JH Kallis v SM Pollock

[cnerd123]

I think that’s a little too hypothetical. It’s hard to imagine someone that bad being constantly used as a frontline bowler. For someone to be considered an all rounder they’d have to bowl with some degree of merit, not just bowl a lot badly.

I think the base assumption is that if you take up the role of a frontline bowler, you are somewhat competent at it.

Usually you'll see a lot of bowlers bowl a big chunk of overs without great stats because they're just a holding bowler. Plug up one end for the bulk of the day and don't let the batsmen get too comfortable or score too freely. They're aren't taking wickets because usually the team lacks any other bowler who can build pressure, or has a strategy through which they attack with certain bowlers at one end and just want to restrict scoring at the other.

I think such bowlers are still front-line bowlers, and to be able to take on this role whilst also being a frontline batsman is pretty impressive. Think of guys like Sobers, Mankad, Shakib, event Vettori for a brief period of time. The role they play for their side is immense.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I'll take a lower order cameo than a boring century by a top-order batsman 6.5/7 days a week

 

[CricAddict]

I think the base assumption is that if you take up the role of a frontline bowler, you are somewhat competent at it.

Usually you'll see a lot of bowlers bowl a big chunk of overs without great stats because they're just a holding bowler. Plug up one end for the bulk of the day and don't let the batsmen get too comfortable or score too freely. They're aren't taking wickets because usually the team lacks any other bowler who can build pressure, or has a strategy through which they attack with certain bowlers at one end and just want to restrict scoring at the other.

I think such bowlers are still front-line bowlers, and to be able to take on this role whilst also being a frontline batsman is pretty impressive. Think of guys like Sobers, Mankad, Shakib, event Vettori for a brief period of time. The role they play for their side is immense.

Isn't Shakib the main wicket taker for BD? Is he a holding bowler?

 

[cnerd123]

Isn't Shakib the main wicket taker for BD? Is he a holding bowler?

tbf he's only the leading wicket-taker of all time because he is their only Test-quality bowler ever (could make an argument for Rafique and Mortaza in his prime, and Mehdi and Fizz look the part now)

He probably is more attacking than your standard holding bowler since he's been BD's only real hope for wickets for most of his career, but for most of his career he's been expected to bowl the bulk of overs and limit the damage the batsmen can do, and that's essentially a holding bowler. Only since Mehdi and Fizz have emerged have we seen him actively switch between the roles of holding bowler and strike bowler depending on what the team needs. Rest of his career he's been some weird mash up of both.