Cricket's great all-rounders

[Dan]

If I had to pick an All Time All-Rounders XI, it would go like:

Openers
Eddie Barlow
Trevor Goddard

Middle Order
Jacques Kallis
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist (w)
Aubrey Faulkner
Keith Miller (c)

''Tail End''
Ian Botham
Imran Khan
Mike Procter
Richard Hadlee

Just missed out: Kapil Dev, Clive Rice, Wilfred Rhodes, Tony Greig, Shaun Pollock, Andrew Flintoff, Shane Watson

Maybe Shane Watson or Rhodes should replace Barlow, perhaps. Leaving Kapil Dev out was really hard, but if you had to include him, who would you leave out? smalishah84, opinions?

Needs more Charlie Macartney. And WG Grace. Macartney really isn't talked about enough, he's the most underrated cricketer ever, bar none IMO.

Grace | Macartney | Kallis | Sobers | Miller (c) | Faulkner | Gilchrist (+) | Rice | Imran | Procter | Hadlee | Botham (12th)

 

[smash84]

dude.....you can't have Miller as captain ahead of Imran

 

[smash84]

If I had to pick an All Time All-Rounders XI, it would go like:

Openers
Eddie Barlow
Trevor Goddard

Middle Order
Jacques Kallis
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist (w)
Aubrey Faulkner
Keith Miller (c)

''Tail End''
Ian Botham
Imran Khan
Mike Procter
Richard Hadlee

Just missed out: Kapil Dev, Clive Rice, Wilfred Rhodes, Tony Greig, Shaun Pollock, Andrew Flintoff, Shane Watson

Maybe Shane Watson or Rhodes should replace Barlow, perhaps. Leaving Kapil Dev out was really hard, but if you had to include him, who would you leave out? smalishah84, opinions?

Pretty decent team Harsh.

One blasphemy of course. Miller captain ahead of Imran

And I would also have Watto ahead of Barlow if openers are to be there. For a spinner you could certainly have Richie Benaud in there

 

[harsh.ag]

rvd619323, you are absolutely correct about Grace being an opener in this team. Completely forgot about him. My bad. And I had never heard of Macartney before today. Thank you for that. Fantastic cricketer he seems to be. I think you may be right about him being ahead of Goddard and Barlow. I have always preferred attacking openers more, and Macartney seems to be one. But Rice ahead of Botham, come on. Rice didn't even play a test match. Isn't it slightly wishful?

 

[harsh.ag]

smalishah84, I did the Miller thing just to antagonize you Miller would have been a great captain though. Otherwise, of course I forgot WG Grace as an opener. So one of Barlow, Goddard or Macartney (check him out!) with Grace. I thought perhaps Faulkner and Sobers could fill in the spinner role, so didn't pick Benaud.

 

[Dan]

rvd619323, you are absolutely correct about Grace being an opener in this team. Completely forgot about him. My bad. And I had never heard of Macartney before today. Thank you for that. Fantastic cricketer he seems to be. I think you may be right about him being ahead of Goddard and Barlow. I have always preferred attacking openers more, and Macartney seems to be one. But Rice ahead of Botham, come on. Rice didn't even play a test match. Isn't it slightly wishful?

I would much preferred to have Macartney at 3, where he was his most dangerous, but nobody in that middle order should be dropped for Barlow, Goddard or Rhodes.

Rice is a personal preference thing, he's a guy that I rate immensely, and it was a travesty he never got to play Test match cricket. Nothing against Botham, he was an incredible all-rounder, but I prefer Rice. Wishful? Maybe.

Smali, another personal preference thing. Miller had this habit of doing things in a very weird way as captain, but getting brilliant results from it. Imran, I feel was a fantastic man-manager and very, very good tactically, but Miller just had that aggressive attitude and knack for making the right bowling changes. Completely understand why you prefer Imran - fantastic captain - but like my selection of Rice, it's just my preference to have Miller leading the side.

 

[smash84]

haha......do agree that Miller may have been a good captain

I really wouldn't want Sobers to bowl spin against a SC side. Benaud would definitely be a better spin option.

Also he was a great captain.

 

[smash84]

Smali, another personal preference thing. Miller had this habit of doing things in a very weird way as captain, but getting brilliant results from it. Imran, I feel was a fantastic man-manager and very, very good tactically, but Miller just had that aggressive attitude and knack for making the right bowling changes. Completely understand why you prefer Imran - fantastic captain - but like my selection of Rice, it's just my preference to have Miller leading the side.

