Is Moeen Ali the best ever test no-rounder?

[Everton Seymour]

Mitchell Marsh ..

42 Test wickets in 32 Test matches @ 38.64 , that's like barely a wicket every Test match and yet Marsh only averaged 25 with the bat and he usually batted in the top 6 .

Darren Sammy

Man got 38 Tests just for good vibes he brought to the West Indies team ..
21 with the bat , 35 with the ball , that he was West Indies captain pretty much symbolises how far West Indies cricket had fallen in the late 2000's-2010's .

 

[mr_mister]

Mitchell Marsh ..

42 Test wickets in 32 Test matches @ 38.64 , that's like barely a wicket every Test match and yet Marsh only averaged 25 with the bat and he usually batted in the top 6 .

Darren Sammy

Man got 38 Tests just for good vibes he brought to the West Indies team ..
21 with the bat , 35 with the ball , that he was West Indies captain pretty much symbolises how far West Indies cricket had fallen in the late 2000's-2010's .

In their second successful T20 WC campaign (the remember the name one) Sammy batted 8 (with a top score of 6, only batted in 3/6 games) and bowled only 3 overs across the tournament, though he did pick up one wicket against Afghanistan

The most specialist captain role I've ever seen in my time watching cricket. Absolute no rounder by that point, basically a non participant actually except to sort out bowling changes

 

[Starfighter]

He did accomplish the rare achievement of being dismissed for a pair in a day.

It occurred to be last night when thinking about England's history of spinners who are really no-rounders mainly picked for their batting. Most English spin picks since seem to have been an attempt to pick another Ray Illingworth.

 

[mr_mister]

Yeah, certainly true for Croft and Giles

And Cork, Defreitas, the Hollioakes were all attempts at another Botham. Even Gough after his debut 50 I imagine sparked some hope


They were way too focused on non specialists in the 90s

Caddick/Fraser/Malcom/Gough/Headley Tufnell/Such should have basically been the pool of bowlers they stuck to. Got too funky too often

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Dipak Patel started for NZ as a specialist batsman, but then became a batting allrounder, and then a bowling allrounder. His highest test score was 99 (run out going for the 3rd and the hundy).

Stats:
Tests - batting av 20.7; bowling av 42
ODIs - batting av 11.8; bowling av 50.2

Nonetheless was still one of the stars of the 1992 WC and is a NZ cricketing icon.

 

[mr_mister]

Dipak Patel started for NZ as a specialist batsman, but then became a batting allrounder, and then a bowling allrounder. His highest test score was 99 (run out going for the 3rd and the hundy).

Stats:
Tests - batting av 20.7; bowling av 42
ODIs - batting av 11.8; bowling av 50.2

Nonetheless was still one of the stars of the 1992 WC and is a NZ cricketing icon.

God that'd be shattering. Worse than Warne's **** up

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Caddick/Fraser/Malcom/Gough/Headley Tufnell/Such should have basically been the pool of bowlers they stuck to. Got too funky too often

Bicknell was the best bowler in the 90s and we wasted him.

 

[Starfighter]

Yeah, certainly true for Croft and Giles
And Cork, Defreitas, the Hollioakes were all attempts at another Botham. Even Gough after his debut 50 I imagine sparked some hope
They were way too focused on non specialists in the 90s
Caddick/Fraser/Malcom/Gough/Headley/Tufnell/Such should have basically been the pool of bowlers they stuck to. Got too funky too often

And Emburey, Edmonds, Moeen, Bess, L Dawson, Ansari (and soon Jacks). Granted, they often haven't had too many better spinners.

Headley's an interesting one. His FC record isn't all that flash but he certainly could be effective on his day. Seems like his career-ending back injury came right when he should have been at his peak.

Bicknell was the best bowler in the 90s and we wasted him.

Wasn't Bicknell considered too slow? Trueman once said something about 'he runs in faster than he bowls'. Funny thing is he could hold a bat too, which should have incentivised picking him.

 

[Migara]

Dipak Patel started for NZ as a specialist batsman, but then became a batting allrounder, and then a bowling allrounder. His highest test score was 99 (run out going for the 3rd and the hundy).

Stats:
Tests - batting av 20.7; bowling av 42
ODIs - batting av 11.8; bowling av 50.2

Nonetheless was still one of the stars of the 1992 WC and is a NZ cricketing icon.

