The Best Allrounder All Time?

[mavric41]

Sir Garfield Sobers - head & shoulders above the rest.

 

[Arjun]

Gary Sobers
Keith Miller
Imran Khan
Adam Gilchrist
Ian Botham
Kapil Dev
Richard Hadlee
Chris Cairns
Shaun Pollock
Mike Procter
Wasim Akram

but NOT PP and AA!

 

[SJS]

how many allrounders hav made double centuries i know wasim made one

Not getting into who is an all rounder or not. Here are those who bowled regularly in tests and also got 200 or more in a test innings.

Sobers, Jayasuriya, Simpson, Worrell, Mankad, Botham, Shastri, Faulkner, Mushtaq Mohammad

 

[SJS]

how many allrounders hav made double centuries i know wasim made one

I dont think a double century makes Wasim an all rounder. Clearly this was a very big score but his performance as a batsman has been very modest to be rated an all rounder.

In 104 test matches he had only 10 scores above 50 with a fifty only every 15th innings.

The comparative figures for number of fifties and innings per fifty for major all rounders are very revealing
Against
Wasim 10 - 14.5

we have

Sobers 56 - 2.8
Kallis 47 - 2.8
Botham 36 - 4.5
Cairns 27 - 3.8
Miller 20 - 4.3
Kapil 35 - 5.2
Imran 24 - 5.2
Hadlee 17 - 7.8
Mankad 11 - 6.5
Rhodes 13 - 7.5 innings
Pollock 15 - 7.9
Benaud 12 - 8.1



Wasim is more in the category of bowlers who could bat a bit and even here there are many who have a better record.

Intikhab Alam a fifty every 8 innings
Paul Reiffel every 8.3 innings
Lindwall every 12 innings
Illingworth every 12.8 innings
Vaas every 14.2 innings

There are others.

 

[a massive zebra]

Best ever: Gary Sobers
Followed by: Imran Khan
then by: keith Miller.

Agreed.

But Botham at his best was a match for any of them. Not consistent enough though.

 

[wpdavid]

Agreed.

But Botham at his best was a match for any of them. Not consistent enough though.

Sorry, but as someone said earlier, Botham's best was mostly against sides who were weakened by Packer or just weak anyway. There's not many occasions when he made runs against good attacks - the 2 tons in 1981 and the third test in 1979/80 are the only one that spring to mind. Obviously he was still very good, but I'd have to conclude Imran was better.

 

[Swervy]

Sorry, but as someone said earlier, Botham's best was mostly against sides who were weakened by Packer or just weak anyway. There's not many occasions when he made runs against good attacks - the 2 tons in 1981 and the third test in 1979/80 are the only one that spring to mind. Obviously he was still very good, but I'd have to conclude Imran was better.

without even looking at stats etc,in my opinion Botham at his peak was better as a batsman than Imran was,good oposition or not.How many hundreds did Botham score..14 was it????Imran-3??? There is a huge disparity there.

Other than the 1981 innings,what about his hundred vs NZ (with Hadlee) in 83,an absolute brilliant innings,he murdered Hadlee that day,his 80 odd vs WI in 84,his 130 odd vs Australia in 87...Bothams career was littered with game turning or even game saving innings,a hell of a lot more than Imran's.

Oh and also Botham scored the greatest 18 of all time vs Australia in 85 as well

 

[C_C]

Its true that Botham had more hundreds than Imran and is much closer to Imran with regards to his batting skill than bowling......
IMO, he was capable of more than Imran with the bat but was nowhre as dogged and determined as the great khan.
threw it away one too many.....
Imran batted lower in the order than botham most of the time.......but dont forget that Imran Khan averaged 50+ with the bat for the last 50 tests he played.

 

[Sanz]

Imran's overall stats may show him as a great allrounder, IMO those stats dont tell you the full story. In the early part of his career Imran wasn't very successful with the bat to be qualified as a world class allrounder in the league of Botham or Sobers, His batting flourished in the later part of his career (say last 5-7 years or you can say since 1986-87 india series) where he was mostly ineffective as a bowler.

To me Botham was way better than Imran, Kapil and Hadlee as a Batsman and pretty much as effective as them as bowler. Botham consistently contributed with Bat and Ball in most of the series he played in but that can not be said about Kapil, Imran or Hadlee. Here is My Allrounders List :-

Top Allrounders :- Gary Sobers, Ian Botham

Good Allrounders :- Imran, Kapil, Hadlee

Average Allrounders :- Chris Cairns, Steve Waugh, Kallis, Pollock, Klusener, Brian Mcmillan

 

[wpdavid]

without even looking at stats etc,in my opinion Botham at his peak was better as a batsman than Imran was,good oposition or not.How many hundreds did Botham score..14 was it????Imran-3??? There is a huge disparity there.

