Who is the greatest part time bowler of all-time?

[Daemon]

I think <1 wpm is a decent indication of a part timer. Carl Hooper barely misses out which I think is fair.

 

[Molehill]

Someone like Gooch is quite interesting. He actually has 246 FC wickets and over 300 in Limited Overs games. But only 23 wickets in 118 Tests in which he only bowled in 66 innings. Kind of suggests he was a part timer who was used rather too sparingly even for a part timer!!

 

[kyear2]

I think the problem here, what even is a part timer? Was Wally Hammond a part timer? If not, do Steve Waugh qualify?? The problem is, the moment you became a certain degree of good with the ball; you become an all-rounder. Anyways, the 3 I will pick, as the men with golden arm who could give you an important break thorough when your frontliners can't:
Virendra Sehwag
Doug Walters
Ken Barrington

But if I'm constantly being told that Hammond isn't an all rounder, how does he not qualify as a part timer?

 

[capt_Luffy]

But if I'm constantly being told that Hammond isn't an all rounder, how does he not qualify as a part timer?

Almost has a WPM of 1..... When does even a player becomes an all rounder??

 

[Coronis]

Yeah its a bit nebulous. Is it defined by how good or poor they are in their secondary skill? Is it defined by how often they bowled? Is it defined by how much they bowled when they did bowl?

e.g Hammond and Kallis both averaged similar amounts of overs in innings where they actually bowled.

 

[reyrey]

JP Duminy is worth a mention. Just under a wicket a game at 38 and at a strike rate of 64 that would make most spinners envious.

Just a shame his batting in Tests didn't quite hit the mark

 

[Socerer 01]

Phillips is currently averaging 17.47 with the ball with a 5-fer and a 4-fer, but might already be considered an allrounder.

Phillips is an all rounder at this point

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah its a bit nebulous. Is it defined by how good or poor they are in their secondary skill? Is it defined by how often they bowled? Is it defined by how much they bowled when they did bowl?

e.g Hammond and Kallis both averaged similar amounts of overs in innings where they actually bowled.

Further proof Kallis' bowling is overrated.

 

[Coronis]

Further proof Kallis' bowling is overrated.

Right..

 

[shortpitched713]

Doug Walters surely takes the cake here. In a 74 Test career he only bowled 10+ overs in an innings 14 times and averaged sub 30 despite playing a decent proportion of his career in a high scoring era.

He is a very interesting shout, just based on the stats.

I've got Walters and Steve Waugh on my shortlist certainly.

However, how "clutch" were some of Walters' bowling performances? For real Waugh to me was such a brilliant part-timer simply because he'd deliver with the ball in big moments for no reason. I'll have to look further into Walters' record.

 

[kyear2]

Further proof Kallis' bowling is overrated.

How????

 

[subshakerz]

How????

Kallis being closer to Hammond level.

 

[Bolo.]

Kallis being closer to Hammond level.

You were criticising Kallis a few days back for having an uneven split in bowling workload. Now Hammond having a more uneven split makes him look better in relation to Kallis.

Do you think these positions are consistent with each other?

 

[subshakerz]

You were criticising Kallis a few days back for having an uneven split in bowling workload. Now Hammond having a more uneven split makes him look better in relation to Kallis.

Do you think these positions are consistent with each other?

I am not sure what you mean by uneven split? Kallis is still better than Hammond.

 

[Coronis]

You were criticising Kallis a few days back for having an uneven split in bowling workload. Now Hammond having a more uneven split makes him look better in relation to Kallis.

Do you think these positions are consistent with each other?

Any excuse for some people to **** on Kallis. Its my fault for bringing the stat up.

 

[Coronis]

But yeah as a comparison Hammond bowled in 110 innings (batted 140) in his 85 matches. Kallis bowled in 272 innings (batted 280) in his 166 matches.

 

[Bolo.]

I am not sure what you mean by uneven split? Kallis is still better than Hammond.

You were arguing that Kallis was a part-timer late career, and you were downgrading him for it.

Now you are either downgrading Kallis or upgrading hammond as a result of Hammond doing the same to a greater degree.

These positions are entirely at odds with each other.

 

[Coronis]

Can you call someone a part timer if they’re bowling every (or almost every) innings/match? Even if they’re **** at it

 

[subshakerz]

You were arguing that Kallis was a part-timer late career, and you were downgrading him for it.

Now you are either downgrading Kallis or upgrading hammond as a result of Hammond doing the same to a greater degree.

These positions are entirely at odds with each other.

No, downgrading Kallis is my consistent position.

 

[subshakerz]

Can you call someone a part timer if they’re bowling every (or almost every) innings/match? Even if they’re **** at it

There isn't a clear definition, which is why I suggested we only call them PT if we don't consider them a proper AR.