Top 4 All Rounders Ever

[ballers101]

I find this to be one of the most ridiculous comments I have seen on these forums for a while now.

Hahaha you know it's funny, you call him an All Rounder but you don't know how good of an all round player he is in World Cups. Generally speaking, he is a great batsmen however, look at his stats as a bowler in World Cups. 48.81, near 50. Including, ICC Champions Trophy South Africa has made the Semi's 6 times. Only once did they ever make it to the finals and it was in the ICC Champions Trophy and they lost. In the world cup they have made the semis twice, in those two times he has failed both times batting and bowling and most importantly when they needed him to perform he did not. Also, you said BEST BATSMEN, he is supposed to be an all rounder he should perform with the bat and the ball which he obviously didn't with the ball. You said he was the best batsmen in the last world cup. Well her played well against Netherlands, West Indies, Ireland and Sri Lanka, other than Sri Lanka really no threatening bowling lineup. West Indies has a much stronger lineup now then they did in the World Cup. He failed against Bangledesh, England, New Zealand and most importantly in the semis he failed against Australia where they needed him the most.

Even in semis against Australia in his first semi final. He did score 53 however, he scored at a very slow rate and put a lot of pressure on the lower batting lineup. I don't care how close they got but in the end it comes to who wins and who loses. In the end Australia won and South Africa lost, I can bet you 100 bucks that even Kallis himself would say that he has played poor in bigger situations.

You look at Imran Khan as captain, near 40 average as a batsmen, under 20 as a bowling average. He most importantly they got to the final once and he was one of the biggest reasons why they won with a huge 72 to win the world cup for Pakistan.

 

[Dare]

Hahaha you know it's funny, you call him an All Rounder but you don't know how good of an all round player he is in World Cups. Generally speaking, he is a great batsmen however, look at his stats as a bowler in World Cups. 48.81, near 50. Including, ICC Champions Trophy South Africa has made the Semi's 6 times. Only once did they ever make it to the finals and it was in the ICC Champions Trophy and they lost. In the world cup they have made the semis twice, in those two times he has failed both times batting and bowling and most importantly when they needed him to perform he did not. Also, you said BEST BATSMEN, he is supposed to be an all rounder he should perform with the bat and the ball which he obviously didn't with the ball. You said he was the best batsmen in the last world cup. Well her played well against Netherlands, West Indies, Ireland and Sri Lanka, other than Sri Lanka really no threatening bowling lineup. West Indies has a much stronger lineup now then they did in the World Cup. He failed against Bangledesh, England, New Zealand and most importantly in the semis he failed against Australia where they needed him the most.

Even in semis against Australia in his first semi final. He did score 53 however, he scored at a very slow rate and put a lot of pressure on the lower batting lineup. I don't care how close they got but in the end it comes to who wins and who loses. In the end Australia won and South Africa lost, I can bet you 100 bucks that even Kallis himself would say that he has played poor in bigger situations.

You look at Imran Khan as captain, near 40 average as a batsmen, under 20 as a bowling average. He most importantly they got to the final once and he was one of the biggest reasons why they won with a huge 72 to win the world cup for Pakistan.

There is a difference between batting all-rounders and bowling all-rounders. His job is not as a strike bowler like Imrans was, Imran got the new ball almost all the time. Kallis has a job to do and that's score load of runs at #3 or #4. When Malinga was going crazy on South Africa it was Kallis and his 80+ that won that match.

So Imran led Pakistan to a world cup and South Africa hasn't won one, how is that to blame on Kallis.

Like I said to blame the entire struggles of the entire team on one man is ridiculous.
You seem to think that I am comparing Imran and Kallis which I am not, all I am saying is you blaming South Africa's short comings on Kallis is stupid. I don't see how that discredits his records as a all-rounder throughout his entire ODI and Test career.

 

[ballers101]

There is a difference between batting all-rounders and bowling all-rounders. His job is not as a strike bowler like Imrans was, Imran got the new ball almost all the time. Kallis has a job to do and that's score load of runs at #3 or #4. When Malinga was going crazy on South Africa it was Kallis and his 80+ that won that match.

So Imran led Pakistan to a world cup and South Africa hasn't won one, how is that to blame on Kallis.
Like I said to blame the entire struggles of the entire team on one man is ridiculous.
You seem to think that I am comparing Imran and Kallis which I am not, all I am saying is you blaming South Africa's short comings on Kallis is stupid. I don't see how that discredits his records as a all-rounder throughout his entire ODI and Test career.

