andrew flintoff best allrounder?

[King Cricket]

I will go with Oram, Vettori and Bravo.

Oram is the best amongst these three. Vettori is a good player, but he's basically a bowler. Regarding Bravo, well, he's not bad but needs to improve in some areas. And Oram, Oram is just awesome.

BTW, we are moving away from the main topic. This thread is not about who's the best allrounder, it's about Flintoff, whether he's the best allrounder or not.

 

[Dare]

There are allot of guys ahead of Shane Watson, Flintoff is #2 behind Kallis. Flintoff is better with the ball, he bowls at a better pace and is one of the best bowlers around, but Kallis more than makes up for that with his batting.

 

[Precambrian]

Kallis was a good allrounder, arguably the best in the world. But his batting has detoriated, so has his bowling.

Batting might have gone down. But bowling? Since 2007, the guy has taken 50 wickets @ 28, much better than his career average. :hpraise

 

[King Pietersen]

Kallis is the best batting all rounder and Flintoffs the best bowling all-rounder. Hes still one of the best bowlers in world cricket, and the fact he bats abit as well makes him easily the best bowling all rounder in my eyes!

 

[Precambrian]

I love Fred. And he is by miles the best bowler England has right now. However he is nowhere near his 2004-05 form, and his batting has become a bit of concern these days.

 

[Themer]

I love Fred. And he is by miles the best bowler England has right now. However he is nowhere near his 2004-05 form, and his batting has become a bit of concern these days.

His batting has started look better as of late in my opinion slowly gaining some form and I think that in the upcoming West Indies series providing the side strain doesn't keep him out he's gonna have a comeback series with the bat.

 

[King Pietersen]

His bowling is as good as it was in 2005 as well, his bowling has never declined, even through all these injuries he's still bowling as fast and as accurately as he always has. Just needs to get his batting back to 2004/5 levels of awesomeness. He'll be back as the best all-rounder in the world soon enough.

 

[sohum]

I know, bowling also counts. Last year, Sakib has taken 5/6 more wickets than Oram in in the tests.

I'm a little confused. By the links you provided me, Oram has taken 17 wickets in 8 matches whereas Shakib has taken 30 wickets in the same number of matches. Since when is the 13 wicket differential 5/6 more wickets?

 

[McLOVIN]

Oram's 2008 Test stats

Click here (Just go and check it i'm tired of writing these things again and again)

Oram's 2008 ODI stats

Click here

Sakib's 2008 test stats

Click here

Sakib's 2008 ODI stats

Click here

Sakib has taken 5/6 more wickets than Oram in tests. But when it comes to batting he is way way way behind Oram.

If you still think Sakib is the no 1 allrounder then I have absolutely nothing to say.:

Oram is freaking experienced! Shakib is not, and he still managed to get on top of the list.. may be Shakib isnt all time best, but most recent or atm, its Shakib.

all time would be Kallis or Polly.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Officially, the ICC have labelled Shakib to be the best allrounder in the world, based on current form.

I think Freddie is the most dangerous allrounder in the world. He's a bit behind on batting, but can win matches either way...

 

[irottev]

I'm a little confused. By the links you provided me, Oram has taken 17 wickets in 8 matches whereas Shakib has taken 30 wickets in the same number of matches. Since when is the 13 wicket differential 5/6 more wickets?

Yes, but Oram is more a genuine all-rounder where-as Shakib is a bowler who bats. Much like Vettori.

To be quite honest, Daniel Vettori is better than Shakib. Proof

54 wickets at 26 and 672 runs at 35. Plus he hasn't been bowling on the same poor pitches all season in Bangladesh

It depends what is meant by all-rounder. It's hard to compare when some are better bowlers, some better batsmen.

I love how Flintoff is being called the best bowling all-rounder when he only got 16 wickets at 33. It's only based on 5 matches. How could he honestly be the best bowling all-rounder of 2008 and recent times?

 

[smssia0112]

As far as all round ability goes it has to be Kallis. His bowling is clearly still world class, Flintoff may be a better bowler but not by as much as some are suggesting here, and he is behind Kallis in batting by the length of the Bass Strait.

Anyone who has seen him against Australia this summer will know what I mean, he's still got it. Having said that I do hate him a fair bit.

 

[irottev]

If you're going for someone as a genuine all-rounder, I agree it's Kallis. He bowls quick, gets swing and is one of the best batsmen of the last decade.

 

[Precambrian]

Yes, but Oram is more a genuine all-rounder where-as Shakib is a bowler who bats. Much like Vettori.

To be quite honest, Daniel Vettori is better than Shakib. Proof

54 wickets at 26 and 672 runs at 35. Plus he hasn't been bowling on the same poor pitches all season in Bangladesh

It depends what is meant by all-rounder. It's hard to compare when some are better bowlers, some better batsmen.

I love how Flintoff is being called the best bowling all-rounder when he only got 16 wickets at 33. It's only based on 5 matches. How could he honestly be the best bowling all-rounder of 2008 and recent times?

Shakib a bowling all rounder? Averaging 33 in ODIs and by far the best ever Bangladeshi ODI batsman. Better figures than a certain David Warner.

 

[Mercules]

Kallis is unrivalled imo.