-
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 are the minimum record requirements for secondary disciplines to qualify someone as an all-rounder?
- Thread starter subshakerz
- Start date
kyear2
International Coach
I consider them more than good enough to fill the role.
kyear2
International Coach
A player could be selected as a batsman, come in at 6 and average 26. He's still a batsman.
kyear2
International Coach
I would not confirm or deny.....
But seriously though, there are other examples.
I personally don't include them in my all rounder rankings (though I do include keepers) but they do factor into the overall player rankings.
A player like Hammond provided more utility and value with his catching than even his bowling..... Chappell, Simpson as well. Kallis not that far away.
He isn't going to play a lot of games though, and I'm not looking at this as how a player would be classified for one game. If they don't meet my mark over a period of time they're not ARs IMO. We can set benchmarks for what the low ends for specialist batters/bowlers based on average output over time and then if the players meet that minimum then they can be considered an AR. What type and how good of an AR they are would require more analysis, but that's for after.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Do I need to tap the sign? What you are doing is introducing a constraint that doesn't apply to specialists without providing any good reason to do so. Sure a crap allrounder won't be playing many games, same as a crap specialist batsman or bowler. It doesn't take away from the fact they were still selected as an allrounder, regardless of whether they meet your personal benchmarks.
Blenkinsop
U19 Captain
Agree with @Starfighter, it's purely down to the intent of the selection. At England's low point in the 90s and early 2000s they went through a phase of picking "bits and pieces cricketers". Not many of them did much with either bat or ball, but they were still all rounders.
It's not that unusual for a specialist spinner to be picked and then not bowl at all in the match because spin isn't needed after all. It doesn't mean they're not a specialist spinner.
It's not that unusual for a specialist spinner to be picked and then not bowl at all in the match because spin isn't needed after all. It doesn't mean they're not a specialist spinner.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Really? To me they are clearly useful tailenders. They aren't ARs. I would never bat them beyond no.8
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
This is actually quite simple.
What is your absolute minimum to be an intl test class batsman in any side in the world?
What is your absolute minimum to be intl test class bowler in any side in the world?
An AR should meet both standards IMO.
What is your absolute minimum to be an intl test class batsman in any side in the world?
What is your absolute minimum to be intl test class bowler in any side in the world?
An AR should meet both standards IMO.
ataraxia
International Coach
Why are these standards based on fluctuating factors
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Because it still is somewhat subjective.
Is Philander's batting good enough to make the cut? Not for me, maybe for others.
Blenkinsop
U19 Captain
David Capel sadly didn't meet either. He was still an all-rounder though.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
No, he was selected as an AR but wasn't good enough.
The same way Steve Smith isn't a leg spinner.
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
We normally consider Imran, Kapil, Pollock, Hadlee and Jadeja ARs.
We don't for Mitch Johnson, Philander and Brette Lee.
Obviously in between them is a cutoff that may be hard to tell but is clearly there.
We don't for Mitch Johnson, Philander and Brette Lee.
Obviously in between them is a cutoff that may be hard to tell but is clearly there.
Blenkinsop
U19 Captain
Does that mean Zak Crawley isn't a batsman? Or Chris Woakes is only a bowler in England?
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Being selected to be an allrounder means he was, for those matches, an allrounder.
I seriously don't know why you're arguing this when it was answered immediately. Just as players are selected to bat or bowl, some are selected to do both i.e. be an allrounder. Capel batted 6 or 7 and bowled plenty, he was an allrounder - just a rather poor one.