I was trying to show everyone how Imran Khan plays better in bigger games. That's all, which if it already isn't obvious enough he is. I was saying that it is his fault entirely but he had a role to play during both and I can argue that he failed that's it. They tied one of the matches, he bowled poorly and put pressure on the lower order to score at a strike rate of 200, which they did and they still feel short. Stats don't mean anything if you don't play strong in big matches that's all. Even stats wise I would still take Imran Khan over Jacque Kallis on any given day that's really all I was trying to say.

I think what I said came out wrong, basically it's just that Kallis underperformed where Imran Khan did not, I am not saying that Kallis is a weak player because he didn't play great in big games. It's just to say that he is better than Imran Khan seems impossible to me, without a proper reason why he is better.

 

[Dare]

I have never said that he is better then Imran. If you look up some threads on all time XIs Imran is always a permanent fixture in my side, alongside Sobers and Bradman. I would take Imran over Kallis too, but Kallis is still one of the best ever.

 

[ballers101]

I have never said that he is better then Imran. If you look up some threads on all time XIs Imran is always a permanent fixture in my side, alongside Sobers and Bradman. I would take Imran over Kallis too, but Kallis is still one of the best ever.

Okay sorry for the mix-up. That's your opinion on Kallis, I respect

 

[Shoaib87]

1. Imran Khan
2. Keith Miller
3. Garry Sobers
4. Shaun Pollock
5. Ian Botham
6. Richard Hadlee
7. Jacques Kallis
8. Kapil Dev
9. Wasim Akram
10. Allan Davidson

 

[stefan]

1.Sobers
2.Kallis
3.Miller
4.Khan
5.Botham
6.Pollock
7.Dev

 

[Owzat]

I don't agree with inclusion of Sobers, or indeed Hadlee. Hadlee was a bowler who could bat, he made only two hundreds compared to 36 5wis and 9 10wms. Gary Sobers was more a batsman who could bowl, his 26 100s dwarf his SIX 5wis.

For me Imran Khan, Ian Botham and Kapil Dev would be right in contention. I have attempted to rate the players using more than just their averages, it filters out players with less than a certain number of runs and wickets and taken at least one 5wi and scored one hundred, then ranks them compared to each other on things like HS, 5wis, 10wis, averages, SRs etc It does have the odd freak like Dizzy in it, but I think it works very well in putting players like Sobers into perspective. If I remember I will see if I still have it, or redo it if I don't. (2nd new computer since I did it thanks to my sig sponsors supplying sh1t products)

EDIT : currently found 33 all-rounders who have scored 1000 runs, taken 100 wkts and have both a hundred and a 5wi. 17 further players scored 1000 runs and took 100 wkts, but don't have both necessary qualifiers of hundred and 5wi. I'm setting about the comparison of HS, averages etc using 5wi, 10wm, 100s and 50s as percentages of matches played to make for fair(er) comparison. I could simply throw in people with good averages, but if they don't have the four basic requirements (1000+ runs, 100+ wkts, 100 x1+ and 5wi x1+) then how pray tell can they be the 'greatest' anything?!?!? Certainly how can they be greater than all-rounders who achieved all of those minimum four cornerstones?!

By country :

England 7 : Botham, Flintoff, Rhodes, Tate, Illingworth, Greig and Bailey
Australia 6 : Benaud, Giffen, Gillespie, Lindwall, Noble and Miller
India 5 : Shastri, Pathan, Mankad, Kumble and Kapil Dev
Pakistan 4 : Imran Khan, Razzaq, Alam and Akram
New Zealand 3 : Cairns, Hadlee and Vettori
South Africa 3 : Goddard, Kallis and Pollock
West Indies 2 : Hooper and Sobers
Bangladesh 1 : Rafique
Zimbabwe 1 : Streak
Sri Lanka 1 : Vaas

The 17 missing out were Muralitharan, Boje, Qadir, Marshall, Waqar Younis, Ambrose, Harbhajan, Srinath, Brett Lee, IAN Johnson, Warne, Emburey, Giles, Titmus, Merv Hughes, Alan Davidson and Warne because they didn't quite make it to 100 - Muralitharan, Qadir, Hughes, Giles and Waqar the weaker in terms of not making it to or much past 50, making 1000 runs because they could hold a bat and played enough Tests. This is why I put in a filter, with the very odd exception they are lower order batsmen at best