Greatest All-rounder if captaincy were to be included

[Migara]

From 2004 to 2006 Flintoff scored 2076 runs @ 37.76 and averaged just under 27 runs per wicket for his 144 wickets in 37 tests. Pretty decent stats for his peak. Although fairly low compared to the peaks of the great 80s all rounders (Kapil, Hadlee, Botham, and Imran).

Is that a big feat? I'd say there had been many comparable ones. Kallis I would think have a similar record to Freddy during the same time and so is Vettori. From 2006 till end of career in mid 2009, Vaas averages 39.9 with the bat and 33.8 with the ball. Freddy's stats even on his peak are nothing out of this world.

 

[Jono]

An average of 27 with the ball is a hell of a lot better than an average of 33.8. That is a stark difference.

 

[Furball]

Is that a big feat? I'd say there had been many comparable ones. Kallis I would think have a similar record to Freddy during the same time and so is Vettori. From 2006 till end of career in mid 2009, Vaas averages 39.9 with the bat and 33.8 with the ball. Freddy's stats even on his peak are nothing out of this world.

I must have missed the many players who averaged over 40 with the bat and under 28 with the ball over a 2-3 year period.

 

[tooextracool]

An average of 27 with the ball is a hell of a lot better than an average of 33.8. That is a stark difference.

especially when 12/54 wickets and 205/838 runs are scored against Bangladesh.

 

[Jono]

Just as you posted that TEC I had just looked at Vaas' figures in more detail, because to me it is unexplainable how he could have done that in the tailend of his career... then I saw a large portion of his runs and wickets were against Bangladesh.

Still a good achievement, but not even close to the Flintoff peak.

 

[Bloody Hell]

AND.......

As a result Keith Miller is the only Australian to play both cricket and Aussie Rules at the highest level.

Biggest Freak!

 

[marc71178]

especially when 12/54 wickets and 205/838 runs are scored against Bangladesh.

Yeah but 33.32 with the bat and 37.60 with the ball doesn't look so good does it.

 

[vcs]

Vettori between 2004 and 2008 won't be too far off IMO. In the last two years his stats as a batsman are remarkable but his bowling has understandably dropped off a bit.

 

[Jono]

AND.......

As a result Keith Miller is the only Australian to play both cricket and Aussie Rules at the highest level.

Biggest Freak!

The only TRUE all rounder

 

[marc71178]

Vettori between 2004 and 2008 won't be too far off IMO. In the last two years his stats as a batsman are remarkable but his bowling has understandably dropped off a bit.

1751 runs @ 35.73 and 136 wickets @ 30.12 in 39 matches does look good.

In the 8 of those he played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe his number were 477 runs @ 68.14 and 51 wickets @ 13.04.

The 31 against top opposition isn't quite as good.

 

[smash84]

Is that a big feat? I'd say there had been many comparable ones. Kallis I would think have a similar record to Freddy during the same time and so is Vettori. From 2006 till end of career in mid 2009, Vaas averages 39.9 with the bat and 33.8 with the ball. Freddy's stats even on his peak are nothing out of this world.

I didn't say they are out of this world but they are decent enough. I am not aware of too many players who would have done that over a fair amount of their career.

An average of 27 with the ball is a hell of a lot better than an average of 33.8. That is a stark difference.

I agree. An average of 34 is almost mediocre.

I must have missed the many players who averaged over 40 with the bat and under 28 with the ball over a 2-3 year period.

The only TRUE all rounder

Well there was this really great all rounder who I did not know about until I read about him on cricinfo. GA Faulkner. Now that guy was a TRUE all rounder too. Sobers, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee and Botham too I should say

1751 runs @ 35.73 and 136 wickets @ 30.12 in 39 matches does look good.

In the 8 of those he played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe his number were 477 runs @ 68.14 and 51 wickets @ 13.04.

The 31 against top opposition isn't quite as good.

Agreed.

 

[Jono]

Well there was this really great all rounder who I did not know about until I read about him on cricinfo. GA Faulkner. Now that guy was a TRUE all rounder too. Sobers, Imran, Kapil, Hadlee and Botham too I should say

Nah I meant played AFL/VFL and cricket

A true Aussie allrounder

 

[smash84]

Nah I meant played AFL/VFL and cricket

A true Aussie allrounder

Oh.....

 

[taipan1]

Pollock and Allan Donald say hi.

Ignoring the small fact that Donald has been retired for 10 years

 

[taipan1]

Between 2004 and 2006 Flintoff would have made the England side on the basis of both disciplines. He was more of a genuine all rounder than either Pollock or Kallis, whose second suit never really elevated beyond being extremely useful.

Pollock.
2001 573@52.09
2002 221@77.00
2003 452 @50.22

More than useful I would say.

 

[Jono]

Why are Pollock and Flintoff even being mentioned here. Both were mediocre captains at best.

 

[taipan1]

Why are Pollock and Flintoff even being mentioned here. Both were mediocre captains at best.

Well, so was Tendulkar but is still a great batsman.

 

[Jono]

No doubt, but I think when you put captaincy into the equation like this thread has done, Imran and Sobers would be clearly ahead of Pollock and Flintoff, no?

 

[taipan1]

No doubt, but I think when you put captaincy into the equation like this thread has done, Imran and Sobers would be clearly ahead of Pollock and Flintoff, no?

Well firstly we had to establish the true meaning of allrounder. It is a seriously devalued term imho.

How good was Sobers as a a captain?

 

[taipan1]

Looks like Sobers only won 9/39 tests. Not that great