Playing Selector: Top five test all rounders ever

[bagapath]

The idea is to see who the younger CW members consider as the top five test allrounders of all time.
Want to choose five names because it is boring to boil the whole argument down to Sobers and one more person all the time.
Here are my top canditates.

Batting allrounders

Sobers
Grieg
Kallis
Stokes

Batsmen who can bowl

Armstrong
Woolley
Hammond
Mushtaq
McMillan
Jayasuriya

Bowling allrounders

Rhodes
Noble
Faulkner
Gregory
Miller
Mankad
Imran
Botham
Kapil
Cairns
Flintoff
Shakib
Jadeja

Bowlers who can bat

Tate
Lindwall
Bailey
Benaud
Hadlee
Akram
Streak
S Pollock
Ashwin
Woakes

 

[ataraxia]

The cutoff makes this easy.

Faulkner

Woolley

Both clearly batting all-rounders, for the record.

 

[bagapath]

The cutoff makes this easy.



Both clearly batting all-rounders, for the record.

Agree with Woolley and moved him.
Faulkner averaged 3+ wickets per test and was a main strike bowler. Leaving him in the company of Miller / Imran and co

 

[Qlder]

You missed the category "Pure Allrounder" with equal batting and bowling skill

Keith Miller
Ian Botham
Andrew Flintoff

These three were not bowing allrounders when they batted in top 6 their whole careers

 

[rtramdas]

My TOP 5 test all rounders in that order

1. Kallis
2. Sobers
3. Pollock
4. Kapil
5. Botham

 

[howitzer]

1. Sobers
2. Imran
3. Hadlee
4. Kallis
5. Miller

 

[Fuller Pilch]

A few pretty decent options missing who are better than some on the list (apologies if they are there and I missed their names):

McCartney, Foster, McCabe, Worrell, Reid, Davidson, Dexter, Walters, Barlow, Goddard, Procter, Mudassar Nazar, Shastri, Wasim, Oram, Vettori, Watson, Philander, De Grandhomme, Holder, Axar

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Anyway

Sobers
Kallis
Imran
Miller
Faulkner

 

[Coronis]

Sobers
Miller
Imran
Kallis
Botham

You missed the category "Pure Allrounder" with equal batting and bowling skill

Keith Miller
Ian Botham
Andrew Flintoff

These three were not bowing allrounders when they batted in top 6 their whole careers

lol. Miller and Botham’s bowling was clearly superior to their batting. Flintoff might be closer.

 

[Qlder]

lol. Miller and Botham’s bowling was clearly superior to their batting. Flintoff might be closer.

Ok. Guess that's why Keith Miller batted 4 with Don Bradman and Neil Harvey in the same side

 

[Coronis]

Ok. Guess that's why Keith Miller batted 4 with Don Bradman and Neil Harvey in the same side

If you think averaging 37 with the bat is equal in skill to averaging 23 with the ball then hey, I’m not gonna argue with you. Wish Sobers was more balanced with a Barnesesque bowling average.

 

[Qlder]

If you think averaging 37 with the bat is equal in skill to averaging 23 with the ball then hey, I’m not gonna argue with you. Wish Sobers was more balanced with a Barnesesque bowling average.

Yes I do because despite opening the bowling he only took 3.1 wkts per Test (and his FC batting average was 48.90 with 41 hundreds so Test average of 37 misses a lot)

 

[kyear2]

Ok. Guess that's why Keith Miller batted 4 with Don Bradman and Neil Harvey in the same side

He had 7 centuries, 3 of which were in one series in the west indies where he averaged 73, and where the 3Ws are marked down for being flat track bullies. Not saying he wasn't a decent batsman, but he averaged basically what Hooper did.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

wtf more did Hadlee need to do

 

[Qlder]

He had 7 centuries, 3 of which were in one series in the west indies where he averaged 73, and where the 3Ws are marked down for being flat track bullies. Not saying he wasn't a decent batsman, but he averaged basically what Hooper did.

That's like saying Kim Hughes was a crap batsman because he averaged only 37. Guarantee no-one who actually watched Kim Hughes bat thinks that.

Same as Bradman wouldn't bat Miller before Harvey unless he considered him a better bat.

 

[trundler]

That's like saying Kim Hughes was a crap batsman because he averaged only 37. Guarantee no-one who actually watched Kim Hughes bat thinks that.

Same as Bradman wouldn't bat Miller before Harvey unless he considered him a better bat.

We are talking about teenage Harvey here though

 

[Qlder]

We are talking about teenage Harvey here though

Keith Miller batted 3 after Bradman retired with Harvey at 4 until he was 22. At that point Harvey was averging 106 so was understandably moved up to 3 with Miller at 4

 

[Coronis]

That's like saying Kim Hughes was a crap batsman because he averaged only 37. Guarantee no-one who actually watched Kim Hughes bat thinks that.

Who said he was a crap batsman? I’m just saying he’s not a borderline ATG batsman whereas he was a borderline ATG bowler. Hot take I know but I’ll stick to it.

Same as Bradman wouldn't bat Miller before Harvey unless he considered him a better bat.

Congratulations on finding such a strong argument. I suppose you think all 3’s are better than 4’s and all 4’s better than 5’s?

 

[Qlder]

Congratulations on finding such a strong argument. I suppose you think all 3’s are better than 4’s and all 4’s better than 5’s?

Up until Greg Chappell batted 4, Australia always had their best batsman at 3, even then you could argue that was Ian Chappell who averaged 50.94 at 3 (and Ricky Ponting followed at 3)

 

[Coronis]

Up until Greg Chappell batted 4, Australia always had their best batsman at 3, even then you could argue that was Ian Chappell who averaged 50.94 at 3 (and Ricky Ponting followed at 3)

Mate you’re wrong, Miller was not a near ATG batsman, no matter what position he batted, get over it.