Other than the 1981 innings,what about his hundred vs NZ (with Hadlee) in 83,an absolute brilliant innings,he murdered Hadlee that day,his 80 odd vs WI in 84,his 130 odd vs Australia in 87...Bothams career was littered with game turning or even game saving innings,a hell of a lot more than Imran's.

Oh and also Botham scored the greatest 18 of all time vs Australia in 85 as well

Yup the 4-ball 18 was pretty special, especially coming off the always loveable Craig McDermott. As for the others, fair enough against Hadlee in '83, but the 86/87 Aus attack was dreadful. Anyway, this one's been debated ad infinitum over the years, so you & I have no chance.

 

[Swervy]

Its true that Botham had more hundreds than Imran and is much closer to Imran with regards to his batting skill than bowling......
IMO, he was capable of more than Imran with the bat but was nowhre as dogged and determined as the great khan.
threw it away one too many.....
Imran batted lower in the order than botham most of the time.......but dont forget that Imran Khan averaged 50+ with the bat for the last 50 tests he played.

yeah Imran was a very goo batsman,but the fact he batted so low down meant I think that he got a fair few not outs in there that will have bumped up his average quite a bit.

When Imran was in full flow with the ball,his batting wasnt as good as it should have been..when Imran didnt bowl through injury, his batting came on..Botham never had that luxury,he had to contribute with both...and be also one of the greatest slip fielders i have ever seen.

maybe Botham did throw his wicket away sometimes, but that was the type of player he was he won more games than lost games for England by playing that way...I do seem to remember Botham batting all day with gatting vs Pakistan (or maybe NZ cant remember ) for 50 not out to save the game for England..so he could do it

 

[wahindiawah]

The best allrounder was Gary Sobers, i think his records tell the complete pic.

After that only one guy comes to mind, and that is Imran Khan. Imran averages 50 with the bat and just 19 with the ball in the last ten years of his career!

And here is what Hadlee has to say about the 4 allrounders of '80's
Hadlee's take on the issue:
(quoted from the official Cricket Web interview)

Q/ In the post-Sobers era, you have been widely considered as one of the four great all-rounders. The others being Kapil Dev, Ian Botham and Imran Khan. Each of you have taken well over 300 wickets and scored over 3000 runs. Who do you consider the greatest all-rounder of all-time?

Sobers is regarded as the best ever – his record speaks for itself. He had all the skill and the versatility. He would be one of the first selected in any world team. Wisden rated him 2nd to Bradman says it all.

During the 80’s it was the ‘Battle of the Allrounders’ – it was a real contest between the four of us. We all knew what each

other was doing around the world and when we played against each other there was a will and desire to outdo your opponent. Of the four of us I would rate Imran as the better player because of his all round consistency with the bat and ball. He could play any type of innings and make the Pakistan team as a batsman alone. He was a potent strike bowler and an influential player in many of Pakistan’s wins.

 

[roseboy64]

Simple.Gary Sobers.Enough said.Imran Khan and Ian Botham were good too though.

 

[Camel56]

Anyone who doesnt think Sobers was the best allrounder in test history should give up following the game now. Deadset anyone who dissagrees has no idea.

 

[Deja moo]

^ I think Sobers is the choice of a majority by far.

The battle between the 4 great allrounders of the 80's however, has spilled into this decade ( for second spot of course ).

 

[SJS]

Anyone who doesnt think Sobers was the best allrounder in test history should give up following the game now. Deadset anyone who dissagrees has no idea.

Totally in agreement with what you say. When someone disputes Sobers being the best all rounder or Bradman being the best batsman, I just say "you win" or "you are the bossman" and decide we are talking of two different games

 

[Buddhmaster]

Personally i'd add DK Lillee to that list as the greatest bowler.

 

[Neil Pickup]

That's daft. There has been no bowler ever who has stood out as a class apart from the rest of the field in the way that Sobers and Bradman do. Besides, there are numerous West Indians who would have something to say about Lillee even being the best.

 

[Langeveldt]

Would people agree that Jacques Kallis is/was better than IT Botham?

 

[twctopcat]

Better is a weird and wonderful word. I would say he is a more consistent batsman, botham beats in bowling and fielding however. And of course botham is the greatest match winner ever.