But it clearly says so on cricinfo profile, whereas Mitchell Johnson with 2 hundreds is just a "bowler"
....sorry, don't mind either way as they're not going to make top 10 in this thread
-
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.
Playing Selector: All time great allrounders No.6 - No.10
- Thread starter bagapath
- Start date
....sorry, don't mind either way as they're not going to make top 10 in this thread
Coronis
International Coach
Who gives a **** about what cricinfo classifies them as? I go to check out O’Reilly’s stats on there and they show me his batting.But it clearly says so on cricinfo profile, whereas Mitchell Johnson with 2 hundreds is just a "bowler"
....sorry, don't mind either way as they're not going to make top 10 in this thread
View attachment 38454View attachment 38456
View attachment 38455
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah and even more ridiculously, they classify Garner as a bowler.
Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
What? Even in ODIs?
capt_Luffy
International Captain
Davidson is in this thread.... And that's what opened the Pandora's Box for your Philanders and such
I think it was the fact that non-allrounder Ray Lindwall was in this poll that started the discussion
capt_Luffy
International Captain
Yeah, you could also say thatI think it was the fact that non-allrounder Ray Lindwall was in this poll that started the discussion
mackembhoy
International Regular
I can't believe a white ball specialist is making the top 10 list.
Faulkner is not better than Stokes. Just nope.
If he was fit he'd have struggled in this ODI batting dominated era. Half a career doesn't make anyone top 10
Faulkner is not better than Stokes. Just nope.
If he was fit he'd have struggled in this ODI batting dominated era. Half a career doesn't make anyone top 10
ataraxia
International Coach
I have an awful feeling this is genuine...
mackembhoy
International Regular
Ok I'm somewhat surprised as this place always seems to rank test performances higher than anything else.
I barely watched Faulkner to be honest. The 2015 world cup was the other side of the world and I'd have been working through most of the games, I may have watched the final I can't remember.
Still think the point about not having a full career is valid in best players ever discussion.
Why don't you make your 5 votes then?
mackembhoy
International Regular
I normally don't engage in these threads. So I'm not really sure why I did.
Will leave it at that
capt_Luffy
International Captain
In your defence, Aubrey Faulkner's career is really around only a quarter of most of the others here
Last edited:
Well since you're here, Aubrey Faulkner says helloI normally don't engage in these threads. So I'm not really sure why I did.
Will leave it at that
Aubrey Faulkner Profile - Cricket Player South Africa | Stats, Records, Video
Read about Aubrey Faulkner cricket player from South Africa profile, stats, rankings, records, videos, photos at ESPNcricinfo
www.espncricinfo.com
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
So tough as you could pick tomorrow and decide on 3 different players in your 5.
Pretty simple for me. Happy Davo is an option now because he would defo be in my 11-15.
Victor Ian
International Coach
I'd pick Procter above all in this list if he was there.
Yeah i'm kind of doing a 20 Test qualification here. Procter would be third otherwise IMO
Coronis
International Coach
How come this only ends up being a qualifier for Procter et all but not Richards?