The allrounder cut-off

[GuyFromLancs]

Where do we draw the line between allrounder, and say, bowling allrounder. Take these 3 fictional players -

1. Averages 32 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 26 with that bat

2. Averages 23 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 17 with the bat

3. Averages 52 with that bat, and 36 with the ball (2.8 wickets per match)



Opinions please ...

 

[BeeGee]

IMO, a bowler with a batting average less than 20 isn't an allrounder.

Judging whether a batsman can be classed as an allrounder based on bowling average or wickets is more difficult. Often the ability to contain and slow down the scoring rate can be almost as valuable as taking wickets.

 

[harsh.ag]

Where do we draw the line between allrounder, and say, bowling allrounder. Take these 3 fictional players -

1. Averages 32 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 26 with that bat

2. Averages 23 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 17 with the bat

3. Averages 52 with that bat, and 36 with the ball (2.8 wickets per match)

Which bat are we talking about here, and why is it producing such wildly different results?

 

[Goughy]

Based on the age old philosophy that anyone who averages more with the bat than the ball is a fine cricketer, Ill take #3

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Where are Smali's Smiley's? His name should be changed to Likeyshah84.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

The answer to this thread is Imran Khan!

 

[Red]

Where do we draw the line between allrounder, and say, bowling allrounder. Take these 3 fictional players -

1. Averages 32 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 26 with that bat

2. Averages 23 with the ball (4 wickets per match), and 17 with the bat

3. Averages 52 with that bat, and 36 with the ball (2.8 wickets per match)



Opinions please ...

1. Could possibly bat at 7, better at 8. Borderline bowling all rounder.

2. Bit similar to someone like Jason Gillespie or the way I imagine Patto will end up. Gun bowler and handy batsman, but would bat no higher than 8 or 9 in a strong test side. Not an all rounder.

3. Gun batsman, very handy bowler. Batting AR. 3 wickets per tests is brilliant output for someone averaging over 50 with the bat. Kallis/Sobers type.

 

[Maximas]

Bowling average over 40 or batting average under 20 and I'd say you're pushing it for an all-rounder

 

[Goughy]

Bowling average over 40 or batting average under 20 and I'd say you're pushing it for an all-rounder

So when, after 20 Tests, Botham had a batting average over 40 AND bowling average under 20 he wasnt an allrounder?

 

[Daemon]

So when, after 20 Tests, Botham had a batting average over 40 AND bowling average under 20 he wasnt an allrounder?

Why not? Meets both criteria Maximas put up.

 

[Maximas]

I meant to imply one or the other, obviously when the player is starting out or is simply **** in both batting and bowling my criteria doesn't really apply

 

[The Battlers Prince]

1,2 are both good to have in a side but neither would be seen genuine allrounder in my books. They're handy lower order bats, where number 3 is a great bat and more than handy bowler, I'm thinking someone used fairly often if he's getting 2.8 wickets a match.

 

[NUFAN]

Having done some calculations the cut off to be a batting all rounder is:

Batting average above 41.80
Bowling average below 41.17

 

[The Battlers Prince]

unsure of seriousness of those numbers, but probably not far off, probably drop the ave to 35 either way?

 

[kyear2]

Batting All Rounders
Garry Sobers
Jacques Kallis
Wally Hammond
Frank Worrell
Eddie Barlow
Bob Simpson
Tony Grieg

Bowling All Rounders
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Wasim Akran
Shaun Pollock

Allan Davidson
Ray Lindwall
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Mike Proctor

All Rounders
Ian Botham
Keith Miller
Aubrey Faulkner
Brian McMillan
Trevor Goddard
Fred Flintoff

Batting All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their batting alone who also are capable fifth bowlers whose bowling average are lower than their batting average and gets at least one wicket per match.

Bowling All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their bowling alone who have an average over twenty and are useful lower order batsmen who could possibly bat as high as No. 7 and capable of scoring fifties when required to rescue or strengthen the team's position.

Genuine All Rounders are players who play on the strength of both disciplines though probably wouldn't be able to secure their place based on either alone. So either they play primarily as bowlers and hurt the strength of the attack but strengthen the batting depth or bat in the top 6 and weaken the batting but strengthen the bowling depth.

Personally I prefer to have a batting and a bowling All rounder to provide a strong fifth bowler and strong batting depth at No. 8. The only way a genuine all rounder fits into a team is if there is a wicket keeping All Rounder whose batting can make up for the batting deficiency.

