The allrounder cut-off

[Garson007]

To me it's really the positive nett effect they have on the average match. I.e. Batting minus bowling average is positive.

 

[OverratedSanity]

A true all-rounder for me would be someone who averages around 25 with the ball and around 40 with the bat. The closest to that is probably Clive Rice, although it's a shame he never played Tests - could have been the greatest all-rounder ever!

Going purely by averages, Aubrey Faulkner fits your criteria perfectly. But he played a long time ago so I don't really know what to make of him. I've never heard if him being talked about as one of the greatest all rounders quite as often as his stats would suggest

My perfect all rounder who practically may still come along would be a top/middle order 45+ average bat with a decent number of hundreds, and a bowling average around 25 with 3-4 wickets /match. Basically someone who could hold a place in the side as a batsman and a bowler. A prime Botham would have matched this I think...

 

[fredfertang]

How would you classify Trevor Bailey and Ray Illingworth?

Neither ever feature in discussions about all-rounders, and while both might have managed a handful of Tests as bowlers alone neither were really good enough as batter or bowler alone to play international cricket, yet for long periods both were automatic selections - Illingworth was a decent skipper of course, but I think the main reason was that both tended to be at their best in a crisis

 

[smash84]

Updated/ edited post.

your updated post is still full of your previous errors

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I think he only removed Wasim and upgraded him for your benefit, but kept Warne and Marshall the same

 

[smash84]

Nope, wasim is still there

 

[Prince EWS]

How would you classify Trevor Bailey and Ray Illingworth?

Neither ever feature in discussions about all-rounders, and while both might have managed a handful of Tests as bowlers alone neither were really good enough as batter or bowler alone to play international cricket, yet for long periods both were automatic selections - Illingworth was a decent skipper of course, but I think the main reason was that both tended to be at their best in a crisis

Extremely harsh to suggest Illingworth wasn't good enough on bowling alone IMO.

 

[fredfertang]

Extremely harsh to suggest Illingworth wasn't good enough on bowling alone IMO.

Two wickets a match over a 61 Test career isn't great - without his batting I think all of Fred Titmus, David Allen or Pat Pocock would have played a few more Tests, and when he was skipper there were quite a lot when we wouldn't otherwise have played two spinners and he wasn't in the same league as Derek Underwood

 

[marc71178]

Wasim, Marshall, and Warne don't really belong in the bowling all rounder category. Don't force the definition on them please

Ye, the thought of any of those "bowling all-rounders" bar Imran batting at 7 would fill me with dread.

Also, wicket-keeping all rounders don't exist and "batting slip fielders" is another stupid category IMO.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

I think Wasim and Marshall exist on the cusp of bowling allrounder.

Someone mentioned Warne above - which is interesting because I actually think he had the talent to be a bolwing allrounder. But he was prone to some seriously dreadful dismissals.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

What do people think of Broad and Swann?

For the first year or so of Test Cricket, Swann looked like a bona fida bowling allrounder. He played some outstanding shots in the 09 Ashes, and it strike rate was Sehwag-ian. But it tailed off a bit from there. Still decenrt though.

Boycott has always sung the praises of Broad's batting style (comparing him to Sobers), but he lacks the focus (or technique) to make it work every match.

 

[Maximas]

Neither Broad or Swann are anywhere near all-rounders nowadays, far too many insignificant innings'

 

[GuyFromLancs]

It's all about how the batting average is compared to the bowling average, no matter how low or high

What if I averaghed 55 with the bat and 40 with the ball. I'd be too useless a bolwer to be considered an allrounder, but would still have figures comparable to Imran Khan

 

[sledger]

Yeah, they are both bowlers who are reasonable enough with the bat from time to time. Fortunately the England selectors seemed to have finally grasped this.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

Neither Broad or Swann are anywhere near all-rounders nowadays, far too many insignificant innings'

Would you revise this if Broad ended up with 6 test centuries?

 

[Maximas]

Probably

 

[GuyFromLancs]

Probably

What if 4 of them were across 2 home series to Bangladesh?

 

[Maximas]

What if 4 of them were across 2 home series to Bangladesh?

God, I don't know, if they came at 6-250 I'd still consider them good knocks and this may influence the decision. If he scored a half century every two tests or so and developed an ability to dig his side out of trouble or further their position with relative consistency then I'd say he might become a bowling all-rounder in my book

 

[Flem274*]

What if this orange was green? Would it still be an orange?

One thing is for certain: Broad would still be a ****.

 

[andyc]

Bowling All Rounders
Imran Khan
Richard Hadlee
Wasim Akran
Shaun Pollock

Allan Davidson
Ray Lindwall
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Mike Proctor

All Rounders
Ian Botham
Keith Miller
Aubrey Faulkner
Brian McMillan
Trevor Goddard
Fred Flintoff

Batting All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their batting alone who also are capable fifth bowlers whose bowling average are lower than their batting average and gets at least one wicket per match.

Bowling All Rounders are players who would be selected based on their bowling alone who have an average over twenty and are useful lower order batsmen who could possibly bat as high as No. 7 and capable of scoring fifties when required to rescue or strengthen the team's position.

Genuine All Rounders are players who play on the strength of both disciplines though probably wouldn't be able to secure their place based on either alone. So either they play primarily as bowlers and hurt the strength of the attack but strengthen the batting depth or bat in the top 6 and weaken the batting but strengthen the bowling depth.

Personally I prefer to have a batting and a bowling All rounder to provide a strong fifth bowler and strong batting depth at No. 8. The only way a genuine all rounder fits into a team is if there is a wicket keeping All Rounder whose batting can make up for the batting deficiency.

You've got Imran Khan as a bowling allrounder, yet Flintoff as a genuine all-rounder?