Other - please specify
Bob Simpson is not considered an all-rounder? From what I have read and seen [ as a coach ] Bob must be a contender as well.
CricZo XI - Draft Dashboard
7 Golds | 13 Silvers
Scorecard Draft - 2010 | Alphabetical Draft - 2011 | The Eras Draft - 2014 | All Time Australia Draft - 2016 | All England Draft - 2016 | Draft By Nation - 2016 | All-time Trading Game - 2016
All-rounders only being more than one discipline is something someone made up to include their favourite player in the category. An all-rounder is someone who performs the main disciplines of the game to a proficient level (ie: batting and bowling). Calling a keeper an 'all-rounder' sounds like something Mark Nicholas has done.
Last edited by Son Of Coco; 16-10-2010 at 03:23 AM.
R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best
R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi
Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath
"How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.
"There's more chance of SoC making a good post than Smith averaging 99.95." - Furball
"**** you're such a **** poster." - Furball
I think I agree with cokes on keepers generally tho. Not quite all-rounders for my quid, although if you add in competent captaincy (which lets out Dhoni, I'm afraid) I suppose one might stretch a point.
I think the key point for keepers is that, no matter how great a keeper they are, they won't be selected for it alone without some batting chops. A keeper might be sufficiently dire to be dropped for being plop behind the stumps (hi Matty), but the days of keepers batting #9 or below are gonesville. Both Oz and England have better keepers than their current test custodians (Manou & Foster respectively), but no-one even seriously advocates them because Haddin's & Prior's batting is so superior.
Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"I don't think that they'll come close to us to be honest."
- Steve Smith before the Ashes
Dhoni's captaincy has moved from overrated to underrated on CW I reckon. A few odd field placements have made others forget his achievements over the last 24 months.
"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."
Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.
Yeah, and it's poor decisions in Tests that have led to criticisms of his ODI captaincy.
But yeah of late his captaincy has been under fire somewhat unfairly I thought.
You're kidding aren't you?
If the poll is about the best allrounder when considering captaincy as a discipline, then it is Sobers by a country mile. He's probably in the top handful or batsmen of all time let alone taking loads of wickets with various bowling styles.
Test Batting average a shade under 58. (37)
Bowling average a shade over 34. (22)
Sobers: 39 Tests, 8 wins, 10 losses, 20 draws. (48 Tests, 14 wins, 8 losses, 26 draws.)
Bowled spin (orthadox and chinaman), medium-fast.
Great fielder anywhere.
Held batting record of 365.
6 6s in an over.
Voted by 90/100 selectors as a cricketer of the century. (Bradman recieved 100 votes, Jack Hobbs (30 votes), Shane Warne (27 votes) and Sir Vivian Richards (25 votes) were the others chosen.)
Last edited by Tom 1972; 16-10-2010 at 08:24 PM.
Then Shaun Pollock, Andrew Flintoff and Shane Watson are not allrounders, because they would not be chosen for certain disciplines if they lost the other.
Pollock would never have been picked as a specialist bat, and for much of Freddy's career, neither would he.
Watson would most definitely not be picked as a specialist bowler.
That's an extreme definition of allrounder. It's more the definition of an all-time great allrounder.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)