• 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.

The allrounder cut-off

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
God, I don't know, if they came at 6-250 I'd still consider them good knocks and this may influence the decision. If he scored a half century every two tests or so and developed an ability to dig his side out of trouble or further their position with relative consistency then I'd say he might become a bowling all-rounder in my book
A half century every 2 Tests from number 8? That's a huge ask.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
You've got Imran Khan as a bowling allrounder, yet Flintoff as a genuine all-rounder?
His definition of genuine all rounder seems to be what I'd call a bit's and pieces player to be honest. Nothing genuine about it in the strictest sense of the word.
 

Maximas

Cricketer Of The Year
either a half century or an important innings that actually influences the match - could be a 30* batting for a draw or a quickfire 40 that lifts the team from 6-150 to 230 all out, that kind of thing. Basically I'm trying to say the guy has to actually contribute to changing the game every now and then to be considered an all-rounder
 

GuyFromLancs

State Vice-Captain
His definition of genuine all rounder seems to be what I'd call a bit's and pieces player to be honest. Nothing genuine about it in the strictest sense of the word.
Flintoff was a genuine allrounder. When he was bad, he was bad with both (although better with ball)

And when he was good, for about 3 years, he averaged 41 with the bat and 27 with the ball.
 

The Battlers Prince

International Vice-Captain
Centuries aren't really the measure of an allrounder, or even a keeper-batsman. They score consistent fifties.

Centuries are the currency of batsmen.
If DeVilliers bats at 5 then centuries would be his shot as a batsmen. As a keeper he's got another job. Less often centuries still make him an allrounder though?
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
either a half century or an important innings that actually influences the match - could be a 30* batting for a draw or a quickfire 40 that lifts the team from 6-150 to 230 all out, that kind of thing. Basically I'm trying to say the guy has to actually contribute to changing the game every now and then to be considered an all-rounder
But asking for that every other Test is a big ask, especially as on average batting that low down he gets less than 3 innings in 2 Tests.
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
If DeVilliers bats at 5 then centuries would be his shot as a batsmen. As a keeper he's got another job. Less often centuries still make him an allrounder though?
I would describe de Villiers as a batsman, yes.

If he was picked primarily for his keeping, and hit regular fifties without many tons - except against weak attacks and/or with a strong score on the board - he'd be a typical keeper-batsman.
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Flintoff was a genuine allrounder. When he was bad, he was bad with both (although better with ball)

And when he was good, for about 3 years, he averaged 41 with the bat and 27 with the ball.
Last 5 years in his career Chaminda Vaas averaged 34 with the bat and 28.6 with the ball, and he was not even meant to be an all rounder. Nothing sensational about Flintoff's figures.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Last 5 years in his career Chaminda Vaas averaged 34 with the bat and 28.6 with the ball, and he was not even meant to be an all rounder. Nothing sensational about Flintoff's figures.
Vaas could seriously bat by the end of his career though. I honestly reckon he could've played on as a domestic batsman and given up the bowling if he felt like it.
 

GuyFromLancs

State Vice-Captain
Last 5 years in his career Chaminda Vaas averaged 34 with the bat and 28.6 with the ball, and he was not even meant to be an all rounder. Nothing sensational about Flintoff's figures.
Ignoring that 41 to 27 bests 34 to 28 - Flintoff also scored 5 centuries. Hit mammoth sixes, caught the public's imagination, and was the best player in a 5 match series against a great Australia side, in which he nearly ended Adam Gilchrist. A man who up until 05 Ashes averaged 56 with the bat in test cricket.

It doesn't really compare. And I like Vaas. He was a very, very good player.
 
Last edited:

Top