Playing specialist bowlers as opposed to all-rounders

[Dark_Horse]

I believe you have to play 5 proper bowler almost in every game. These bowlers should be complete and your best bowler not all rounders first. If they offer any thing with the bat that’s a bonus. If 5 proper batsman couldn’t win you games neither the 6,7 bits and pieces would. Same goes to batsman. 5 relentless bowlers pressure continues and better chance of wicket taking and chocking the opposition. Allrounder may win you a game every 10 matches but in other matches they may let you down as well. Furthermore, every person will have a defined role

 

[Hasan123]

Anyday I'll play a specialist bowler over a all rounder who doesn't specialise in 1 particular skill set. An all rounder must make the team on batting or bowling merit.

 

[PakSarZameen]

When your specialist bowlers haven't taken more than 3 wickets in the entire year, it's better to play an all rounder.

 

[Robert]

Many of England’s better bowlers are all-rounders, not specialists.

 

[Plumb]

When your specialist bowlers haven't taken more than 3 wickets in the entire year, it's better to play an all rounder.

True.. When specialist bowlers don't know what length to bowl on these pitches then they should look to choose some other career in life

 

[Majid Khan]

Might as well, I'm sure you could get a specialist bowler / tailender, give him 2 weeks of net practice as a batsman and he will be up to the 'all rounder' class of Faheem, Shadab, and Nawaz , in other words good enough with the bat to get the occasional 15 or 20 runs.

 

[Justcrazy]

" all rounder " is a big term. There are categories of all rounders.

True all rounders are very very rare.

 

[Rayyman]

I agree wholeheartedly. Hasan Ali should be the only all-rounder and bat at #8. Sarfraz can be #7. Maybe Imad can play also if he bats well. Faheem and Shadab needed to be booted out.

 

[Savak]

These specialist bowlers need to be world class bowlers otherwise the tail becomes too long.

 

[Virat_Kohli_fan]

3 should be selected purely on basis of bowling regardless of batting ability.
1 should be mostly on basis of bowling but should be capable of holding a bat.
1 should have the capability to bat out 50 overs with a specialist batsman at his side in case of a collapse.

 

[fluke]

who is real ALL ROUNDER in our team. i didnt see one who i can call an ALL ROUNDER

 

[MMHS]

Better teams never, never select their 4 bowlers for their batting contribution; may be in ODI it can come down to 3, sometimes. What better teams do is pick 4 bowlers and facilitate them to work on their batting - it's easily possible to make a 18-19 average batsman from a base of 10-12 average - that's 25-35 extra runs per innings (Test). Also, better planned team works on hitting ability of their tail - in ODIs, often these batsmen come to bat with few ball left or few runs needed at high asking.

In other way, say Anwar Ali is bowling at 50 average and batting at 25 average, while Amir is batting at 15 average & bowling at 30 average - now think which is easier to fix: bringing Anwar's bowling average down to 35 keeping batting intact or pulling Amir's bating average up to 25, keeping bowling average intact?

 

[babajee]

Rana Faheem Ashraf makes the Pakistan team on merit as a bowler. His batting is a bonus

 

[BaankeJi]

who is real ALL ROUNDER in our team. i didnt see one who i can call an ALL ROUNDER

Faheem and Malik.

 

[giri26]

New Zealand had done this very effectively in the 90's with all rounders like Chris Cairns, Chris Harris, Gavin Larsen etc..Cairns and Harris could be proper batters and Larsen was the only one who was a neither here nor there sort of cricketer. He just bowled with impeccable accuracy and restricted runs. SA played with quite a few all rounders but they were brilliant ones like Lance Klusner, Shaun Pollock etc. Playing all rounders for the sake of playing will never work. You need to have good ones to actually make an impact.