Bowling All Rounders or Batting All Rounders +

[subshakerz]

I prefer the bowling all-rounder as long as he is a great captain.

 

[subshakerz]

Well I guess one of my qualifiers is you can’t be an allrounder if you haven’t at least scored a century and also taken a 5’fer in tests. Arbitrary? Sure. But I think that’s a good starting point, better than an arbitrary average imo.

My criteria is someone who bats in the top 7 and bowls regularly as five bowlers.

But no 5fer or century can weed out quite a few.

 

[sayon basak]

My criteria is someone who bats in the top 7 and bowls regularly as five bowlers.

But no 5fer or century can weed out quite a few.

A specific amount of Batting in the top seven per inning and average number of overs bowled per inning could serve as a good definition.

 

[subshakerz]

A specific amount of Batting in the top seven per inning and average number of overs bowled per inning could serve as a good definition.

I see Hadlee/Ashwin as the minimum standard bat and Kallis as the minimum standard bowler.

 

[sayon basak]

I see Hadlee/Ashwin as the minimum standard bat and Kallis as the minimum standard bowler.

Kallis bowled 12.3 overs on average per inning.

Ashwin and Hadlee batted in the top seven 29.53% and 39.55% of the time. Both batted at 8th more frequently than in the top seven.

 

[subshakerz]

Kallis bowled 12.3 overs on average per inning.

Ashwin and Hadlee batted in the top seven 29.53% and 39.55% of the time. Both batted at 8th more frequently than in the top seven.

Yeah that's why they are all borderline to me. As in, I can't accept less than them to entertain as all-rounders. Otherwise they are useful tailenders or part time bowlers.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Jadeja is greatest spin bowling all rounder. average of 24 with ball and avearage of 37 with bat doesnt that make him atg

I think Phillips and possibly Washington S will end up greater

 

[sayon basak]

Yeah that's why they are all borderline to me. As in, I can't accept less than them to entertain as all-rounders. Otherwise they are useful tailenders or part time bowlers.

Agree. But one would still have to choose where to draw the line. Is it Hadlee's 39% or Ashwin's 29%? Or maybe 25% to include both (which I think is too soft)

 

[sayon basak]

I think Phillips and possibly Washington S will end up greater

And maybe Miraz.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

And maybe Miraz.

He's been very good recently

 

[sayon basak]

He's been very good recently

Averages 22 with the bat and 32 with the ball. Just needs to flip that.
Too hard?

 

[subshakerz]

Agree. But one would still have to choose where to draw the line. Is it Hadlee's 39% or Ashwin's 29%? Or maybe 25% to include both (which I think is too soft)

Hadlee. Ashwin is a special case because he batted 8 more mostly due to Jadeja ahead of him. Vettori is also a special case who chose to bat no.8 as well.

 

[kyear2]

My criteria is someone who bats in the top 7 and bowls regularly as five bowlers.

But no 5fer or century can weed out quite a few.

Can bat competently at 8, and bowl regularly at 3rd or 4th change. 1 wicket per match for the batting all rounders and and a batting average around 20 for the bowling all rounders is good enough for me.

 

[Qlder]

Can bat competently at 8, and bowl regularly at 3rd or 4th change. 1 wicket per match for the batting all rounders and and a batting average around 20 for the bowling all rounders is good enough for me.

Meh, so someone plays 100 Tests for 100 wickets as batting allrounder and about 1500 runs for bowling allrounder. Mind blowing mediocrity

 

[subshakerz]

Can bat competently at 8, and bowl regularly at 3rd or 4th change. 1 wicket per match for the batting all rounders and and a batting average around 20 for the bowling all rounders is good enough for me.

No. Wasim, Philander, etc aren't all-rounders. Has to be mid late 20s averaging at least.

If you are batting in the top 7 regularly, the team is relying on you for batting strength.

No.8, with some exception, is your best tailender.

5th bowlers will regularly bowl 4th change usually or even 3rd if needed.

 

[subshakerz]

Meh, so someone plays 100 Tests for 100 wickets as batting allrounder and about 1500 runs for bowling allrounder. Mind blowing mediocrity

We are talking minimum standard to qualify to even be called one.

 

[Qlder]

We are talking minimum standard to qualify to even be called one.

Yeah, someone that takes 100 tests to take 100 wickets is not an allrounder. It's someone who bowls a bit and hopefully bats better than they bowl

 

[subshakerz]

Yeah, someone that takes 100 tests to take 100 wickets is not an allrounder. It's someone who bowls a bit

Yeah I don't like the 1 wicket per test standard either. Carl Hooper would be an AR then. That's why I just care if they are regularly used in the 5 bowling options.

I said Kallis is the minimum I would go and he is 1.5, but for much of his career nearly 2.

 

[Qlder]

Yeah I don't like the 1 wicket per test standard either. Carl Hooper would be an AR then. That's why I just care if they are regularly used in the 5 bowling options.

I said Kallis is the minimum I would go and he is 1.5, but for much of his career nearly 2.

Kallis is actually 1.76 wpm. I personally think an allrounder should be at least 2 wpm but Kallis forces us to lower the standard to about 1.75 wpm to fit him in

 

[LangleyburyCCPlayer]

Kallis is actually 1.76 wpm. I personally think an allrounder should be at least 2 wpm but Kallis forces us to lower the standard to about 1.75 wpm to fit him in

What about someone like Stokes, who has been above 2 wpm for most of his career but whose bowling has become less of a factor in recent times, not because of ability, but fitness?