• 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.

All-rounder-heavy Test teams

neville cardus

International Debutant
The England team in the Ashes Test of 1882 contained no fewer than six all-rounders (Barlow, Grace, Barnes, Steel, Ulyett and Studd), which explains why in both innings it had front-line batsmen at number ten. I can't think of a line-up that even approximates this. Can anyone else?
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
South Africa had Kallis, Cronje, McMillan, Pollock, Klusener and Symcox. Every single player was a capable batsman.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...d-test-south-africa-tour-of-australia-1997-98

England had Jackson, Braund, Jessop, Hirst, Lockwood and Rhodes. Rhodes at 11 scored over 2,000 Test runs @ 30 with multiple Test centuries.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...ralia-5th-test-australia-tour-of-england-1902

England had Arnold, Braund, Hirst, Bosanquet, Relf and Rhodes. Again with Rhodes at 11.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...lebone-cricket-club-tour-of-australia-1903-04
 
Last edited:

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I remember a game between India and South Africa in which the latter had a ridiculously strong tail with Symcox at 11, I think.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
NZ's best stab at this (which is pretty mediocre obviously) would be a side containing Cairns, Oram, Styris, Vettori and if you want to get fun with it, Astle and McMillan.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Trying to think of an equivalent for Pakistan. Perhaps Afridi, Mahmood, Mushtaq and Akram? That's pushing the all rounder label a bit.
 

the big bambino

International Captain
Pretty sure Australian sides just after the second war was filled with all rounders. What a contrast to the years since Davo and Benaud.
 

GoodAreasShane

Cricketer Of The Year
South Africa generally could bat down to eleven in most games where Allan Donald didn't play. There would likely have been sides where Donald was the only one without a FC century on occasion
 

the big bambino

International Captain
Don't know if this is an exhaustive list but Australia had these players who could be called all rounders just after the war. Miller, Lindwall, Loxton, McCool, Ring, Ian Johnson, Pepper, Bill Alley. Some of these are probably on the edge of bowlers who can bat but Lindwall had two test tons and all the others, with the possible exception of Johnson, were arguably better bats than he.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Don't know if this is an exhaustive list but Australia had these players who could be called all rounders just after the war. Miller, Lindwall, Loxton, McCool, Ring, Ian Johnson, Pepper, Bill Alley. Some of these are probably on the edge of bowlers who can bat but Lindwall had two test tons and all the others, with the possible exception of Johnson, were arguably better bats than he.
Yeah Lindwall and Johnson are probably more bowlers who could bat rather than pure all-rounders (Ring maybe the same), but yeah that's an impressive stash of all-rounders.

Then there's Davidson, Benaud and Archer not that far behind them.....
 

CricAddict

Cricketer Of The Year
Trying to think of an equivalent for Pakistan. Perhaps Afridi, Mahmood, Mushtaq and Akram? That's pushing the all rounder label a bit.
Add Razzaq to it as well. I think above 4 and Razzaq played together at some point. Not sure if you are referring to Mushtaq Ahmed or Saqlain Mushtaq but both weren't allrounders.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
I remember a game between India and South Africa in which the latter had a ridiculously strong tail with Symcox at 11, I think.
Symcox was a batting all-rounder. Don't believe me? See his top career batting and bowling rating points.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Symcox was a batting all-rounder. Don't believe me? See his top career batting and bowling rating points.
In terms of output, I don't think it is unreasonable to call Symcox a batting all rounder. He made a Test century and averaged as much as quite a few top order batsmen who are given an extensive runs in the side. He took less than 2 wickets per match at an average of over 40 in in Tests. As the ICC ratings are based on performance rather than perception, I dont think his relative batting and bowling ratings are particularly absurd.
 

Dendarii

International Debutant
It was Symcox's batting which got him into the South African side. They didn't have much in the way of decent spin options at the time, so they went for the one most likely to contribute with the bat (which they would also do a bit later on with Nicky Boje).
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17417/scorecard/62811/england-vs-australia-1st-test-australia-tour-of-england-1956

McDonald
Burke
Harvey
Burge
Miller
Archer
Benaud
Johnson
Lindwall

Langley +
Davidson

You could argue (to degrees of success) that all of the players in blue would be capable of batting at #7 in test teams, if not higher, in addition to being frontline bowlers.

Jim Burke was a handy part time offie.
Would be one of the best attacks of all-time too!
 

the big bambino

International Captain
its looks great but half of them were probably too old (though Miller took a 10fa at Lords that Ashes) and the other half just a little too green. None really at their prime for that series.
 

Top