subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
I prefer the bowling all-rounder as long as he is a great captain.
-
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.
Bowling All Rounders or Batting All Rounders +
- Thread starter kyear2
- Start date
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
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
International Debutant
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
Hall of Fame Member
I see Hadlee/Ashwin as the minimum standard bat and Kallis as the minimum standard bowler.
sayon basak
International Debutant
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
Hall of Fame Member
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
Hall of Fame Member
I think Phillips and possibly Washington S will end up greater
sayon basak
International Debutant
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
International Debutant
And maybe Miraz.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
He's been very good recently
sayon basak
International Debutant
Averages 22 with the bat and 32 with the ball. Just needs to flip that.
Too hard?
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
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
International Coach
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
Hall of Fame Member
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
Hall of Fame Member
We are talking minimum standard to qualify to even be called one.Meh, so someone plays 100 Tests for 100 wickets as batting allrounder and about 1500 runs for bowling allrounder. Mind blowing mediocrity
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
Hall of Fame Member
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
State 12th Man
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?