On another tangent, it is always useful to have a batsman like a Worrell who can bat and also contribute with the ball, and a bowler like Hadlee who can also contribute with the bat. Similarly batsmen and bowlers who are exceptional slip fielders like Chappell, Ponting, Lara, Warne, Cook and Swann are just as importance to team balance and success.

Hence (Not including players listed above)

Batting Slip Fielders
Ricky Ponting
Brian Lara
Greg Chappell
Everton Weekes
Allan Boder
Rahul Dravid
Bruce Mitchell
Clive Lloyd

Of course ther are also the keeping All Rounders who are more important than the slip fielding ones like Gilchrist, Knott, Waite, Ames, Walcott, Dujon ect, though some would argue always go for the best wicketkeeper regardless.

Wicket Keeping All Rounders
Adam Gilchrist
Allan Knott
John Waite
Clyde Walcott
Kumar Sangakkara
Matt Prior
Les Ames
Jeff Dujon
Mark Boucher
Dennis lindsay
M.S Dhoni

 

[smash84]

Wasim, Marshall, and Warne don't really belong in the bowling all rounder category. Don't force the definition on them please

 

[Agent Nationaux]

A true all-rounder for me would be someone who averages around 25 with the ball and around 40 with the bat. The closest to that is probably Clive Rice, although it's a shame he never played Tests - could have been the greatest all-rounder ever!

 

[Howe_zat]

Averages have nothing to do with it, because you can't claim someone was picked as an allrounder or not based on how successful they were at it.

Imrul Kayes has the Test batting record of a plucky #9, but he's still a batsman.

 

[kyear2]

Batting All Rounders
Garry Sobers
Jacques Kallis
Wally Hammond
Frank Worrell
Eddie Barlow
Bob Simpson
Tony Grieg

Bowling All Rounders
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Wasim Akran
Shaun Pollock

Allan Davidson
Ray Lindwall
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Mike Proctor

All Rounders
Ian Botham
Keith Miller
Aubrey Faulkner
Brian McMillan
Trevor Goddard
Fred Flintoff

Batting All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their batting alone who also are capable fifth bowlers whose bowling average are lower than their batting average and gets at least one wicket per match.

Bowling All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their bowling alone who have an average over twenty and are useful lower order batsmen who could possibly bat as high as No. 7 and capable of scoring fifties when required to rescue or strengthen the team's position.

Genuine All Rounders are players who play on the strength of both disciplines though probably wouldn't be able to secure their place based on either alone. So either they play primarily as bowlers and hurt the strength of the attack but strengthen the batting depth or bat in the top 6 and weaken the batting but strengthen the bowling depth.

Personally I prefer to have a batting and a bowling All rounder to provide a strong fifth bowler and strong batting depth at No. 8. The only way a genuine all rounder fits into a team is if there is a wicket keeping All Rounder whose batting can make up for the batting deficiency.

On another tangent, it is always useful to have a batsman like a Worrell who can bat and also contribute with the ball, and a bowler like Hadlee who can also contribute with the bat. Similarly batsmen and bowlers who are exceptional slip fielders like Chappell, Ponting, Lara, Warne, Cook and Swann are just as importance to team balance and success.

Hence (Not including players listed above)

Batting Slip Fielders
Ricky Ponting
Brian Lara
Greg Chappell
Everton Weekes
Viv Richards
Allan Boder
Rahul Dravid
Mahela Jayawardene
Barry Richards
Bruce Mitchell
Clive Lloyd

Mark Taylor
Mark Waugh

Of course there are also the keeping All Rounders who are more important than the slip fielding ones like Gilchrist, Knott, Waite, Ames, Walcott, Dujon ect, though some would argue always go for the best wicketkeeper regardless.

Wicket Keeping All Rounders
Adam Gilchrist
Allan Knott
John Waite
Clyde Walcott
Kumar Sangakkara
Matt Prior
Les Ames
Jeff Dujon
Mark Boucher
Dennis lindsay
M.S Dhoni

Updated/ edited post.

 

[Maximas]

Averages have nothing to do with it, because you can't claim someone was picked as an allrounder or not based on how successful they were at it.

Imrul Kayes has the Test batting record of a plucky #9, but he's still a batsman.

It's all about how the batting average is compared to the bowling average, no matter how low or high