The great 1980s all rounders

[weldone]

Cairns>Flintoff as well.

I personally agree, but that's a lot closer than Pollock versus Flintoff.

 

[Flem274*]

yeah, Kallis. To be honest, people like Pollock, Cairns, and Flintoff had their moments, but it's only Freddie who'll be spoken in superlatives and in the same vein (from a sheer match-impacting pov) as the big 4 from the 80s.

Nah.

Huge cricketer obv, and you can't judge him by his stats which are inflated by being terrible early on, but anyone who speaks of him like they do of the big four puts too much weight on 2005.

Cairns>Flintoff as well.

Agreed.

 

[Mike5181]

You could argue Pollock deserves to be right in with the great 80s all rounders.

 

[Flem274*]

He does. Arguably a better batsman than Hadlee, and a slightly lesser bowler who, like McGrath, had to do the hard yards in a decade featuring some very flat pitches on a regular basis.

 

[Ikki]

But it is the bowlers that must take 20 wickets in order to seal the match. That is the way test cricket is designed hence ATG bowlers are probably deemed more valuable than ATG batsmen.

There is a better argument: everyone must bat, but not everyone has to bowl.

 

[weldone]

There is a better argument: everyone must bat, but not everyone has to bowl.

So you can hide the weaker discipline of a batting allrounder if you have to, but you can't hide the weaker discipline of a bowling allrounder.

 

[DingDong]

The new Top 50 thread got me thinking about the four great all rounders of the 80s. That and Ding Dong being a putz talking about Hadlee.

Where do you rate them against each other?

Personally I have Imran > Botham > Hadlee > or = Dev.

Thoughts?

I'd like the comments on this thread kept to the more respected posters, so please onl comment if you've made 1,000 or more posts on CW.

Cheers.

hadlee is a top 10 atg of all time. period!

deal with it u kiwi hater

 

[Jager]

It all depends on what you value in your allrounders. I'd say Botham was more of an overall game-changer (aggressive batting in comparison to Imran's) plus he was still an excellent bowler. Imran is personally on top of the list for me though on bowling alone, seeing as all his home matches were played in generally unfavourable conditions, his batting was solid and was also an excellent captain.
Imran > Botham > Hadlee > Dev

I hope I am respected enough to have a valid opinion...

 

[Debris]

The new Top 50 thread got me thinking about the four great all rounders of the 80s. That and Ding Dong being a putz talking about Hadlee.

Where do you rate them against each other?

Personally I have Imran > Botham > Hadlee > or = Dev.

Thoughts?

I'd like the comments on this thread kept to the more respected posters, so please onl comment if you've made 1,000 or more posts on CW.

Cheers.

Imran over Hadlee on strength of better batting. They are are well clear of the other two for me because they have one skill (bowling) at ATG level.

Botham over Dev on basis that he is more likely to throw in a match winning performance.

 

[weldone]

I'd like the comments on this thread kept to the more respected posters, so please onl comment if you've made 1,000 or more posts on CW.

I hope I am respected enough to have a valid opinion...

.

 

[weldone]

... They are are well clear of the other two for me because they have one skill (bowling) at ATG level.
...

 

[ankitj]

Jager, post 1000 times on this very thread to reach qualification number. Spam away.

 

[Jager]

Yeah I chose to disregard that, it's not like the number of posts you have made determines your capability of producing a valid argument

 

[benchmark00]

Yeah I chose to disregard that, it's not like the number of posts you have made determines your capability of producing a valid argument

Spoken like a true 88 poster.

 

[Fusion]

Yeah I chose to disregard that, it's not like the number of posts you have made determines your capability of producing a valid argument

It doesn't. My horrible post history is a prime example of how number of posts does not equal quality. Post in any thread you'd like.

 

[weldone]

It doesn't. My horrible post history is a prime example of how number of posts does not equal quality. Post in any thread you'd like.

Haha yeah, it's like comparing total number of runs scored in test matches to say that Michael Atherton was a better batsman than Donald Bradman

 

[grecian]

This thread has gone really downhill since they started letting the riff-raff in......

 

[smash84]

 

[smash84]

Haha yeah, it's like comparing total number of runs scored in test matches to say that Michael Atherton was a better batsman than Donald Bradman

 

[Ikki]

So you can hide the weaker discipline of a batting allrounder if you have to, but you can't hide the weaker discipline of a bowling allrounder.

And if you hide it, then he is not being used as an all-rounder. Pretty poor way to illustrate how good of an all-rounder one is that if you do not use their other discipline it makes them a better player.