip him into the allrounders category atm. He looked solid and impressive with the ball in Sri Lanka earlier this year though.
I don't consider Nicky Boje an allrounder, but rather a bowler who's a decent batsman. Sort of like Ian Bradshaw.

True allrounders in the world (IMO of course)...

West Indies - Bravo, Gayle (ODI)
England - Flintoff
Australia - Gilchrist
South Africa - Hall, Pollock, a tentative Kallis
New Zealand - Oram, Cairns
Pakistan - Shoaib Malik, Afridi (though I think he's more of a bowler who bats a bit)
Sri Lanka - Jayasuriya (ODI)

Those are the ones who come to mind right now.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

don't get franklin's ability with the bat wrong,

Franklin Batting in State Championship Last Season,
379 runs@34.45, H/S:108*

Franklin Batting in State Shield Last Season,
207 runs@51.75, H/S:67*

he has also scored a fair few runs for NZ 'A' including a century, his batting seems to be fairly underrated.

When he gets more than 25* for New Zealand we'll take notice.

Tests: 64 runs @ 10.66, HS: 23
ODIs: 116 runs @ 8.92, HS: 25*

 

[Beleg]

In ODI's, I still count Razzaq as an all-rounder, though obviously he isn't test class.

 

[Richard]

Just becuase someone isnt very good, it doesnt mean they are not an allrounder! Just like batsmen and bowlers, you have good and bad allrounders.

Anthony McGrath is a prime example. Obviously he is not picked for his batting or bowling alone, and in ODIs, you couldnt say one was better than the other (but in tests Im pretty confident his batting would be considered better than his bowling).

For me an all-rounder is simple: someone who is as good with bat as ball (wicketkeeping and fielding don't come into it for me - no such thing as specialists at either). Like batsmen and bowlers, you get good ones and not so good ones.
Some people complicate it by saying you have to be worth your place in a team on either discipline - in which case all-rounders are rare things indeed! Personally I just think they're the exceptionally good all-rounders.