• 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.

Best All-Rounder ever

Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Debris said:
Always wonder why Alan Davidson never gets a mention in these threads. Possibly a better bowler than anyone mentioned and a reasonable bat.
Click to expand...
Davo.

WAFG.

Quite the apres-dinner speaker too.

Saw him at a club do a few years ago where he told some good tales. He also told off a few of the lads who were pissed and jibbering away to themselves, disrupting the speech. man's a legend tttt.
 
Last edited:
cricket100%

cricket100%

Cricket Spectator
Dissector said:
IMO Sobers was the best batting all-rounder and Imran the best bowling all-rounder. Hard to separate the two. Imran was a great captain but Sobers was a superlative fielder and a versatile bowler.

A name that deserves to be thrown in the mix: Aubrey Faulkner from South Africa who averaged 41 with the bat and 27 with the ball. His performance in the series against England in 1909-10 was arguably the greatest ever in the history of cricket.
Click to expand...
I do know about Faulkner. I thought that he did not play enough international cricket to be in the mix. If you can, read The Selected by Niel Manthorp and Michael Owen-Smith. Great book.
 
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
8ankitj said:
Cricket Web
Click to expand...
Ok not going to look through 15 threads but I think Flintoff is a greater allrounder than Donald or Garner. Having said that, there is no way in hell that I would rate Flintoff better than either of them as cricketers. His bowling is good but not that good. And his batting is overrated at best in tests.
 
cricket100%

cricket100%

Cricket Spectator
honestbharani said:
There are many and if you are genuinely interested, take a search for Sobers/Kallis.. There was a thread specific to it. And if you want, we can continue discussion there.
Click to expand...
I have now posted some great stats regarding Sobers and Kallis. There you will be able to compare them.:mellow:
 
Last edited:
The Battlers Prince

The Battlers Prince

International Vice-Captain
Debris said:
Always wonder why Alan Davidson never gets a mention in these threads. Possibly a better bowler than anyone mentioned and a reasonable bat.
Click to expand...
one of the best all rounders and absolutely versatile because he's a left arm opening bowler or first change, but certainly the best bowling all rounder
 
bagapath

bagapath

International Captain
schearzie said:
one of the best all rounders and absolutely versatile because he's a left arm opening bowler or first change, but certainly the best bowling all rounder
Click to expand...
dont get carried away mate. 5 half centuries in 44 tests is not good enough to be called "certainly the best bowling all rounder". davo was a terrific left arm seamer who could bat a bit. that was it. but he was no match for imran or hadlee, both of whom took more than 4 wickets per test at 22 runs, which means they could have averaged a mere 5 runs with the bat and still be automatic choices in their teams as bowlers alone. as it happened, imran averaged 37 with the bat (6 centuries) and hadlee, a respectable 27 (2 centuries). either of them would be the best bets for the greatest bowling all rounder title depending what kind of balance you want in terms of bowling vs batting. hadlee was the better bowler and imran, the better batsman. even an akram who averaged 23 with bat and ball but also scored 3 centuries including a double, or shaun pollock who averaged 32 with the bat and claimed 400 wickets at 23 would be better choices than davidson. with no centuries in 40+ tests, davidson was more of a brett lee, malcolm marshall or vaas kind of batsman. allrounder is a heavy tag for his batting ability. even benaud was more of an allrounder coz even though he averaged the same as davo, he scored 3 hundreds.
 
ankitj

ankitj

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
schearzie said:
one of the best all rounders and absolutely versatile because he's a left arm opening bowler or first change, but certainly the best bowling all rounder
Click to expand...
Not sure about his all-round ability but a great bowler definitely. Makes it to my all time AUS XI (at the expense of Bill O'Reilly).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top