NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Chris Cairns, although he could've been picked on batting alone was more down to our dire 90s and 2000s batting stocks.
-
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.
What is the best definition of an all-rounder?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
In a stronger team I don't think Chris Cairns would make a side on either batting or bowling. But he was a very good all-rounder
thierry henry
International Coach
Cairns seems to have been revisionised into something other than the bowling all-rounder he was. He was a front line quick bowler other than when injured (which tbf was often). I feel like there’s a muddying of the waters given that at times (maybe more in LO cricket) he was playing either as a pure batsman or as someone who could bowl a few overs because he was coming back from various injuries.
The good version of Cairns (which was really a relatively short period of time in the middle of a long career where he was regularly either injured or just not good) was primarily in the team because he was our best bowler.
I also agree that he would’ve made most NZ XIs at the time averaging say 35ish batting 5.
The good version of Cairns (which was really a relatively short period of time in the middle of a long career where he was regularly either injured or just not good) was primarily in the team because he was our best bowler.
I also agree that he would’ve made most NZ XIs at the time averaging say 35ish batting 5.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Wouldn't make Australia and South Africa. Would make the rest.
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
He was genuinely one of the best bowling options in the country between 1995 and 2004, especially as a strike bowler.
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
At worst, he was the 3rd choice specialist seamer behind Nash and Doull - before you add his batting, which is a great bonus and at times better than some of the specialists knocking about the side during the same period. There were seasons he outperformed both of those bowlers.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
He's better than Lee and Nel. There is no question McGrath, Gillespie, Pollock, Donald and Ntini were better. Those teams were often fielding a Lee, Hall, Nel, Bichel etc though. The West Indies when they briefly had Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop on the park were the best trio and he's not getting near that as a bowler alone.
Now watch as a section of Aussies claim the bloke who averaged 31 was way better than Cairns.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah fair enough. I was thinking Reiffel instead of Lee though.
He'd be batting 8 for Australia which would be a amazing tail. Cairns 8, Reiffel 9, Warne 10.
Also SA would have Pollock at 9 behind Cairns and Boucher.
thierry henry
International Coach
imo/recollection Cairns was pretty clearly our best bowler and leader of the attack during that era, with the major proviso that he was actually fitHe was genuinely one of the best bowling options in the country between 1995 and 2004, especially as a strike bowler.
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
(didn't play for a few seasons, injured iirc)Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
At worst, he was the 3rd choice specialist seamer behind Nash and Doull - before you add his batting, which is a great bonus and at times better than some of the specialists knocking about the side during the same period. There were seasons he outperformed both of those bowlers.
The qualities of Nash and Doull are up for debate themselves….imo all 3 were good frontline test seamers. Doull probably had the most limitations (lack of pace, depending on swing), Nash was the most ruined by injuries, so Cairns still leads the way as far as being our top seamer of the era (the Bond era pretty much coinciding with Cairns being on his last legs with the ball)
Flem274*
123/5
I don't know too much about Reiffel. He was injured or winding down when I first began watching. I understand he was a really good bowler though, so fair enough.