Eh, I have a rather strict definition of a genuine allrounder. For me it's someone whose both skills are at a very comparable level, eg Aubrey Faulkner and Keith Miller and Tony Greig in FC, and arguably Vinoo Mankad and Trevor Goddard.
Bothams bowling wasn't that much better than his batting.
Imo it was. For instance, Sobers was one of the 4 main bowlers of WI for over a decade, at times even arguably there best. Don't think anyone will think of him as a genuine allrounder.
Alok Kapali
His bowling was barely specialist standard overall.
Whose, Sobers?? No way, you are stretching. And like, that's true for Botham's batting as well.
No by 80s standards Botham was a regulation bat. In fact he was better than his final average. Better than Sobers as a bowler.
I don't think Botham as a batsman was better than Sobers as a bowler. Both were better than their Final average.
etc. they felt more borderline
I don’t think anybody ever called Hammond an allrounder. I believe it was said about him that he had the capability to be a better bowler but wasn’t, though on occasions when he was motivated you could see that in him.
He was a little below average for his time. But he was well above average for a bowler.
How do you determine that?
The average number 6 was a bit better than him during his time.
Based on batting average?
Yeah. And even tbf 6 wasn’t his best position despite being his most often. iirc he was better at both 5 and 7. Clearly mismanaged career. But yeah… average very low order batsman. Above average bowler.
What was the 80s average and output for a no.6?
During Botham’s career, just under 34.
