Who is the best allrounder of your current national cricket team

[Sanz]

Pinch hitters dont have the average like Razzaq and they dont have 1.30 wickets per match with a good SR .... And I know that India has the best produce of cricketers of all kind in the world ... I admitt . So apart from India can any one else dare to discuss some thing about this poor ordinary world and the others apart from "India"???? This will be quite helpfull for the promotion of cricket in other parts of the world . Plzz let other countrymen discuss about their B class cricketers.
And pinch hitters can hit may be a couple of boundries in an over of Mcgrath but Apart from Razzaq no one has ever hit 5 well calculated rolling boundries in the same over of Mcgrath ............

Dude, you dont make much sense to me and I wasn't even discussing India (not a single word related to India in my last post), I gave my opinion on Razzaq's allround skills as a cricketer. If you dont like it, too bad I am not here to please you, find a pakistani board and there you will have lot of people who have same view as yours.

As I said, Razzaq was an allrounder, not anymore, If you disagree with me than prove me wrong rather than just blabbering your hate-filled mouth and bringing India in every discussion. You kind of proved my point by giving the example of Razzaq hitting Mcgrath for 5 fours in an over, typical pinch hitter style that too done 4-5 years ago. Razzaq was a good prospect then, not anymore.

 

[marc71178]

It should be the same with Kallis who is clearly the best allrounder in the world by far.

No he's not "by far" - since his bowling is nowhere near as good as it used to be.

 

[a massive zebra]

That is a silly way of looking at things. Gary Sobers would not have made the West Indies side for his bowling, but no one is questioning his right to be deemed the best allrounder of his time. It should be the same with Kallis who is clearly the best allrounder in the world by far.

Exactly. How Flintoff could be ranked above Kallis on the basis of good performances against New Zealand and West Indies is beyond me. This perception is probably caused by bias and people prefering more explosive players to those that actually do the business.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Well, one of our best just got killed while at work...although to be fair he was more of a pinch hitter. Suppose it has to be Mohamad Zeeshan Ali or Majid Zia Butt.

(you did ask)

 

[roseboy64]

Chris Gayle,Dwayne Bravo

 

[Swervy]

That is a silly way of looking at things. Gary Sobers would not have made the West Indies side for his bowling, but no one is questioning his right to be deemed the best allrounder of his time. It should be the same with Kallis who is clearly the best allrounder in the world by far.

yes he would

 

[Swervy]

Exactly. How Flintoff could be ranked above Kallis on the basis of good performances against New Zealand and West Indies is beyond me. This perception is probably caused by bias and people prefering more explosive players to those that actually do the business.

or how about some great performances vs SA as well...or being the most economical bowler of the world cup etc.

 

[Anil]

Depends on whether you want an all-rounder to score a fair number of runs AND take wickets or score a lot of runs and take few wickets.

Personally I'd say an all rounder needs to be successful with bat AND ball.

...and isn't kallis successful with the ball? he is a regular bowler for s.a, not part-time although he might come in as first change or second change. coupled with that, the fact that kallis is a vastly superior batsman to flintoff. flintoff has been most impressive recently and has been emphatically silencing doubters about his talent and potential, but imo has some way to go to get into kallis' league...

 

[Swervy]

...and isn't kallis successful with the ball? he is a regular bowler for s.a, not part-time although he might come in as first change or second change. coupled with that, the fact that kallis is a vastly superior batsman to flintoff. flintoff has been most impressive recently and has been emphatically silencing doubters about his talent and potential, but imo has some way to go to get into kallis' league...

so when did you last watch Flintoff play then????

 

[Anil]

so when did you last watch Flintoff play then????

i haven't seen any of his recent games...so has he improved so much that he looks a better batsman than kallis??? he has been an excellent middle-order to late middle-order batsman for england for the past year and a half, but kallis has been the mainstay of s.a batting along with gary kirsten(retired), graeme smith & herschelle gibbs for some years now. in terms of bowling, neither are front-line bowlers, but are regular bowlers for their side and give disciplined bowling performances more often than not and occasionally a match-winning one. if my evaluation is not correct, please let me know.

 

[nookie_lk]

Flintoff has along way to come to the standard of Kallis...Kallis is much more experienced and definitely a better batsman...bowling i should say flintoff is much better than Kallis especially pace wise.

 

[a massive zebra]

yes he would

Don't be ridiculous, he was less likely to make the West Indies side for his bowling than Kallis is for South Africa. His strike rate was nearly 100 and he only took 20 wickets in a series 3 times, in each case bowling a lot of balls to get to that mark. He may have had variety but was never a great bowler, people like Hall, Griffiths, Gibbs, etc would give him no chance of making the side if he was not a good batter aswell.

 

[Swervy]

Don't be ridiculous, he was less likely to make the West Indies side for his bowling than Kallis is for South Africa. His strike rate was nearly 100 and he He may have had variety but was never a great bowler, people like Hall, Griffiths, Gibbs, etc would give him no chance of making the side if he was not a good batter aswell.

if he was such as crap bowler , how the hell is it that people rate him as the greatest all rounder of all time. A number of experts on the subject have said he was good enough to play for WI on bowling alone, the experts who have played with or against him, and are not relying on Statsguru to help them form an opinion

 

[a massive zebra]

He was arguably the best allrounder of all time because of his great batting and fielding in addition to his useful bowling. The fact is that throughout his entire career no frontline bowler with such a modest record played more than a handful of matches for the West Indies.

You cannot say Sobers would have made the side for his bowling if Kallis would not have made the South Africa side for his. Kallis was a better bowler at his best and throughout their entire careers. Kallis might not be a great bowler now but Sobers was only effective between 1961-66 and even then far from world class. Furthermore, the West Indies attack of Sobers time was normally stronger than the current South African one.

