trundler
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, considering Kallis came in third. ?Actually yeah Hammond should be way higher on this list lol. Huge miss.
Yeah, considering Kallis came in third. ?Actually yeah Hammond should be way higher on this list lol. Huge miss.
Actually yeah Hammond should be way higher on this list lol. Huge miss.
If Hadlee is already picking up votes as an all-rounder, should we be considering Hammond as well as someone who's an approximate batting AR counterpoint? (I.e. awesome bat, handy but not special bowler.)
Hammond
Hammond
Hammond
Hammond
Hammond
Hammond.
Hammond.
On of the greatest batsmen ever and good enough bowler to balance a side as the 5th bowler in a batting-friendly era. By ICC rankings he was the #1 all rounder for most of his career.
Hammond.
I tend to agree. The term 'all-rounder' is applied too loosely. You have batsmen who were useful bowlers and bowlers who were handy bats. However, a true all-rounder could be a match winner with either or both disciplines.Hammond is Hadlee is reverse. Neither are all rounders.
How does that tally with voting for a batsman who took fewer than one wicket per Test at an average of nearly 40?I find it hard to vote for bowlers averaging < 25 with the bat as true all-rounders. As good as Benaud and Davidson were, I'm giving the nod to Holder.
Fair comment. There are a few on the list with low WPM figures.How does that tally with voting for a batsman who took fewer than one wicket per Test at an average of nearly 40?