Matt79
Global Moderator
You could argue that Gilchrist played the role of the allrounder in the Australian team. Does it matter whether the extra twenty runs come from a bowler or the keeper, compared to a typical player in that role?Agreed. Good points there about wicketkeeper-batsmen. It's interesting that the great WI and Aussie sides did not have any great all-rounders.
The Windies, yeah for sure, although again, Marshall was a pretty decent lower order batsman, and Dujon for the time was a very good keeper-batsman.
But overall, it proves the point that if your four bowlers are good enough, the fifth bowler is pretty irrelevant, particularly if, in the case of Australia, one of them is a spinner with the endurance and control to bowl long long spells.