Patel was a joke with the ball. To make things worse he was a joke with the bat too.

 

[subshakerz]

Moeen Ali is a bowling allrounder, taking three wickets a test as a spinner for England is good enough output to justify him and his batting sweetens the deal

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Patel was a joke with the ball.

1992 CWC

vs Aus 10 overs, 1 for 36
vs Eng 10 overs, 2 for 26
vs Ind 10 overs, 2 for 29
vs Pak 10 overs, 0 for 25 & 10 overs, 1 for 50
vs SAf 10 overs, 1 for 28
vs SL 9 overs, 0 for 32
vs WI 10 overs, 1 for 19
vs Zim DNB

For one month (on the biggest stage) he was the best ODI spinner in the world. Opened the bowling too.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

God that'd be shattering. Worse than Warne's **** up

Even worse, the throw that ran him out was by Derek Pringle who basically just chucked it in without really trying to run him out and somehow got lucky.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

1992 CWC

vs Aus 10 overs, 1 for 36
vs Eng 10 overs, 2 for 26
vs Ind 10 overs, 2 for 29
vs Pak 10 overs, 0 for 25 & 10 overs, 1 for 50
vs SAf 10 overs, 1 for 28
vs SL 9 overs, 0 for 32
vs WI 10 overs, 1 for 19
vs Zim DNB

For one month (on the biggest stage) he was the best ODI spinner in the world. Opened the bowling too.

Dipak Patel in 92 got more wickets at a better average and ER as an opening bowler than Murali did in 96 bowling on bunsens.

 

[Migara]

1992 CWC

vs Aus 10 overs, 1 for 36
vs Eng 10 overs, 2 for 26
vs Ind 10 overs, 2 for 29
vs Pak 10 overs, 0 for 25 & 10 overs, 1 for 50
vs SAf 10 overs, 1 for 28
vs SL 9 overs, 0 for 32
vs WI 10 overs, 1 for 19
vs Zim DNB

For one month (on the biggest stage) he was the best ODI spinner in the world. Opened the bowling too.

Aravinda de Silva has a single bowling performance that trumps all of them.

Oh, I just realized de Silva was a better ODI bowler than Patel.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Aravinda de Silva has a single bowling performance that trumps all of them.

Oh, I just realized de Silva was a better ODI bowler than Patel.

But has he got EIGHT consecutive performances better than Patel?

 

[Migara]

But has he got EIGHT consecutive performances better than Patel?

The one performance he got makes that eight less than insignificant. Best bowling figures in a WC final. That is not your day to day part timer achieve. Semi finals also he took 2-0-3-1. So two consecutive bowling performances that dwarfs a whole career of a "bowler"

Edit: Aravinda did much better with the ball in 96 WC than Patel in 92 WC. Just googled the stats. 3 bowling innings, 4 wickets at 21.75. So no, Patel was not as good as some of part times in WC.

 

[Prince EWS]

The one performance he got makes that eight less than insignificant. Best bowling figures in a WC final. That is not your day to day part timer achieve. Semi finals also he took 2-0-3-1. So two consecutive bowling performances that dwarfs a whole career of a "bowler"

Edit: Aravinda did much better with the ball in 96 WC than Patel in 92 WC. Just googled the stats. 3 bowling innings, 4 wickets at 21.75. So no, Patel was not as good as some of part times in WC.

There's a big different between breaking a couple of partnerships and bowling your full quota as a main bowler in every game.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Edit: Aravinda did much better with the ball in 96 WC than Patel in 92 WC.

??????!!!!
Aravinda's economy rate was 5.11 (about the 80th best in the tournament), while Patel's was 3.10 (the best of anyone who played more than one match and third best overall). Also Patel bowled 79 overs, while Aravinda only bowled 17.

 

[Migara]

There's a big different between breaking a couple of partnerships and bowling your full quota as a main bowler in every game.

Bowling almost full quota in a WC final trumps it all I suppose.

 

[Migara]

??????!!!!
Aravinda's economy rate was 5.11 (about the 80th best in the tournament), while Patel's was 3.10 (the best of anyone who played more than one match and third best overall).

Still, he flopped when it mattered. Never won a WC on his bowling. Overall is a poorer bowler, when he was selected to bowl. Poor, poor player.