 

[a massive zebra]

A number of experts on the subject have said he was good enough to play for WI on bowling alone, the experts who have played with or against him, and are not relying on Statsguru to help them form an opinion

They are allowing his great batting and great reputation to cloud their judgement on his bowling, and thus making baseless comments. You cannot argue with the plain facts and the facts are he was never more than a useful international bowler who would not have made the side purely on bowling ability. If he was such a good bowler then why did he never actually do very well (except for 3 series but then Kallis has also done well at times)?

 

[superkingdave]

i haven't seen any of his recent games... in terms of bowling, neither are front-line bowlers, but are regular bowlers for their side and give disciplined bowling performances more often than not and occasionally a match-winning one. if my evaluation is not correct, please let me know.

Last 10 tests
Flintoff
M Overs Runs W BB BMB Ave ER SR 5i 10m
10 270.4 789 33 5/58 7/78 23.90 2.91 49.2 1 0
Kallis
10 250 746 15 3/71 3/60 49.73 2.98 100.0 0 0

I would argue the case that Flintoff IS a frontline bowler, Kallis is more like the old Flintoff, you know the one everyone said was a rubbish bowler

 

[a massive zebra]

Last 10 tests
Flintoff
M Overs Runs W BB BMB Ave ER SR 5i 10m
10 270.4 789 33 5/58 7/78 23.90 2.91 49.2 1 0
Kallis
10 250 746 15 3/71 3/60 49.73 2.98 100.0 0 0

But Flintoff has played his last 10 matches against West Indies and New Zealand, while Kallis has faced far tougher opposition. And Kallis is obviously the better batsman of the two.

 

[Swervy]

i haven't seen any of his recent games...so has he improved so much that he looks a better batsman than kallis??? he has been an excellent middle-order to late middle-order batsman for england for the past year and a half, but kallis has been the mainstay of s.a batting along with gary kirsten(retired), graeme smith & herschelle gibbs for some years now. in terms of bowling, neither are front-line bowlers, but are regular bowlers for their side and give disciplined bowling performances more often than not and occasionally a match-winning one. if my evaluation is not correct, please let me know.

ok..Flintoff is a more naturally aggressive batsman and does give more chances than Kallis....to compare the two is futile really becuase of the differing roles and styles of play...but to be honest talent wise i would suggest that maybe Flintoff has more talent as a batsman (almost in the same way as comparing Botham to Boycott)

I have no doubts what so ever Flintoff is a better bowler and probably has been for 3 years, but is only now that he is getting the deserved rewards. Probably more than anyother bowler in the England team (and that includes Harmison) you feel that it is Flintoff who is going to get the wicket that is needed.

Flintoff is certainly one of the best slip fielders in the world, but then again I think Kallis is pretty good as well.

I guess its all down to personal preference. I was brought up on all rounders being people who can change a game in no time, and Flintoff fits in more with the Botham/Dev type of player,Kallis isnt that type of player...back in the eighties no-one could decide who the best all rounder was, coz it all depended on opinion. I guess its the same here.

 

[marc71178]

...and isn't kallis successful with the ball?

Not in the last 18 months or so, no.

Just look at the numbers.

 

[Swervy]

But Flintoff has played his last 10 matches against West Indies and New Zealand, while Kallis has faced far tougher opposition. And Kallis is obviously the better batsman of the two.

Kallis is obviously the better batsman of the two!!! Well he has certainly been very successful recently...but have a look at what he has done century wise recently, and compare it to Flintoff performing against so called poor teams:

Last 10 centuries:
160 3 caught wk 1 W 1st Test v NZ in SA 2000/01 at Bloemfontein
157* 3 not out 1 W 1st Test v Zim in Zim 2001/02 at Harare
189* 3 not out 2 D 2nd Test v Zim in Zim 2001/02 at Bulawayo
139* 4 not out 2 W 2nd Test v BD in SA 2002/03 at Potchefstroom 105 4 bowled 1 W 1st Test v Pak in SA 2002/03 at Durban
158 4 bowled 1 W 1st Test v WI in SA 2003/04 at Johannesburg
177 4 caught 2 W 2nd Test v WI in SA 2003/04 at Durban
130* 4 not out 3 D 3rd Test v WI in SA 2003/04 at Cape Town
130* 4 not out 1 W 4th Test v WI in SA 2003/04 at Centurion
150* 4 not out 3 D 1st Test v NZ in NZ 2003/04 at Hamilton

Ok..only one of those is off the African continent ..and not one of those was vs a team at the top of its game...pretty similar to what people are saying about Flintoff

Mat I NO Runs HS1 Ave 100 50 0

overall 80 133 22 5967 189* 53.75 16 31 6

v Australia 12 23 2 685 101 32.61 1 4 1
v Bangladesh 2 2 2 214 139* - - 1 1 0
v England 15 22 1 787 132 37.47 2 4 2
v India 4 7 3 338 95 84.50 0 3 0
v New Zealand 9 15 3 817 160 68.08 3 3 1
v Pakistan 8 12 0 456 105 38.00 1 2 0
v Sri Lanka 12 21 2 639 87 33.63 0 5 1
v West Indies 14 26 6 1464 177 73.20 5 8 1
v Zimbabwe 4 5 3 567 189* 283.50 3 1 0

Doesnt look so good vs decent bowling attacks.....

I guess I am being a bit naughty here, I do think he is a good player, but maybe the recent great run he has had is somewhat lessened by the opposition..in the same way some people would say Flintoffs has