Playing Selector: All time great allrounders No.6 - No.10

[bagapath]

He’s got my vote

thanks

 

[mr_mister]

Davidson has a higher batting average than bowling average.

Should absolutely make him count as an AR

 

[subshakerz]

Greig being robbed here..seriously underrated.

 

[bagapath]

Davidson has a higher batting average than bowling average.

Should absolutely make him count as an AR

So does Don Bradman

 

[mr_mister]

So does Don Bradman

The rule applies more to bowling all rounders. For example, Wasim and Lindwall didn't

Pollock, Hadlee, Davidson did

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Greig being robbed here..seriously underrated.

Just bcos he's not in the top 10 doesn't mean he's underrated.

 

[bagapath]

The rule applies more to bowling all rounders. For example, Wasim and Lindwall didn't

Pollock, Hadlee, Davidson did

Of the five names you have listed, Davidson is the only one without a single 100 to his name.
We are listing the greatest all rounders here. Which allrounder worth his salt would not be able to reach the century mark at least once? Davidson was a great bowler and a useful bat. But with just five half centuries in 44 tests, all-rounder he was not.

 

[subshakerz]

Just bcos he's not in the top 10 doesn't mean he's underrated.

It does. Given the opposition he played and numbers he got.

 

[peterhrt]

Benaud didn't consider himself an all-rounder, admitting that he didn't have the reactions or technique to handle bowlers of high pace like Tyson and Hall. Did well against Adcock and Heine though.

Given that he normally put himself in ahead of Davidson, presumably Benaud didn't consider him an all-rounder either.

Lindwall's batting was quite highly rated in Australia - like Miller he preferred batting to bowling - but the numbers don't support him.

On rain-damaged English pitches, Noble's batting was way ahead of Miller's.

 

[Bolo.]

It does. Given the opposition he played and numbers he got.

Extremely short career, with a nothing special record at FC- basically just played tests at his peak. I'm sure plenty of players with fewer votes here would be posting comparable peak numbers.

Goddard, who has less votes than him, actually has his numbers beat over a career that is nearly triple the length.

He is quality, but the fact that he is getting a bunch of top 10 votes makes me think he is a touch overrated.

 

[mr_mister]

Of the five names you have listed, Davidson is the only one without a single 100 to his name.
We are listing the greatest all rounders here. Which allrounder worth his salt would not be able to reach the century mark at least once? Davidson was a great bowler and a useful bat. But with just five half centuries in 44 tests, all-rounder he was not.

Averages are a far superior stat for assessing quality then the hundreds column

Atherton got more tons than Damien Martyn


Davidson averaging more with bat than ball qualifies him as an all rounder. This is something even Flintoff couldn't do

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Averages are a far superior stat for assessing quality then the hundreds column

Atherton got more tons than Damien Martyn


Davidson averaging more with bat than ball qualifies him as an all rounder. This is something even Flintoff couldn't do

It is pointless arguing criteria in this thread - Oram (36.3 & 33) and De Grandhomme (38.7 & 33) both averaged more with bat than ball as well and they weren't included either.

 

[mr_mister]

That's because they're kiwis

 

[howitzer]

Extremely short career, with a nothing special record at FC- basically just played tests at his peak. I'm sure plenty of players with fewer votes here would be posting comparable peak numbers.

Goddard, who has less votes than him, actually has his numbers beat over a career that is nearly triple the length.

He is quality, but the fact that he is getting a bunch of top 10 votes makes me think he is a touch overrated.

Greig that is, not Goddard i hope as Goddard should be right in the discussion and tends not to be.

 

[Coronis]

Averages are a far superior stat for assessing quality then the hundreds column

Atherton got more tons than Damien Martyn


Davidson averaging more with bat than ball qualifies him as an all rounder. This is something even Flintoff couldn't do

He also played 50 more tests, and only had 3 more tons. You can use numbers as well as common sense during these discussions.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

That's because they're kiwis

Probably. John R Reid wasn't included either which is even stranger.

 

[howitzer]

He also played 50 more tests, and only had 3 more tons. You can use numbers as well as common sense during these discussions.

I always look at people who fixate on this magical century number as overly simplistic souls. If we're going there then Dave Warner has more centuries in fewer games than Viv Richards. I know you rate Richards lower than most, but please don't tell me you rate him lower than Warner.

 

[Coronis]

I always look at people who fixate on this magical century number as overly simplistic souls. If we're going there then Dave Warner has more centuries in fewer games than Viv Richards. I know you rate Richards lower than most, but please don't tell me you rate him lower than Warner.

Plum or Dave?

 

[howitzer]

@Prince EWS Warner>Richards could be his Hoggard>Lillee. I like it.

 

[howitzer]

Plum or Dave?

Dave but either.