Bowlers Who can Bat

[Anjula]

There Are some bowlers that can really bat,
Even guy's like Sanat Jayasuria is also a bowler in early Days,
There are still bowlers that worth giving a chance up in the order,
Mithchell Jonhson
Nuwan Kulasekara
Rangana Herath
Saeed Ajmal
Dammika prasad
Add some more to the list guys

 

[Owzat]

Johnson falls more into the category of all-rounder, although he has only one hundred in Tests he has six fifties and bats eight more because their keeper can usually bat.

His batting average is a tad low for an all-rounder, but then averages don't decree what role someone plays but how good or bad they are at it ie he could just not be a very good all-rounder.................

For me a "bowler who can bat" is someone down the order who is capable of scoring the odd fifty, but generally bats 9-11 and averages well under 20. Anyone batting eight with any regularity (like Johnson) surely is playing an all-rounder role even if it is a bowling all-rounder more than genuine all-rounder.............?

Interesting question is whether Swann is a "bowler who can bat" or an all-rounder who simply doesn't bat high enough, or isn't used as one. He averages early 20s, has no hundred but four fifties and bats 30% at #8, 50% at #9 and 20% at #10 so is more a nine than eight or 10 (in use)

All that said, is there a difference between a "bowler who can bat" and a "bowling all-rounder" ? Every dog has his day, in terms of bowlers scoring runs, but where do you draw the line before saying they are a bowling all-rounder..................?

 

[AbhishekS]

Ravichandran Ashwin, Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann, Ravi Rampaul!

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

the thing with all-rounders that are primary bowlers is they are a role within a team dictated by where they fall in the batting order rather than a clear kind of player. shakib for bangladesh is a true all-rounder, he would hold his spot in either discipline, for india he'd be a bowler that batted at 7 or 8.

batsmen that are ok with bowling just bat their position in the line up and will be called upon if needed and bowled as long as their success dictates, it's a lot more organic and happens with the match. bowlers tend to have responsibilities that are more set in stone. even if you had 3 bowlers that could all bat as well as shakib, only one of them is going to actually play as an all-rounder the other two coming in further down. i imagine their averages would reflect that even if there was nothing between them in terms of skill.

all rounders are quite hard to judge i think, and their averages can be misleading, imran has a poorer batting record than his all-rounder tag suggests but that's because when he started out he still had to bat and got out for low scores. he wasn't actually playing as an all rounder, when he was his average was quite good (over the 80s it was in the 40s)

this was an unnecessary observation.

 

[teamindia]

How come Bhajji has not been mentioned yet !!

 

[AbhishekS]

How come Bhajji has not been mentioned yet !!

Because currently he is a batsman who can bowl.

 

[Bevab]

Everybody.

Because all bowlers can do batting, whether good or bad depends on their skill.

 

[Owzat]

he would hold his spot in either discipline

I guess that for me would be one of the best definitions of a genuine all-rounder, that they could get in the side as a batsman or bowler. So you have to wonder if Swann or Broad would get in as batsmen, although someone seems to have included them as bowlers who can bat which to me is a bowling all-rounder anyway

Interesting point about the batting order, don't you think that as a quicker bowler Broad should bat below Swann as a long innings would surely be more detrimental to Broad who would bowl earlier?

imran has a poorer batting record than his all-rounder tag suggests but that's because when he started out he still had to bat and got out for low scores. he wasn't actually playing as an all rounder, when he was his average was quite good (over the 80s it was in the 40s)

this was an unnecessary observation.

Imran averaged 37.69 with the bat so I'm not sure where you're coming from with that, although he did bowl less and focus more on batting as his career came to an end. Even if you break his batting down to runs per innings it was a decent 30.21.

To compare that with other top all-rounders who scored over 1000 runs, took 100 wickets and had at least one hundred and 5wi, players like Sobers, Kallis, Greig, Miller, Hooper and Botham managed more runs per innings, but all those who averaged more in my list averaged nearly 10 runs per wicket or more with the ball................. Only Miller, Goddard, Botham and Cairns average more runs per innings with bat, and less than 30 with the ball.

Point of all that, only 'all-rounders' who were more batsmen average more runs per innings than Imran and none more than four runs per innings so it's the same street.

Interestingly Kapil Dev who I consider a bowling all-rounder scored 28.52 runs per innings, Hadlee who is probably the greatest bowling all-rounder of all time only 23.31 runs per innings.

But again in reference to the OP, when do you give credit for a bowler 'who can bat' and stop shy of someone who is more of an all-rounder? Was Streak 'a bowler who can bat' or a bowling all-rounder? Same question re DeFreitas, Vaas, Wasim Akram etc. DeFreitas doesn't make my list as he didn't score a Test hundred, does the ability to score a fifty make a bowler more than just a bowler? Gillespie is in my list, I don't want him to be, but ridiculously he has a Test double to his name. His career average was 18.74, is that 'a bowler who can bat' or a bowling all-rounder? Even without the double he averaged 15.89, rabbits tend to average well under 10 so you could list virtually anyone in this thread unless you clarify ground rules. I nominate Sobers

 

[khalek]

Abhimanyu Mithun. He looks solid every time I watch him bat.

 

[sifter132]

Umm Daniel Vettori anyone?? He's probably the best bowler who can bat in world cricket. Might as well give Shahid Afridi a plug as well...And of those who've retired recently, Shaun Pollock is a guy who is underrated by history. He would often bat at #7 for SA.

 

[VC the slogger]

Certainly one of them is Brett Lee.He is not a consistent performer with the bat but can hit huge sixes off the best bowlers also.I remember the 57 he scored vs South Africa in 2006 VB Series supporting Mike Hussey who scored a 73 or something and he had scored an entertaining half century against South Africa in 2002 against a good bowling line up including Allan Donald,Shaun Pollock,Makhaya Ntini,Klusener and Nicky Boje.He has also scored good knocks in Test cricket and had partnerships with good batsmen to get Australia out of difficult situations.
Nicky Boje was also another such player whose batting was sometimes under-rated even though his batting average(25.23 in Tests and 26.67 in ODIs)was very good for a no 8-9 batsman.
Also if you look at some of Mashrafe Mortaza's performances with the bat in both Test,ODIs you can also say that he is a bowler who can bat and he can smoke some huge sixes as well.

 

[Anjula]

Umm Daniel Vettori anyone?? He's probably the best bowler who can bat in world cricket. Might as well give Shahid Afridi a plug as well...And of those who've retired recently, Shaun Pollock is a guy who is underrated by history. He would often bat at #7 for SA.

Daniel Vettori and Shahid Afridi are all ready all-rounders.
Rangana Herath got unbeaten 80 against India.
Also Brett Lee got (as i remember) unbeaten 70 in a t20.
Mithchell Johnson got a century to his name in Test cricket.
Saeed Ajmal haven't got any good scores but he looks like he can bat.
Lasith got 57 in Odi (He got run out) and unbeaten 30 in t20.

 

[sifter132]

Ah OK so their batting is too good to be a bowler who bats?? I think Shane Warne was a great one, he and Brett Lee used to be great partners for Gilchrist or any other middle order batsmen who were still in. Can't forget Jason Gillespie either...

 

[Owzat]

Sorry but this thread loses all point if you have no definitions or bounds within which a player has to fall to be in this category. At the moment it's just a lot of names thrown out of whom a lot if they score runs with any regularity are all-rounders.

Vettori is an all-rounder, he has a Test hundred and average up in the region of if not above 30 ffs. I consider him on the bowling side of an all-rounder, but he has batted six I believe for the kiwits.

 

[khalek]

Peter Siddle.