Paid The Umpire
All Time Legend
I think that...
Justin Langer should be AUSTRALIAS ALLROUNDER.
To give the other sides a chance...
Justin Langer should be AUSTRALIAS ALLROUNDER.
To give the other sides a chance...
-
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.
Aussie Allrounder spot for WC
- Thread starter Blewy
- Start date
Bazza
International 12th Man
Just because someone doesn't bat at 4 does not mean they are not good enough to get in the side as a batsman. Look at Shaun Pollock. He averages 33 in test cricket with 11 50s and 2 centuries. That probably puts him in the same league as the likes of Butcher, who England have batting at 3.
He also averages about 23 in ODIs with 6 50s and a HS of 75. Admittedly these stats don't make him a world class batsman, but they ain't bad for someone who for me is the third best bowler in the world - makes him a far more valuable asset than McGrath or Murali really, especially as he's done a decent job as captain also and is still only 29. Now THAT's an AR!! I've just decided Pollock is a much better cricketer than I realised.
Compare Kallis and everyone knows he's a world class batsman, averaging as he does 49 in tests and 44 in ODIs. His bowling averages of ~30 in both forms are not breaking any records, but they are impressive for a second discipline. In conclusion, it would be very harsh to say Pollock is not a true all rounder, though there is no denying Kallis is currently the best of a decent crop. Considering he's still 27, Kallis could quite conceivably get about 8-10,000 runs and 250-300 wickets in each form of the game, which is mighty impressive. As for Pollock we could see numbers along the lines of 4000/400 in tests and 3000/400 in ODIs. I think those kind of stats make for an all rounder argument!!
He also averages about 23 in ODIs with 6 50s and a HS of 75. Admittedly these stats don't make him a world class batsman, but they ain't bad for someone who for me is the third best bowler in the world - makes him a far more valuable asset than McGrath or Murali really, especially as he's done a decent job as captain also and is still only 29. Now THAT's an AR!! I've just decided Pollock is a much better cricketer than I realised.
Compare Kallis and everyone knows he's a world class batsman, averaging as he does 49 in tests and 44 in ODIs. His bowling averages of ~30 in both forms are not breaking any records, but they are impressive for a second discipline. In conclusion, it would be very harsh to say Pollock is not a true all rounder, though there is no denying Kallis is currently the best of a decent crop. Considering he's still 27, Kallis could quite conceivably get about 8-10,000 runs and 250-300 wickets in each form of the game, which is mighty impressive. As for Pollock we could see numbers along the lines of 4000/400 in tests and 3000/400 in ODIs. I think those kind of stats make for an all rounder argument!!
Eclipse
International Debutant
Were the hell did you get this opinion that an True allrounder has to be worth his place in the team as both a batsman and a bowler?
When deffining someone as a true allrounder is this only for test or ODI cricket because I know players like Watson would make a State side as a bowler or a Batsman.
Also Cairns was selected in the New Zealand team in last years VB series as a batsman only when he was injured.
When deffining someone as a true allrounder is this only for test or ODI cricket because I know players like Watson would make a State side as a bowler or a Batsman.
Also Cairns was selected in the New Zealand team in last years VB series as a batsman only when he was injured.
Rik
Cricketer Of The Year
No...he has been in the top 10 for his bowling.
And he has been in the Top 20 for the last 2 seasons as he only really started to belive in himself a few years ago, since then he's been conisistant with both bat and ball. Oh and one other thing, he would get into the NZ side as either a batsman or a bowler so I think he qualifies as an All-Rounder...thank you Marc...:frog:
[Edited on 19/11/2002 by Rik]
Andre
International Regular
In my opinion, an all-rounder is somebody who can hold his place in the team for one disciple, either his batting or bowling, and contribute signifcantly for the other disciple. Examples of this: Pollock as a bowler who scores good runs, Cairns the same, Kallis a batsman who takes wickets.
hey I thought we were supposed to be discussing the Aussie prospects???????
I think for ODI's the ideal 5th / 6th bowling options should be a batsman that can bowl - not neccessarily to take wickets, but at least to tie down an end.
I take this view because of not wanting to potentially weaken the batting line up with a bowler who bats, as they can be inconsitant - hence why I like 2 options for the 5th bowler. I also like to see them as being medium pacers who are accurate in line & length, so as to give the batsmen no pace on the ball to work with. This is another reason why I go for the bowling batsman, rather than the batting bowler.
In this regard I like players like Astle, and McMillan b4 he tried to bowl quicker.
I have no idea as to who fits this bill for Australia. I do not like Watson as the 5th option because he is a 'batting bowler' and of fast / med pace. I used to think that Symmonds was the option until he changed from bowling medium pace to spin and then forgot to score runs. Probably the best bet as a 5th / 6th option to fit my criteria is Bevan. I would share the 5th bowling with him and either Symonds (as medium pacer) or evan Harvey as a 'batting bowler', as they both bring more than 1 string to their bows with outstanding fielding. I do not think it is the responsibility of the 5th bowling option/s to win a match with either bat or ball, but to support the specialists in the team.
IMO not only do NZ have too many 'all-rounders' in their team, but they are also 'batting bowlers' (Oram, Styris,Harris & Cairns) as opposed to 'bowling batters'
(Astle, McMillan).
I think for ODI's the ideal 5th / 6th bowling options should be a batsman that can bowl - not neccessarily to take wickets, but at least to tie down an end.
I take this view because of not wanting to potentially weaken the batting line up with a bowler who bats, as they can be inconsitant - hence why I like 2 options for the 5th bowler. I also like to see them as being medium pacers who are accurate in line & length, so as to give the batsmen no pace on the ball to work with. This is another reason why I go for the bowling batsman, rather than the batting bowler.
In this regard I like players like Astle, and McMillan b4 he tried to bowl quicker.
I have no idea as to who fits this bill for Australia. I do not like Watson as the 5th option because he is a 'batting bowler' and of fast / med pace. I used to think that Symmonds was the option until he changed from bowling medium pace to spin and then forgot to score runs. Probably the best bet as a 5th / 6th option to fit my criteria is Bevan. I would share the 5th bowling with him and either Symonds (as medium pacer) or evan Harvey as a 'batting bowler', as they both bring more than 1 string to their bows with outstanding fielding. I do not think it is the responsibility of the 5th bowling option/s to win a match with either bat or ball, but to support the specialists in the team.
IMO not only do NZ have too many 'all-rounders' in their team, but they are also 'batting bowlers' (Oram, Styris,Harris & Cairns) as opposed to 'bowling batters'
(Astle, McMillan).