The Pure All-Rounders

[capt_Luffy]

In this thread I want to discuss all rounders who could have played atleast quarter the no. of matches they've played for their national teams based on either of their skills. Alternate title: the Shakib Al Hasan appraisal thread. As much as I think Shakib is overrated here, I can't help but be bewildered by the fact that he pretty much is Bangladesh's top 2 of all time in both batting and bowling. Others I could think of who could possibly have done that: Aubrey Faulkner, Trevor Goddard, Wilfred Rhodes, Ian Botham, Keith Miller, maybe Imran Khan and Garry Sobers?

 

[Nintendo]

In this thread I want to discuss all rounders who could have played atleast quarter the no. of matches they've played for their national teams based on either of their skills. Alternate title: the Shakib Al Hasan appraisal thread. As much as I think Shakib is overrated here, I can't help but be bewildered by the fact that he pretty much is Bangladesh's top 2 of all time in both batting and bowling. Others I could think of who could possibly have done that: Aubrey Faulkner, Trevor Goddard, Wilfred Rhodes, Ian Botham, Keith Miller, maybe Imran Khan and Garry Sobers?

If sobers was in a team that allowed him to bowl his left arm pace more he probably would be. The fact that he was that generations version of Smith in terms of batting output, while also being able to consistently bowl two varieties of spin and left arm pace at the top level, all while being a gun fielder, is crazy to imagine.

 

[subshakerz]

Maybe Chris Cairns.

 

[Bolo.]

If sobers was in a team that allowed him to bowl his left arm pace more he probably would be.

Think it was more that he didn't know how to bowl pace at the start of his career and injuries stopped him from bowling it at the end.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Flintoff. Was England's best bowler for a few years there which more or less coinicided with his peak batting form that saw him bat 4 in the ODI side and outperform half their other batsmen. Rob Key, Anthony McGrath, Ed Smith and Owais Shah all played Test cricket around then and Flintoff outperformed them as a bat easily.

 

[ataraxia]

Flintoff. Was England's best bowler for a few years there which more or less coinicided with his peak batting form that saw him bat 4 in the ODI side and outperform half their other batsmen. Rob Key, Anthony McGrath, Ed Smith and Owais Shah all played Test cricket around then and Flintoff outperformed them as a bat easily.

England, though, not a great feat really

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Mankad, Jadeja, Vettori, Hadlee, and JR Reid.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Jadeja, Vettori, and Hadlee.

I don't think they were good enough batsmen to make it into the team without bowling....

 

[peterhrt]

AG Steel, Woolley
Giffen, Noble, Macartney
John Reid
Lala Amarnath, Mankad

Batting and bowling peaks of Woolley and Macartney (and Rhodes) did not coincide.

WG Grace in first-class cricket up to the age of 31 when bowling mainly in his quicker style:

264 matches
19958 runs @ 50.39. 61 hundreds.
1364 wickets @ 14.20. 5.17 wpm.
365 catches

The distinction between the various classes of cricket was blurred in Grace's day. In all cricket, including minor matches, he scored around 100,000 runs and took 7500+ wickets. Only a handful of batsmen have reached a six-figure run aggregate. The others are club players.

Only two bowlers are known to have passed WG's wicket tally. One was his elder brother and the other a 19th century club lob bowler. Even in his sixties Grace would squeeze in extra club matches in September in order to reach a hundred wickets in the season.

 

[Pothas]

I mean it so obviously depends on the team they are playing for doesn't it. If there was a Shakib for each country he would have had lots of different looking careers.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

They were for at least a quarter of their matches. The last 5 years Jadeja has been better than Kohli, Rahane, and Pujara. Vettori averaged about 40/high 30s post 2003/4. Hadlee averaged more than Jeff Crowe, Ken Rutherford, and Trevor Franklin with the bat.

 

[Bolo.]

25% is a pretty low qualifier that might let a few bowling ARs sneak in.

Pollock's most AR 25% had him averaging 56 bat and 22 ball. And he played a ton of tests. Guys with 50 test careers probably only need a couple of half decent innings to squeeze in unless the batting in their team is stacked.

 

[mr_mister]

Vinoo Mankad has a pretty strong case. Lead spinner and opening bat

 

[Dendarii]

25% is a pretty low qualifier that might let a few bowling ARs sneak in.

Pollock's most AR 25% had him averaging 56 bat and 22 ball. And he played a ton of tests. Guys with 50 test careers probably only need a couple of half decent innings to squeeze in unless the batting in their team is stacked.

You could arguably get Kallis in there too using 25%. I don't know if it was his best period, but after 50 test matches he averaged 41 with the bat and 27.44 with the ball (although his WPM was less than 2).

 

[thierry henry]

I don't think they were good enough batsmen to make it into the team without bowling....

Vettori is a better shout than almost anyone else in this conversation because he was averaging 40-odd over a number of years in a pretty average-to-poor batting line up.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I agree with Bolo that the 25% is too low a qualifier. You can justify way too many bowling all-rounders who either had a good run with the bat in Test cricket and/or played with **** batting line-ups. Even if they realistically never would have been selected to play as a batsman if they never bowled

 

[Bolo.]

You could arguably get Kallis in there too using 25%. I don't know if it was his best period, but after 50 test matches he averaged 41 with the bat and 27.44 with the ball (although his WPM was less than 2).

I remember discussing this with friends when he was at about 70 tests. The conclusion was something along the lines of: ''We wouldn't particularly want him as a specialist bowler, but he wouldn't be the weakest link of the quicks''.

 

[Coronis]

On the topic of Kallis, in his best 5 year period bowling (98-03) 53 matches 135 wickets at 26.62. (3964 runs @ 56.62 in this period)

If South Africa insisted on playing a spinner (Adams or Boje) he’d be competing with Ntini for the third pace spot (33 matches 118 @ 28.22). Wouldn’t be crazy (though I don’t know if I would pick him based on that alone)

I remember discussing this with friends when he was at about 70 tests. The conclusion was something along the lines of: ''We wouldn't particularly want him as a specialist bowler, but he wouldn't be the weakest link of the quicks''.

Checks out.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Vettori is a better shout than almost anyone else in this conversation because he was averaging 40-odd over a number of years in a pretty average-to-poor batting line up.

Vettori was most successful at no 8. I doubt to many teams will take a specialist batsman to bat there.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I agree with Bolo that the 25% is too low a qualifier. You can justify way too many bowling all-rounders who either had a good run with the bat in Test cricket and/or played with **** batting line-ups. Even if they realistically never would have been selected to play as a batsman if they never bowled

That was what I meant. Someone who would realistically get selected in their national teams based on either skill. Pollock, Hadlee, Jadeja and Vettori had performed better than some specialist batsmen in their batting line-up, but I hardly doubt they would get pick based on their batting alone.