Imran v Hadlee v Miller

[harsh.ag]

Allrounderiness ranking:

1. Miller
2. Sobers
3. Botham (on full career, #1 on peak)
4. Kallis

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I go: 1. Sobers 2. Imran 3. Hadlee 4. Kallis 5. Miller 6. Botham 7. Procter 8. S. Pollock 9. Kapil 10. Shakib 11. Faulkner 12. Mankad 13. Jadeja 14. Flintoff 15. Goddard

Cairns was better than several of those players.

 

[Engle]

An All-Rounder does not just score runs and/or capture wickets. They also have to advise, support and bring out the best in their team.
They are the glue that fills in the cracks and binds the team together. Teamwork.
As bowler, Imran mentored his fellow fasties and supported his spinners
As batsman, Imran connected with the higher order batsmen and guided/shepherded the tail

 

[Starfighter]

Miller was certainly the most debonair.

 

[ankitj]

Cairns was better than several of those players.

I knew I was forgetting some

 

[h_hurricane]

As overall cricketers,

1.Sobers
2. Imran
3. Hadlee
4. Kallis
5. Miller
6. Pollock
7. Botham
8. Kapil
9. Jadeja
10. Shakib

As all rounders,

1. Sobers
2. Imran
3. Kallis
4. Miller
5. Botham
6. Kapil
7. Hadlee
8. Pollock
9. Cairns
10. Shakib

 

[Jack1]

For me:
1. Khan 2. Hadlee 3. Miller

Picking Hadlee 1 would be understandable. Considering Wpm Miller is certainly 3rd in my view

 

[Jack1]

Miller is the only genuine allrounder amongst them. Hadlee was not a batsman at all, though a useful hitter at 7 or 8. Imran was only a number 7 or 8 during his prime years as a bowler. Most of his record as a batsman is due to becoming a dogged accumulator of runs late in his career.

Khan was an all rounder just look at his stats. You’re being silly. You can bat any position and still be an all rounder.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Khan was an all rounder just look at his stats. You’re being silly. You can bat any position and still be an all rounder.

If you insist on statsmongering instead of watching cricket you should know that he averaged over 50 over the last handful of years at a time when he wasn’t the main strike bowler. For most of his career he had the record of a useful number 7 or 8. As Pakistan captain you carry the weight of the world on your shoulders, but one thing he didn’t carry was the role of a genuine Test all rounder.

 

[Flem274*]

As overall cricketers,

1.Sobers
2. Imran
3. Hadlee
4. Kallis
5. Miller
6. Pollock
7. Botham
8. Kapil
9. Jadeja
10. Shakib

As all rounders,

1. Sobers
2. Imran
3. Kallis
4. Miller
5. Botham
6. Kapil
7. Hadlee
8. Pollock
9. Cairns
10. Shakib

jadeja ****ing lol. **** can do something away from home first.

 

[marc71178]

Khan was an all rounder just look at his stats. You’re being silly. You can bat any position and still be an all rounder.

All rounders need to perform with the bat and the ball at the same time - something Imran most definitely did not do.

 

[Pothas]

He was a bowling all rounder for most of his career, still think that counts as an all rounder but it does not really matter either way.

There are so few quality actual all rounders that it is almost a myth and really in most cases the batting and bowling all rounders are better cricketers and probably more useful.

 

[a massive zebra]

All rounders need to perform with the bat and the ball at the same time - something Imran most definitely did not do.

That's simply not true. In the four calendar years between 1980 and 1983, Imran took 134 Test wickets @ 16.35 and also averaged over 45 as a batsman with multiple test centuries.

Miller is the only genuine allrounder amongst them. Hadlee was not a batsman at all, though a useful hitter at 7 or 8. Imran was only a number 7 or 8 during his prime years as a bowler. Most of his record as a batsman is due to becoming a dogged accumulator of runs late in his career.

Just because someone bats at 7 or 8 doesn't necessarily mean they are not a genuine all rounder. During Imran's peak years as a bowler, he was averaging mid 40s with the bat, which is good enough to justify genuine all rounder status in anyone's book.

 

[Red]

Miller's wpm ratio is pretty easily explained by the fact that Australia's teams of the era were chock full of all rounders.

In the 48 invincible sides there was always 5 and sometimes 6 bowlers in the team. Lindwall, Miller, Bill Johnston, Ern Toshack, Sam Loxton, Ian Johnson.

Miller, Lindwall, Loxton and Johnson were all very capable batsmen and probably all capable of batting in the top 6 (or at least at 7). So it was a very balanced XI.

Lindwall was the main pace weapon, Johnston and Toshack could bowl seriously long spells economically, Loxton was a change medium pacer and Johnson the spinner. So Miller's role was to just bowl quick and strike, but in short bursts. Bradman is on record saying that was the way he liked to use Miller, only 3 or 4 overs per spell.

There were times when Miller had to step it up in bowling because of injury and decimated the opposition with pace bowling.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I gave up going around in circles with people cherry picking stats years ago. Especially when the same people rubbish Ian Botham because his peak was only a few years. He certainly didn’t make multiple centuries between 80 and 83. Unless the definition of multiple is more than one. Imran is obviously a great cricketer but he didn’t carry the load of a Test all rounder.

 

[marc71178]

That's simply not true. In the four calendar years between 1980 and 1983, Imran took 134 Test wickets @ 16.35 and also averaged over 45 as a batsman with multiple test centuries.

Averaging over 45 sounds good till you realise that in 25 Tests he scored 1176 runs - hardly a heavy workload.

Imran rarely, if ever put together a series where he had to put in a considerable effort with the bat whilst also having a considerable workload with the ball - it was either one or the other and that to me is not an all rounder. It's a very valuable cricketer but if you compare it to others who actually did perform with both disciplines at the same time, he comes up short.

 

[stephen]

Miller - player who will improve any side in history the most
Hadlee - the best choice for an ATXI
Imran - the player with the most impactful career (and the best post- retirement job)

 

[Pothas]

Averaging over 45 sounds good till you realise that in 25 Tests he scored 1176 runs - hardly a heavy workload.

Imran rarely, if ever put together a series where he had to put in a considerable effort with the bat whilst also having a considerable workload with the ball - it was either one or the other and that to me is not an all rounder. It's a very valuable cricketer but if you compare it to others who actually did perform with both disciplines at the same time, he comes up short.

This sort of makes out like he was sometimes a good batsman and sometimes a good bowler when he of course is actually one of the best bowler ever.

 

[Line and Length]

I find it interesting that some, who have provided their rated list of all-rounders, have Kallis behind either or both Imran and Hadlee. I guess bowling all-rounders who are front-line strike bowlers have more impact in terms of match winning performances. Kallis rates as a great batsman but his bowling, while more than useful, didn't have the impact of others.
I say interesting because, elsewhere, I have seen Kallis ranked above Sobers by some. I shake my head at that!

 

[stephen]

Thing is, Kallis was good enough to be a first change bowler for virtually any side in the world during his playing years. He was also an all time great batsman. That makes him one of only two guys in history that could do that job. He was something special.

I honestly think that Kallis is not only a captain's dream, but he's also a selector's dream since he gives you so much flexibility with your composition. You can go in with 4 seam bowlers and a spinner or 3 seamers and two spinners without sacrificing batting at all.

Sure, he's behind Sobers but honestly in any real side in history he's the player first or second picked.