Fair enough.........

I do feel that Imran has real leadership qualities (even after the cricket field he has made a mark in philanthropy in Pakistan, and hopefully soon in politics)

 

[kyear2]

Tactically Sobers was also a great captain and he was a risk taker. his drawback was that he people and developmental skills were just lacking. He spentg more time on the golf course than with his players and never instilled that disipline that was lacking. He got by on his natural abilities and figured everyone else could as well.

 

[Dan]

Fair enough.........

I do feel that Imran has real leadership qualities (even after the cricket field he has made a mark in philanthropy in Pakistan, and hopefully soon in politics)

Agreed, in terms of leadership Imran is ahead of Miller.

I just think that Miller's style of captaincy, mostly his tactics, would work well with the personalities in the XI. Especially since he's juggling 10 Test-quality bowlers.

 

[ankitj]

Put Mankad in place of Barlow in that XI please.

 

[smash84]

Tactically Sobers was also a great captain and he was a risk taker. his drawback was that he people and developmental skills were just lacking. He spentg more time on the golf course than with his players and never instilled that disipline that was lacking. He got by on his natural abilities and figured everyone else could as well.

Which was precisely why Sobers wasn't such a great captain IMO.

He couldn't see the limitations of his players.

While tactically Imran subscribed wholeheartedly to the Ian Chappell school of thought of "attack is always best" but he understood the limitations of his players and who to use in what situation and he could inspire the players to rise to a level above their usual level (something like synergies if you will)

 

[harsh.ag]

8ankitj, actually it may happen that Mankad is slightly lower on the pecking order for the opening slots. As I said earlier, I completely missed WG Grace and he has got to be there. So that leaves one spot open for one of Goddard, Barlow, Macartney, Rhodes, Mankad and Watson. rvd619323 pointed me to Macartney whose record is fantastic, and he seemed to have been an attacking batsman. Barlow is perhaps SA's best opener after Richards and Smith. Goddard was good too. Rhodes had a class opening salvo with Jack Hobbs. Pretty tough for Mankad to get a place, right? What do you think?

 

[ankitj]

I am not sure if Eddie Barlow qualifies as an all-rounder based on his test record at least. He takes less than 1.5 wickets a match. I think Mankad and Goddard have the most rounded record among those who can take the opening spot. So, they will be my choice for openers. Grace, again based on test record, doesn't qualify as an all-rounder, but I can understand picking him based on his exploits in pre-test era.

I agree with most of your choices otherwise. I rate S. Pollock more than you do, and might try to squeeze him in as well.

Also, I believe Bruce Mitchell has the claim to be considered among the top opening SA batsmen. He makes it to my AT SA XI to partner Barry Richards.

 

[smash84]

what about Watto as an opener?

 

[Jager]

Macartney is criminally underrated as you said before rvd, I definitely agree all the way. He has been likened to Victor Trumper in terms of style and has a fantastic record overall, especially with standardised averages. I would have Miller leading my side as well, he had that magic about his captaincy.

 

[harsh.ag]

So I think I can safely conclude that Macartney wouldn't be a totally controversial choice. I choose him simply on account of being more attacking than Goddard and Mankad. Watto and Barlow just miss out. Wonderful to find out about such a wonderful cricketer after all these years. Really, where has he been hiding from all the all-rounder discussions I have had till now ! Watto could be up there in a few seasons. 8ankitj, you are completely correct about Bruce Mitchell. For some weird reason I thought he used to bat at no. 3

 

[ankitj]

what about Watto as an opener?

Decent choice, but Mankad and Goddard are comfortably better. Watson is not doing a lot of bowling it seems.

 

[Flametree]

Pollock is seriously underrated here too - a similar bowling average to Akram with a batting average 10 points higher (I know he had a lot of not-outs in his record).

Another who rarely gets a mention is Mushtaq Mohammed. He just didn't bowl enough I guess, with fewer than 1.5 wickets per match, but that was just because his side was never short of a leg-spinner. But he averaged 39 with bat and 29 with ball which is pretty useful.

And for an earlier comment about Sobers... in the Rest of the World side against England in 1970, he scored almost 600 runs at 73 and took 21 wickets at 21. Probably the greatest allround performance ever over a 5-test series. Pity it was later decided it wasn't a test series at all.

 

[Flametree]

And Jack Gregory was one of the few players who was pick-able for either discipline...