• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who is currently the best all-rounder at international level?

Who is currently the best all-rounder at international level?

  • Andrew Symonds

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Adam Gilchrist

    Votes: 22 26.2%
  • Abdur Razzaq

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Andrew Flintoff

    Votes: 39 46.4%
  • Shoaib Malik

    Votes: 3 3.6%
  • Jacques Kallis

    Votes: 5 6.0%
  • Kumar Sangakkara

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sanath Jayasuriya

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Kamran Akmal

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Mahinder Singh Dhoni

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Shaun Pollock

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Shahid Afridi

    Votes: 5 6.0%
  • Michael Clarke

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Jacques Rudolph

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Brendon McCullum

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Scott Styris

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chris Gayle

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Geraint Jones

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Jacob Oram

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chris Cairns

    Votes: 6 7.1%

  • Total voters
    84

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Samuel_Vimes said:
Still saying that? :p
Yeah.

He's hit well for 2 good scores in this test but is more a no.7 as he's likely to prove every bit as unreliable as in the past.

For mine, he's equal with Harmison as England's best bowler and probably the 2 or 3 ranked seamer in the world at present.
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
social said:
Yeah.

He's hit well for 2 good scores in this test but is more a no.7 as he's likely to prove every bit as unreliable as in the past.

For mine, he's equal with Harmison as England's best bowler and probably the 2 or 3 ranked seamer in the world at present.
Valid point, but a no. 7 is also an all-rounder's spot (not to mention that the keeper England's got is every bit as unreliable as Fred). Don't know how many all-rounders have been able to bat in the top six since WWII - Sobers, Kallis in his prime?

Though, I can agree, he wouldn't be picked for his batting if he couldn't bowl.
 

Hanuma

School Boy/Girl Captain
flintoff and gayle are my favourites.


im sure a lot of you will disagree but surely a wickie/batsman allrounder cannot be considered as much of an allrounder as bat/bowl.

wickie keeping is simply not as hard as bowling.
 

Hanuma

School Boy/Girl Captain
no...im not kidding, its just about being a good athlete.

im sorry but there isnt much thinking involved....all it is is diving catches....thats it.

to be a world class bowler and batsman is sooo much harder than being world class wickie and batsman.
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Hanuma said:
no...im not kidding, its just about being a good athlete.

im sorry but there isnt much thinking involved....all it is is diving catches....thats it.

to be a world class bowler and batsman is sooo much harder than being world class wickie and batsman.
That's just stupid. There's far more to it than just diving catches. You have an extremely simplified view of wicketkeeping
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
not including wicket keepers i would say it is now Flintoff. He has the great ability all great all rounders do too take the game away from the opoistion as shown in this match. I would have said Kallis a while ago but his bowling has not been great of late so i say it is freddy
 

Natman20

International Debutant
Of course everyone would vote either Gilchrist or Flintoff after all everyones following the Ashes. But are they really the best
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Natman20 said:
Of course everyone would vote either Gilchrist or Flintoff after all everyones following the Ashes. But are they really the best
Flintoff is a far better bowler than Kallis, than Kallis is a better batsman than Flintoff. Thus, Flintoff > Kallis as an allrounder. (I hope that made as much sense as it does in my mind)

Gilchrist is a fine batsman. Kallis is a fine batsman.

Who else can you honestly say is a better allrounder than Flintoff and Gilchrist are right now?
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
Gilchrist and Sangakkara aren't all rounders because they don't bowl (duh!)

Kallis for me, just beating Freddie..
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Langeveldt said:
Gilchrist and Sangakkara aren't all rounders because they don't bowl (duh!)

Kallis for me, just beating Freddie..
Allrounders meaning that they do two ''specialist'' roles in the team.

How can Kallis be considered a better allrounder than Flintoff? He's not at all a potent bowler anymore, whereas Flintoff is currently extremely potent with both ball and bat.
 

Top