• 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: Top five test all rounders ever

Choose the top five test allrounders of all time

  • Total voters
    49
M

Majestic

U19 Captain
bagapath said:
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 - Don't know
Woolley- Don't know
Hammond - Not an A/R
Mushtaq - A/R
McMillan - Not an A/R
Jayasuriya - Not an A/R in tests

Bowling allrounders

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

Bowlers who can bat( Not considered)

Tate
Lindwall
Bailey
Benaud
Hadlee
Akram
Streak
S Pollock
Ashwin
Woakes
Click to expand...
My final order for post 1940 players:-

Sobers
Imran
Kallis
Miller
Botham
Kapil

Stokes
Greig
Cairns
Shakib
Jadeja
Flintoff
Mankad
 
Q

Qlder

International Debutant
This reminds me when growing up watching "the big 4" in the 80's that generally 1 wicket = 20 runs was thrown around a lot (fivefor = century).

If we use that logic today we'd have: Rating = runs per match + (wkts per match x 20)

1. Sobers - 136 9 (86.4 + 50.5)
2. Hadlee - 136.5 (36.3 + 100.2)
3. Faulkner - 135.8 (70.2 + 65.6)
4. Botham - 126.1 (51.0 + 75.1)
5. Imran - 125.6 (43.3 + 82.3)
6. Cairns - 123.8 (53.5 + 70.3)
7. Goddard - 121.4 (61.4 + 60.0)
8. Miller - 115.6 (53.8 + 61.8)
9. Kallis - 115.3 (80.1 + 35.2)
10. Davidson - 114.7 (30.2 + 84.5)
11. Benaud - 113.6 (34.9 + 78.7)
12. Pollock - 113.0 (35.0 + 78.0)
13. Greig - 110.7 (62.1 + 48.6)
14. Dev - 106.4 (40.1 + 66.3)
15. Flintoff - 105.9 (48.7 + 57.2)
 
Last edited:
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Qlder said:
This reminds me when growing up watching "the big 4" in the 80's that generally 1 wicket = 20 runs was thrown around a lot (fivefor = century).

If we use that logic today we'd have: Rating = runs per match + (wkts per match x 20)

1. Sobers - 136 9 (86.4 + 50.5)
2. Hadlee - 136.5 (36.3 + 100.2)
3. Faulkner - 135.8 (70.2 + 65.6)
4. Botham - 126.1 (51.0 + 75.1)
5. Imran - 125.6 (43.3 + 82.3)
6. Cairns - 123.8 (53.5 + 70.3)
7. Miller - 115.6 (53.8 + 61.8)
8. Kallis - 115.3 (80.1 + 35.2)
9. Dev - 106.4 (40.1 + 66.3)
10. Flintoff - 105.9 (48.7 + 57.2)
Click to expand...
Actual no. 1 is Shakib - 138.09 (67.48+70.6)
 
Q

Qlder

International Debutant
OverratedSanity said:
Actual no. 1 is Shakib - 138.09 (67.48+70.6)
Click to expand...
I purposely did not include current players as not fair for retired players who had long careers with significant decline later years

As an example Shakib currently has 66 Tests with 138.1 but Botham after 66 Tests was a 143.1 (57.2 + 86.1) and would be clear all-time #1 at same point in career
 
Last edited:
Coronis

Coronis

International Coach
OverratedSanity said:
You sincerely think India and Pakistan were batting lineups than the west indies?
Click to expand...
I think they were at the very least on par with them, which is why I think over that period (late 70’s-early 90’s) bowling stats against the West Indies is overrated.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Qlder said:
This reminds me when growing up watching "the big 4" in the 80's that generally 1 wicket = 20 runs was thrown around a lot (fivefor = century).

If we use that logic today we'd have: Rating = runs per match + (wkts per match x 20)

1. Sobers - 136 9 (86.4 + 50.5)
2. Hadlee - 136.5 (36.3 + 100.2)
3. Faulkner - 135.8 (70.2 + 65.6)
4. Botham - 126.1 (51.0 + 75.1)
5. Imran - 125.6 (43.3 + 82.3)
6. Cairns - 123.8 (53.5 + 70.3)
7. Miller - 115.6 (53.8 + 61.8)
8. Kallis - 115.3 (80.1 + 35.2)
9. Dev - 106.4 (40.1 + 66.3)
10. Flintoff - 105.9 (48.7 + 57.2)
Click to expand...
Murali (9.5 + 120.3 = 129.8) > Botham as all-rounders confirmed. Barnes meanwhile nears 150 and Rashid Khan breaches it (sorry, sorry, I had to...)

Goddard beats Miller ftr
 
Q

Qlder

International Debutant
ataraxia said:
Murali (9.5 + 120.3 = 129.8) > Botham as all-rounders confirmed. Barnes meanwhile nears 150 and Rashid Khan breaches it (sorry, sorry, I had to...)

Goddard beats Miller ftr
Click to expand...
Well put in a minimum allrounder criteria of 30 runs and 1.5 wickets per match 😉

Goddard now added
 
Last edited:
bagapath

bagapath

International Captain
You can now choose the next five all rounders in this thread:

Playing Selector: All time great allrounders No.6 - No.10

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/threads/playing-selector-top-five-test-all-rounders-ever.91282/ The top five allrounders chosen in the above thread are, unsurprisingly.. 1. Sobers 2. Imran 3. Miller 4. Kallis 5. Botham Now, to complete the top 10 greatest all rounders ever, let us vote for the...
www.cricketweb.net
 
shortpitched713

shortpitched713

International Captain
bagapath said:
At the moment, with 36 votes in. the clear leaders are:

Sobers - 34
Imran - 30
Miller - 27
Kallis - 22
Botham - 18

Not surprised. In fact I voted for the same five. But I am trying to understand whether this is a reflection of how we value their individual talents or is it also mixed with what type of all rounder - batting/ bowling - we believe they are?

For example, Why is Miller rated above Botham? Do we like Miller's superior batting average ignoring the low WPM?

Or why is Sobers ranked way above Kallis when their numbers are alike? Is it to do with their playing styles - aggressive versus dour? Or is it assumed that Sobers is far a better bowler?
Click to expand...
Here's the elephant in the room, about why it's so ****ing hard to rate all-rounders.

The truth apparent to anyone who watches Test cricket is that (excluding Bradman for obvious reasons), the very best bowlers just blow out the very best batsmen in the world for value. McGrath vs Lara, absolutely laughable comparison. For the top 6-7 bowlers of all-time, they could make an impact towards match result in their team's favor with a consistency that batsmen could never dream of. Even something like the top 15-20 bowlers all time, are going to be more valuable, in my estimation than the very best batsmen, although a slight step down from the top tier. After that some bowlers' value might be more comparable to batsmen, but in these tier it's leaps and bounds higher.

Batsmen are inherently inconsistent, and at the very top they have a very granular difference from one to the next, in their ability to effect matches, unlike bowlers whose top end impact seems to be almost limitless.

So you combine those two attributes, and it's hard to really rank "value" of an allrounder as compared to "balance" of an all-rounder. No one other than Imran could possibly compete with Hadlee on "value", but he doesn't have the "balance" between the two attributes which we see in all-rounders.

Looking just at batting and bowling, that's why I had Sobers "valued" as the 7th best all-rounder in my initial list. But that isn't how we really rank all-rounders. The real way is something like a "rating" of 1-100 for batting, 1-100 for bowling, then add them up. By that listing I'd then have Imran and Miller at the top, followed by Sobers, at a more reasonable 3rd (he's in the same tier as the above if you factor in fielding too).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top