Wow I actually remember this happening!

[Richard]

and when there is doubt, you cannot classify someone as being a good bowler. good bowlers are proven performers at either ODI or test match level

No, good bowlers are proven at club level.
Exceptionally good bowlers are proven at Test and\or ODI level.

in the grand scheme of it all, geoff allott did not do enough just from 7 ODIs to be put amongst the half decent bowlers of the last decade.

No, not so, but he did do enough to be considered someone very unfortunate not to play much more than he did.

 

[tooextracool]

No, good bowlers are proven at club level.
Exceptionally good bowlers are proven at Test and\or ODI level.

this is quite a desperate tactic of yours, nonetheless if thats were you want to go then we can claim that Allott was a good bowler only at the club level and was an unproven quantity at the ODI level, and was certainly rubbish at test match cricket.

No, not so, but he did do enough to be considered someone very unfortunate not to play much more than he did.

Yes that i do agree on.

 

[Richard]

this is quite a desperate tactic of yours, nonetheless if thats were you want to go then we can claim that Allott was a good bowler only at the club level and was an unproven quantity at the ODI level, and was certainly rubbish at test match cricket.

How on Earth is it so? Test and ODI cricket are a pinnacle only the tiniest minority reach. Obviously Allott was not a good Test bowler, it would take an extreme fool to argue that, but while he was not a proven high-calibre ODI bowler he was someone who generally bowled pretty reasonably in the limited opportunities he got, then came back after injuries and was clearly not the same bowler.