cricket betting betway blog banner small
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 158
Like Tree54Likes

Thread: What Qualifies as a Test Allrounder?

  1. #1
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,524

    What Qualifies as a Test Allrounder?

    Just thinking about the criteria I should set for my test allrounders list. Currently, it is an adjusted batting average of 20.00 or more and 1 or more wickets per innings. This eliminates batting allrounders such as Steve Waugh and Dougie Walters who would otherwise finish high up the list.

    I'm thinking that Graeme Swann and Ryan Harris shouldn't be thought of as allrounders, though. Perhaps I should raise the batting average cut-off to 25.00, but this would eliminate Wasim Akram, Alan Davidson, and others.

    Thoughts?
    Last edited by Days of Grace; 01-12-2018 at 10:35 PM.
    Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), H Larwood, SK Warne, T Richardson, SE Bond

  2. #2
    International Vice-Captain trundler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    4,317
    Maybe account for not outs or fifties per innings? I'm sure there would always be some weird omissions and inclusions anyway.
    trundler isn't annoying at all. He's quality. -TJB
    Yea trundler is the new Bijed. Good addition. - Zorax
    Quote Originally Posted by ankitj View Post
    trundler is the coolest member to join the forum in a long time.

  3. #3
    International Debutant Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    2,592
    Maybe bat in 80 percent innings and bowl more than 7 overs in 80 percent. Or perhaps generally bat top 8 and bowl top 5. I think the bowling definitely needs a quantity participation thing.
    zorax likes this.

  4. #4
    International Debutant Victor Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    here
    Posts
    2,592
    An all rounder should not be someone useful with bat or useful with ball, if you get what I mean. They should be someone being picked to make a reasonable contribution with both. Averages alone won't identify this.


  5. #5
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,524
    Minimum requirement of 2.00 points per innings might work.

  6. #6
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend zorax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    20,184
    Yea I'd go with number of overs bowled/innings and frequency of batting in the top 8 as well.
    Check out The Cricket Web Podcast!

    The Cricket Web Podcast #33 - I Just Wanna Talk About Vernon Philander

    iTunes
    SoundCloud

    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    If only Kane Richardson had played some HK domestic cricket before his ODI debut.
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Kennedy View Post
    The Hong Kong Blitz is better than the IPL.

  7. #7
    Cricket Web Staff Member Howe_zat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Top floor, bottom buzzer
    Posts
    27,535
    Whether or not you played as an allrounder shouldn't be measured by how good you were at it. Shivron Hetmyer averages 19, but he's still a batsman.
    zorax and ankitj like this.
    We are lost
    We can never go home

  8. #8
    The Tiger King smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    29,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Just thinking about the criteria I should set for my test allrounders list. Currently, it is an adjusted batting average of 20.00 or more and 1 or more wickets per innings. This eliminates batting allrounders such as Steve Waugh and Dougie Walters who would otherwise finish high up the list.

    I'm thinking that Graeme Swann and Ryan Harris shouldn't be thought of as allrounders, though. Perhaps I should raise the batting average cut-off to 25.00, but this would eliminate Wasim Akram, Alan Davidson, and others.

    Thoughts?
    25 is not a bad cutoff. Akram and Davidson and Marshall weren't really all rounders so they should be out of the list.
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  9. #9
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,524
    I was actually surprised that Davo never scored a test century.

    Wasim has a huge double century vs. Zimbabwe and not much else.

  10. #10
    Cricketer Of The Year mr_mister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    9,185
    Davidson definitely an all rounder. Look at his FC stats
    cricket rules brah

  11. #11
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,524
    Frank Woolley was also an all-rounder in first-class cricket, but not really an all-rounder in tests.

  12. #12
    Cricketer Of The Year Starfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Thinking of supersports
    Posts
    9,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Frank Woolley was also an all-rounder in first-class cricket, but not really an all-rounder in tests.
    17 overs a test seems enough to me. Generally I've seen people put a cut off at around 1 w/m, though I personally think that's slightly too low.

    For comparison Watson bowled 15.5 overs a test.
    Last edited by Starfighter; 02-12-2018 at 02:32 AM.

  13. #13
    International Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    5,524
    Percentage of teamís overs is better.

    And yes, 1 wicket a match is a little low. 1 wicket per innings is better.

  14. #14
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    21,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Percentage of team’s overs is better.

    And yes, 1 wicket a match is a little low. 1 wicket per innings is better.
    Though the percentage of teams overs can change dramatically if you are touring Australia or India depending on what you bowl.

    Looking at the England side I would say Stokes, Woakes and Moeen are genuine all rounders. Rashid and early Broad bowlers who know which end of the bat to hold and can make vital contributions and Curran we need to wait to see more of as he could be a freak.

  15. #15
    Cricketer Of The Year Starfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Thinking of supersports
    Posts
    9,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    Percentage of team’s overs is better.
    Doesn't take into account team / condition dynamics with any adequacy.

    And yes, 1 wicket a match is a little low. 1 wicket per innings is better.
    No way. That excludes Watson, and Kallis (292 in 272) only just scrapes in. Should be somewhere between 1 and 1.5 at the most.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The allrounder cut-off
    By GuyFromLancs in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 174
    Last Post: 24-10-2013, 02:01 PM
  2. Craig Kieswetter qualifies for England
    By gap2 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 18-02-2010, 02:51 PM
  3. Best Test Allrounder
    By aussie tragic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 16-08-2006, 05:55 AM
  4. Replies: 87
    Last Post: 19-12-2005, 05:49 PM
  5. Anyone need an allrounder?
    By Eclipse in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-02-2003, 04:03 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •