What is the criteria for becoming a true all-rounder?

[Sidilicious]

Now, there have been multiple debates on who the greatest all rounder is and the answers are always between Imran Khan and Gary Sobers.

But I would like to conduct an analysis (unless someone here has already done so) about what an all rounder is?

Ideally, a perfect all-rounder is able to get into the team both as just a batsman and just a bowler. i.e he has to be good enough in both facets of the game to get into the team purely on either batting or bowling. The consideration whether he is good in the other facet is not taken into account.

In order to analyse this, I propose the following requirements
1. Played a minimum of 50 tests. (Could be reduced to 30 in order to include players pre WWII)
2. The time frame considered would not be for the whole career, but a set of 50 consecutive matches. So, a player's match 0 - match 50, match 1 - match 51, match 2 - match 52, and so on
3. In order to qualify for the above definition of an all rounder the player's batting and bowling skills will be compared to his team mates who played in those matches
4. Minimum of 4 wickets per test match (or 2 wickets per innings bowled) during that period
5. Minimum batting average of 40 during that period
6. Batting Comparison with contemporary team mates - For an all rounder to fulfil the batting criteria, the player would need to be in the top 7 batsman by average in his team for that period. Contemporaries who have played a min of 60% of those would be considered
7. Bowling Comparison with contemporary team mates - For an all rounder to fulfil the bowling criteria, the player would need to be in the top 4 bowlers by average in his team for that period. Contemporaries who have played a min of 60% of those would be considered


What is you opinion on this criteria for my analysis? Is there something that I may have missed.

Finally, before I do the analysis (I will not have time to do this analysis until the next weekend)
1. Has anyone done a similar analysis? (So that I do not need to duplicate effort)
2. Does anyone know how to extract data from the Cricinfo stats guru to Excel?

 

[WC-Passion]

Now, there have been multiple debates on who the greatest all rounder is and the answers are always between Imran Khan and Gary Sobers.

But I would like to conduct an analysis (unless someone here has already done so) about what an all rounder is?

Ideally, a perfect all-rounder is able to get into the team both as just a batsman and just a bowler. i.e he has to be good enough in both facets of the game to get into the team purely on either batting or bowling. The consideration whether he is good in the other facet is not taken into account.

In order to analyse this, I propose the following requirements
1. Played a minimum of 50 tests. (Could be reduced to 30 in order to include players pre WWII)
2. The time frame considered would not be for the whole career, but a set of 50 consecutive matches. So, a player's match 0 - match 50, match 1 - match 51, match 2 - match 52, and so on
3. In order to qualify for the above definition of an all rounder the player's batting and bowling skills will be compared to his team mates who played in those matches
4. Minimum of 4 wickets per test match (or 2 wickets per innings bowled) during that period
5. Minimum batting average of 40 during that period
6. Batting Comparison with contemporary team mates - For an all rounder to fulfil the batting criteria, the player would need to be in the top 7 batsman by average in his team for that period. Contemporaries who have played a min of 60% of those would be considered
7. Bowling Comparison with contemporary team mates - For an all rounder to fulfil the bowling criteria, the player would need to be in the top 4 bowlers by average in his team for that period. Contemporaries who have played a min of 60% of those would be considered


What is you opinion on this criteria for my analysis? Is there something that I may have missed.

Finally, before I do the analysis (I will not have time to do this analysis until the next weekend)
1. Has anyone done a similar analysis? (So that I do not need to duplicate effort)
2. Does anyone know how to extract data from the Cricinfo stats guru to Excel?

Take a screenshot of Cricinfo Stats on whatever you need. Then open up something like Paint and select the important part of the screenshot, then crop it.

Save it and open it in excel, or just copy the picture and paste it in excel. I think that should work.

Your criteria looks good.

 

[Sachin136]

It depends on what you want to extract. If, let's say you want to export a player's data to a .csv file, you can download R (https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/ for Windows and https://cran.r-project.org/bin/macosx/ for Mac) and then run a program like https://github.com/tvganesh/cricketr/blob/master/R/getPlayerData.R

To use that package, open up R and type
library(devtools)
install_github("tvganesh/cricketr")
library(cricketr)

Then to get the player's data in a .csv file, use:

playerName <- getPlayerData(playerID,dir="..",file="playerName.csv",type="batting",homeOrAway=c(1,2),
result=c(1,2,4))

Replace playerName with the name of the player (it doesn't matter what you type). To get the player ID open up that player's ESPNcricinfo page (e.g. http://www.espncricinfo.com/canada/content/player/35320.html) and write the number at the end (35320)

So for Sachin the command would be

tendulkar <- getPlayerData(35320,dir="..",file="tendulkar.csv",type="batting",homeOrAway=c(1,2),
result=c(1,2,4))

Then you get the .csv file in the directory you are in.

 

[Sidilicious]

It depends on what you want to extract. If, let's say you want to export a player's data to a .csv file, you can download R (https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/ for Windows and https://cran.r-project.org/bin/macosx/ for Mac) and then run a program like https://github.com/tvganesh/cricketr/blob/master/R/getPlayerData.R

To use that package, open up R and type
library(devtools)
install_github("tvganesh/cricketr")
library(cricketr)

Then to get the player's data in a .csv file, use:

playerName <- getPlayerData(playerID,dir="..",file="playerName.csv",type="batting",homeOrAway=c(1,2),
result=c(1,2,4))

Replace playerName with the name of the player (it doesn't matter what you type). To get the player ID open up that player's ESPNcricinfo page (e.g. http://www.espncricinfo.com/canada/content/player/35320.html) and write the number at the end (35320)

So for Sachin the command would be

tendulkar <- getPlayerData(35320,dir="..",file="tendulkar.csv",type="batting",homeOrAway=c(1,2),
result=c(1,2,4))

Then you get the .csv file in the directory you are in.

Thanks, that looks awesome. I will take a look at it.

 

[Stallion__]

Finally, before I do the analysis (I will not have time to do this analysis until the next weekend)

Whats the progress mate?

More than just a weekend has passed

 

[Slog]

Not going to talk from a statistical perspective of what qualifies a player as an all rounder.

But for me personally, the difference between who I consider an All rounder and a bits and pieces player is that an all rounder should be able to make the team as first choice from just his primary skill and be competent enough to atleast compete for a spot in the team if he just goes by his second skill. . Imran Khan or Hadlee would make it into the team hands down as pure bowlers only but might not be in the first eleven as batsmen but would definitely be in the reserves. Some might get in on both counts.

Bits and pieces on the other hand are not good enough individually in either aspect

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Someone who could get into the team as bowler or as a batsman

Like a trump card in all instances

 

[Robert]

The true all-rounder must be able top hold down his or her place in the test side purely as a batter and purely as a bowler.

So that means:

Miller
Sobers
Imran
Botham (for his first 70 tests anyway)
Kapil
Kallis

....but not Hadlee and Sean Pollock who wouldn't make it in as batters alone. Flintoff would have made it in for about 25 tests in the mid-2000s but otherwise his batting was not good enough. Hammond and Shastri weren't quite good enough as bowlers.

I think that's it.

 

[MMHS]

The true all-rounder must be able top hold down his or her place in the test side purely as a batter and purely as a bowler.

So that means:

Miller
Sobers
Imran
Botham (for his first 70 tests anyway)
Kapil
Kallis

....but not Hadlee and Sean Pollock who wouldn't make it in as batters alone. Flintoff would have made it in for about 25 tests in the mid-2000s but otherwise his batting was not good enough. Hammond and Shastri weren't quite good enough as bowlers.

I think that's it.

That's a fine list - may be Hadlee could have made the Kiwi side as pure batsman. He averaged ~28 & there were players in his team averaging around 30. As the lone warrior, often he focused on his bowling, but in between when ever required scored valuable runs. Could have averaged better with bat, by not taking full load of bowling. For that matter, Sobers & Imran for a good part of career won't have made the team as 4th bowler or No. 6 batsman.

Proctor & Rice would have definitely been there had they played for longer, probably Collie Smith & Gary Gilmor as well while Monty Noble & George Giffen were genuine all-rounders - often batted in top 5 & took the new ball. Very small sample, but Albury Fulkner & Ted MacDonald were probably closest to a genuine all-rounder that you can get.

 

[justarslan]

Great Khan.

 

[Stallion__]

Ideally, a perfect all-rounder is able to get into the team both as just a batsman and just a bowler. i.e he has to be good enough in both facets of the game to get into the team purely on either batting or bowling.

Thats a very ideal definition. Cricket haven't produced many names which fulfills this definition.

Imagine, had that been the case, why wouldn't a team pick 4-5 allrounders in a team to add both batting and bowling strengths. Lets look great allrounders with this point of view.

-) Sobers - Its true that he started his career batting at number 9 means that he debuted very much as a bowler. But assuming that he was Chris Martin with the bat, was he good enough bowler to be in that WI side? I am not so sure. Maybe a borderline selection as a bowler.

-) Kallis - Again, we do the same activity with him. Was he a good enough bowler? Early on in his career, maybe he could bowl longer spells but later, he was just used to rest the main pacers or as a partnership breaker. So all in all, just like Sobers, he too was a similar caliber bowler.

-) Miller - Probably he does make into the team on both accounts. Was a tremendous bowler and even played in the team as pure batsman.

-) Imran - Good enough batsman? Well after, he was handed captaincy, then yes. Before that, he wasn't.

-) Botham - During first half of his career, he was a genuine allrounder, during second half, more of a bits and pieces player. (Less than 1400 runs and 100 wickets in last 35 matches)

-) Kapil - Was a best Indian bowler almost throughout his career. As a batsman, have played some fine innings, but considering that rest of the batsmen were Gavasker, Amarnath, Vishy, Azhar and Vengsarker, he might not have been there as a batsman alone. Or may have been but only in certain periods of his career.

-) Hadlee, Wasim, Davidson - Way too good with the ball, still won't have made it in as batsman.

-) Shaun Pollock - SA were good enough to produce a better batsman than him.

-) Andrew Flintoff - Barring his golden patch, he won't fit into the definition.

-) Tony Greig - Makes a strong case for being there as a bowler as well. There were three clearly better bowlers in English team during his period, Arnold, Underwood and Old. Though Willis emergence could have ended his career a bit earlier.

-) Aubrey Faulkner - Genuine allrounder. Would have been in the team even either as a pure batsman or pure bowler. Fantastic record specially considering that he played only against England and Australia and that too in a minnow side.

-) Monty Noble, George Giffin, Jack Gregory - Probably would have made it both as a batsman and bowler (not as much clear case as Faulkner)

-) Vinoo Mankad - I think he could have played both as a batsman or bowler (considering India weren't that great team during his period)

-) Warwick Armstrong - Not a good enough bowler I guess.

-) Collie Smith - Sad ending to his career. Sobers once called him greater allrounder than him. He was starting developing into a player/allrounder who could be in the team considering any of the two aspect.

-) Gary Gilmour - Played very little but still left the mark. Not so sure about him being a genuinely good batsman to survive in the team as a batsman alone.

-) Clive Rice/Mike Procter - Would have made a strong case of being true allrounders. Didn't got opportunities at international level.


So all in all, we don't have many players in the history of the game who have spend most of their careers as being good enough batsman and bowlers to make it into their teams.

 

[MMHS]

In a different context, I wrote something on the role of an all-rounder (hence their type), mostly for ODI, but still lots of points are valid. These two threads can be merged

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...l-Rounder-Position-Who-would-be-a-perfect-fit

 

[Energetic]

All-Rounder is a dead term now.

 

[tigerkhan]

In simple terms, a cricketer who bats and bowls regularly for his team - his batting average has to be reasonably higher than his bowling average

 

[Bilal7]

Imran Khan averaged 50< in the batting department and 20> in the bowling department, during the last 10 years of his career. Along with being one of the greatest leaders that cricket has seen. Think he'll win this, if OP's criteria is utilized.

Not going to talk from a statistical perspective of what qualifies a player as an all rounder.

But for me personally, the difference between who I consider an All rounder and a bits and pieces player is that an all rounder should be able to make the team as first choice from just his primary skill and be competent enough to atleast compete for a spot in the team if he just goes by his second skill. . Imran Khan or Hadlee would make it into the team hands down as pure bowlers only but might not be in the first eleven as batsmen but would definitely be in the reserves. Some might get in on both counts.

Bits and pieces on the other hand are not good enough individually in either aspect

Imran was one of our best batsmen during his time. He would have made it.

The true all-rounder must be able top hold down his or her place in the test side purely as a batter and purely as a bowler.

So that means:

Miller
Sobers
Imran
Botham (for his first 70 tests anyway)
Kapil
Kallis

....but not Hadlee and Sean Pollock who wouldn't make it in as batters alone. Flintoff would have made it in for about 25 tests in the mid-2000s but otherwise his batting was not good enough. Hammond and Shastri weren't quite good enough as bowlers.

I think that's it.

Kallis wouldn't have made it as a pure bowler and Kapil wouldn't have made it as a pure batsman, in my opinion. I find it hard to believe that South Africa didn't have a pacer who could average below 32 and India didn't have a batsman who could average more than 30.

All-Rounder is a dead term now.

Nope. They are the best players so it's expected that they are very rare.

 

[Rana]

Being able to bat well enough to face any type of bowler with a proper technique effective enough to score runs. And scoring runs regularly, contributions good enough to help tilt the balance to your side.

Being able to bowl 1/5 or 1/4 or 1/3 of the teams overs. Having the ability to pick up crucial wickets, other wickets will follow. If a fast bowler, atleast a bowling pace of 135ks. Enough pace to trouble batsman with pace . If spinner, enough variation to bowl vital overs if required

 

[Big Mac]

Kallis wouldn't have made it as a pure bowler and Kapil wouldn't have made it as a pure batsman, in my opinion. I find it hard to believe that South Africa didn't have a pacer who could average below 32 and India didn't have a batsman who could average more than 30.
.

Kallis would probably have averaged below 32 if he wasn't needed to be the main batsman in the team though. Even though Kallis bowled within himself for much of his career his stats are very similar to that of Zaheer Khan and he was a specialist bowler who served India with distinction for a very long time.

Zaheer: 3,130 Overs, 311 Wickets @ 32.94
Kallis: 3,372 Overs, 292 Wickets @ 32.65

Kallis was a legit all-rounder and one of the greatest cricketers to ever play the game.

 

[Justcrazy]

Test standard all rounders are rare.

Too much cricket nowadays , very difficult to be fit for both aspects

 

[Executioner]

Shakib is the only genuine allrounder currently whose batting average is atlest 5 more than his bowling average in all formats

 

[bond007]

A true alrounder can either win you the match with a bat or a ball.Like razzaq when he came on the scene and probably later on also

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Kallis would probably have averaged below 32 if he wasn't needed to be the main batsman in the team though. Even though Kallis bowled within himself for much of his career his stats are very similar to that of Zaheer Khan and he was a specialist bowler who served India with distinction for a very long time.

Zaheer: 3,130 Overs, 311 Wickets @ 32.94
Kallis: 3,372 Overs, 292 Wickets @ 32.65

Kallis was a legit all-rounder and one of the greatest cricketers to ever play the game.

This. Kallis' bowling helped SA a lot more than those figures suggest.The likes of Steyn and Donald were always fresh with Kallis' bowling and batsmen always took chances against Kallis(underestimated his pace and bounce) and therefore he was useful in breaking partnerships. ATG allrounder.

 

[Robert]

Imran Khan averaged 50< in the batting department and 20> in the bowling department, during the last 10 years of his career. Along with being one of the greatest leaders that cricket has seen. Think he'll win this, if OP's criteria is utilized.

That is a red herring. He scored fewer actual runs per innings batted than Botham and Kapil, but he had a great many not-outs to make his average look bigger. He was good enough to make it into the Pakistan team as a batsman and sometimes played purely in this role, but just six test centuries tells a story at a time when decent middle-order batters were making twelve to fifteen in a career. I would put Botham ahead of him as a batter for the fourteen test hundreds, and Kapil ahead of him for the scorching pace the Indian scored at.

 

[bilalmasaud]

Not going to talk from a statistical perspective of what qualifies a player as an all rounder.

But for me personally, the difference between who I consider an All rounder and a bits and pieces player is that an all rounder should be able to make the team as first choice from just his primary skill and be competent enough to atleast compete for a spot in the team if he just goes by his second skill. . Imran Khan or Hadlee would make it into the team hands down as pure bowlers only but might not be in the first eleven as batsmen but would definitely be in the reserves. Some might get in on both counts.

Bits and pieces on the other hand are not good enough individually in either aspect

Imran khan was a more than decent batsman and in his later years averaged above most of our players in the squad so not sure where you're coming from here ...

 

[Bilal7]

Kallis would probably have averaged below 32 if he wasn't needed to be the main batsman in the team though. Even though Kallis bowled within himself for much of his career his stats are very similar to that of Zaheer Khan and he was a specialist bowler who served India with distinction for a very long time.

Zaheer: 3,130 Overs, 311 Wickets @ 32.94
Kallis: 3,372 Overs, 292 Wickets @ 32.65

Kallis was a legit all-rounder and one of the greatest cricketers to ever play the game.

That is a red herring. He scored fewer actual runs per innings batted than Botham and Kapil, but he had a great many not-outs to make his average look bigger. He was good enough to make it into the Pakistan team as a batsman and sometimes played purely in this role, but just six test centuries tells a story at a time when decent middle-order batters were making twelve to fifteen in a career. I would put Botham ahead of him as a batter for the fourteen test hundreds, and Kapil ahead of him for the scorching pace the Indian scored at.

Yes, batting average doesn't tell us how many runs a player scores in each innings. I don't see why Imran remaining not-out in a good percentage of his innings was a bad thing; you want your lower-order batsmen in test matches to be hard to dismiss. A lack of centuries is a legitimate criticism against him, no one is perfect.

Botham was arguably better, he did bat in much difficult batting conditions, after all but Imran was better than Kapil with the bat. Doesn't matter how quickly the Indian scored his runs, this is test match cricket we are talking about.

 

[Bilal7]

^ I'm split over Kallis. At times I view him as a batsman who could bowl and at others, a true all-rounder.

 

[Sachin136]

Yes, batting average doesn't tell us how many runs a player scores in each innings. I don't see why Imran remaining not-out in a good percentage of his innings was a bad thing; you want your lower-order batsmen in test matches to be hard to dismiss. A lack of centuries is a legitimate criticism against him, no one is perfect.

Botham was arguably better, he did bat in much difficult batting conditions, after all but Imran was better than Kapil with the bat. Doesn't matter how quickly the Indian scored his runs, this is test match cricket we are talking about.

I'm assuming you do not think too highly of Viv Richards either?

 

[Robert]

Yes, batting average doesn't tell us how many runs a player scores in each innings. I don't see why Imran remaining not-out in a good percentage of his innings was a bad thing; you want your lower-order batsmen in test matches to be hard to dismiss. A lack of centuries is a legitimate criticism against him, no one is perfect.

Depends. Some batters are re-ink hunters in it for personal glory. Some work for the team, to prevent the tail getting blasted away. I think Imran was in the latter category. He made any number of match-crucial fifties.

I merely comment that the large percentage of not-outs and selection of a certain range makes him look like Richards, Miandad and Border (or Sobers) but he was not in their league.

 

[Robert]

Botham was arguably better, he did bat in much difficult batting conditions, after all but Imran was better than Kapil with the bat. Doesn't matter how quickly the Indian scored his runs, this is test match cricket we are talking about.

Hmm, how many matches did Pakistan win under Imran? The speed at which runs are scored does matter, at the risk of sounding like CricketAnalyst.

 

[Bilal7]

Hmm, how many matches did Pakistan win under Imran? The speed at which runs are scored does matter, at the risk of sounding like CricketAnalyst.

Not as much as the amount of runs that are scored or the ability to get stuck in and be hard to dismiss.

I'm assuming you do not think too highly of Viv Richards either?

I think highly of Viv primarily because he averaged 50. His SR is secondary.

Depends. Some batters are re-ink hunters in it for personal glory. Some work for the team, to prevent the tail getting blasted away. I think Imran was in the latter category. He made any number of match-crucial fifties.

I merely comment that the large percentage of not-outs and selection of a certain range makes him look like Richards, Miandad and Border (or Sobers) but he was not in their league.

Of course, Imran as a batsman, was not in their league. Since the OP of this thread, contained stat-based criteria, I mentioned Imran's name and his most note-worthy statistic as a response.

The fact that he averaged 50 with the bat is something that deserves praise, even if he was no Miandad with the bat.

 

[Saj]

The criteria is tried and tested and simple :-

A player who can singlehandedly win you a match with either the bat or ball.

 

[Sidilicious]

2 years after promising to do so, I finally conducted a bit of statistical analysis. While conducting the analysis, I took the following items into consideration.

1. The time frame considered would not be for the whole career, but a set of 10 consecutive matches. So, a player's match 1 - match 10, match 2 - match 11, match 3 - match 12, and so on
2. Minimum of 3 wickets per test match during that period
3. Minimum runs scored of 50 runs per match
4. No. 2 and 3 were done for both, per match basis and as an average over 10 matches

I had to remove some of the above criteria, as it was extremely difficult to compare a player to his contemporaries.

Also, please comment if I should change the criteria for analysis

 

[Sidilicious]

Following were my findings

Imran Khan
Matches - 88
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 14
Out of which were won by his team - 6
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 15
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 69
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 7
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 7

Ian Botham
Matches - 102
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 20
Out of which were won by his team - 10
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 48
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 65
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 39
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 32

Richard Haddlee
Matches - 86
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 14
Out of which were won by his team - 5
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 6
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 77
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 6
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 6

Kapil Dev
Matches - 131
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 16
Out of which were won by his team - 4
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 16
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 85
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 11
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 11

Jacques Kallis
Matches - 166
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 19
Out of which were won by his team - 12
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 139
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 12
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 12
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 12

 

[Sidilicious]

I will do one of for Sobers soon, but it looks like Ian Botham seems to be by far the winner as a complete all-rounder.

 

[SarfiBabarHaris]

The criteria is tried and tested and simple :-

A player who can singlehandedly win you a match with either the bat or ball.

This!
Shakib is the first one that comes to mind followed by Stokes and Moeen in tests.

 

[Sidilicious]

The criteria is tried and tested and simple :-

A player who can singlehandedly win you a match with either the bat or ball.

This!
Shakib is the first one that comes to mind followed by Stokes and Moeen in tests.

What about those who consistently perform with the bat and ball. They might not score a 100 and take five wickets, but if they consistently perform with the bat and ball in the SAME period, effectively allowing you 12 players!

 

[Ab Fan]

Lol on people calling Kapil not a true all rounder.Same goes about Kallis.

 

[Ab Fan]

Debate should be up for these players:

Hadlee
Pollock
Ashwin

 

[Ab Fan]

That is a red herring. He scored fewer actual runs per innings batted than Botham and Kapil, but he had a great many not-outs to make his average look bigger. He was good enough to make it into the Pakistan team as a batsman and sometimes played purely in this role, but just six test centuries tells a story at a time when decent middle-order batters were making twelve to fifteen in a career. I would put Botham ahead of him as a batter for the fourteen test hundreds, and Kapil ahead of him for the scorching pace the Indian scored at.

What about Daniel Vettori? Will he make it? 6 test hundreds over his career.

 

[Sidilicious]

Debate should be up for these players:

Hadlee
Pollock
Ashwin

I have done the analysis for Haddlee.

I will do the same for Sobers, Miller, Pollock and Vettori.

I will also do one for Shakib, Ashwin, Jadeja and Moeen as well, but all of them have a significant proportion of their careers ahead of them.

 

[jaf348]

Somewhat forgotten because he played for NZ but I think Chris Cairns was probably one of the finest all rounders in the past 25 years. He was far more impactful with the ball in hand vs Flintoff who was massively overrated by the English. Cairns 62 tests, 13 5-fers and 1 10-fer vs Flintoff 79 tests 3 5-fers says it all. Pakistan are sorely missing a pace bowling all rounder like him these days.

As for the criteria for a true all rounder - bowling average below 30 and batting average over 30.

 

[jeetu]

Following were my findings

Imran Khan
Matches - 88
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 14
Out of which were won by his team - 6
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 15
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 69
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 7
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 7

Ian Botham
Matches - 102
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 20
Out of which were won by his team - 10
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 48
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 65
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 39
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 32

Richard Haddlee
Matches - 86
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 14
Out of which were won by his team - 5
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 6
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 77
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 6
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 6

Kapil Dev
Matches - 131
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 16
Out of which were won by his team - 4
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 16
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 85
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 11
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 11

Jacques Kallis
Matches - 166
No. of matches where he took at least 3 wickets and scored at least 50 runs - 19
Out of which were won by his team - 12
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he scored at least 500 runs - 139
Over a period of 10 matches No. of times he took at least 30 wickets - 12
Over a period of 10 matches where he did both (took at least 30 wickets and scored at least 500 runs) - 12
With a batting average greater than bowling average - 12

Great analysis. Although I don't know if winning match should be considered a priority here. A player can only so do much.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Ian Botham is the most genuine allrounder of all time, by a considerable distance. Although he's not the greatest allrounder since he isn't an ATG in either batting or bowling.

 

[Sidilicious]

Great analysis. Although I don't know if winning match should be considered a priority here. A player can only so do much.

Yup. If you score more than 50 runs a test and take 3 wickets, there is not much else you could do.

For me the most interesting number was the last row.

In a set of consecutive 10 tests, how many time did an AR score 500 runs or more, take 30 wickets or more and do it with a batting average > bowling average.

Botham did it 32 times out of possible 93 instances (102 matches equals to 93 possible instances of 10 matches together). Thats nearly 35% of his career. For early a 3rd of his career England played with 12 players. 10 regular players + Botham the batsman and Botham the bowler.

Imran did it 7 times out of 77 instances = about 9%

Kapil did it 11 out of 122 = about 9%

Sobers did it in 35 in 84 possible instances = 42%

Keith Miller did it in 24 out of 46 instances = 52%

 

[jeetu]

Yup. If you score more than 50 runs a test and take 3 wickets, there is not much else you could do.

For me the most interesting number was the last row.

In a set of consecutive 10 tests, how many time did an AR score 500 runs or more, take 30 wickets or more and do it with a batting average > bowling average.

Botham did it 32 times out of possible 93 instances (102 matches equals to 93 possible instances of 10 matches together). Thats nearly 35% of his career. For early a 3rd of his career England played with 12 players. 10 regular players + Botham the batsman and Botham the bowler.

Imran did it 7 times out of 77 instances = about 9%

Kapil did it 11 out of 122 = about 9%

Sobers did it in 35 in 84 possible instances = 42%

Keith Miller did it in 24 out of 46 instances = 52%

The beauty of stats done in a honest way. We both comes to similar conclusion by using different method. Although there can be minor difference.
Miller and Botham were quite high on both lists.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Total Matches [/td][td]Peak Performance Percentage [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]102 [/td][td]16.67 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Keith Miller [/td][td]55 [/td][td]14.55 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Imran Khan [/td][td]88 [/td][td]11.36 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CL Cairns [/td][td]62 [/td][td]11.29 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GS Sobers [/td][td]93 [/td][td]10.75 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DL Vettori [/td][td]113 [/td][td]10.62 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sir RJ Hadlee [/td][td]86 [/td][td]10.47 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Benaud [/td][td]63 [/td][td]9.52 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Pollock [/td][td]108 [/td][td]9.26 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]79 [/td][td]8.86 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev [/td][td]131 [/td][td]7.63 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis [/td][td]166 [/td][td]4.82 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[Sidilicious]

The beauty of stats done in a honest way. We both comes to similar conclusion by using different method. Although there can be minor difference.
Miller and Botham were quite high on both lists.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Total Matches [/td][td]Peak Performance Percentage [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]102 [/td][td]16.67 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Keith Miller [/td][td]55 [/td][td]14.55 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Imran Khan [/td][td]88 [/td][td]11.36 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CL Cairns [/td][td]62 [/td][td]11.29 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GS Sobers [/td][td]93 [/td][td]10.75 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DL Vettori [/td][td]113 [/td][td]10.62 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sir RJ Hadlee [/td][td]86 [/td][td]10.47 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Benaud [/td][td]63 [/td][td]9.52 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Pollock [/td][td]108 [/td][td]9.26 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]79 [/td][td]8.86 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev [/td][td]131 [/td][td]7.63 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis [/td][td]166 [/td][td]4.82 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

This is adding the 'Exceptional' and 'Great' from your list?

I wonder if we would see such players again.

And yeah, nothing better than a proper stats analysis. Really gives a good picture, if looked at it the right way.

 

[jeetu]

This is adding the 'Exceptional' and 'Great' from your list?

I wonder if we would see such players again.

And yeah, nothing better than a proper stats analysis. Really gives a good picture, if looked at it the right way.

These are once in a generation player its tough to find them. India and Pakistan are trying look for next Kapil and Imran for last 25 years and failing.

Last list was from great column.
I have combined and sorted them now.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Total Matches [/td][td]Great [/td][td]Exceptional [/td][td]Sum [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]102 [/td][td]16.67 [/td][td]7.84 [/td][td]24.51 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Keith Miller [/td][td]55 [/td][td]14.55 [/td][td]5.45 [/td][td]20.00 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GS Sobers [/td][td]93 [/td][td]10.75 [/td][td]7.53 [/td][td]18.28 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CL Cairns [/td][td]62 [/td][td]11.29 [/td][td]4.84 [/td][td]16.13 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DL Vettori [/td][td]113 [/td][td]10.62 [/td][td]5.31 [/td][td]15.93 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sir RJ Hadlee [/td][td]86 [/td][td]10.47 [/td][td]3.49 [/td][td]13.95 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Imran Khan [/td][td]88 [/td][td]11.36 [/td][td]2.27 [/td][td]13.64 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Benaud [/td][td]63 [/td][td]9.52 [/td][td]1.59 [/td][td]11.11 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Pollock [/td][td]108 [/td][td]9.26 [/td][td]0.93 [/td][td]10.19 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]79 [/td][td]8.86 [/td][td]1.27 [/td][td]10.13 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev [/td][td]131 [/td][td]7.63 [/td][td]1.53 [/td][td]9.16 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis [/td][td]166 [/td][td]4.82 [/td][td]1.20 [/td][td]6.02 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

Only Imran dropped few spots on combined list rest remained same.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Botham is the most complete allrounder ever.
These stats clearly reveal that he was a better batsman than kapil, imran. Maybe his batting avg was not great but he had the ability to win matches with both his bowling and batting.
BOTHAM IS AN ATG.
He has 15 hundreds, no other allrounder of fab 4 is near him.

 

[Sidilicious]

These are once in a generation player its tough to find them. India and Pakistan are trying look for next Kapil and Imran for last 25 years and failing.

Last list was from great column.
I have combined and sorted them now.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Total Matches [/td][td]Great [/td][td]Exceptional [/td][td]Sum [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]IT Botham [/td][td]102 [/td][td]16.67 [/td][td]7.84 [/td][td]24.51 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Keith Miller [/td][td]55 [/td][td]14.55 [/td][td]5.45 [/td][td]20.00 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GS Sobers [/td][td]93 [/td][td]10.75 [/td][td]7.53 [/td][td]18.28 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CL Cairns [/td][td]62 [/td][td]11.29 [/td][td]4.84 [/td][td]16.13 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DL Vettori [/td][td]113 [/td][td]10.62 [/td][td]5.31 [/td][td]15.93 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sir RJ Hadlee [/td][td]86 [/td][td]10.47 [/td][td]3.49 [/td][td]13.95 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Imran Khan [/td][td]88 [/td][td]11.36 [/td][td]2.27 [/td][td]13.64 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Benaud [/td][td]63 [/td][td]9.52 [/td][td]1.59 [/td][td]11.11 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Pollock [/td][td]108 [/td][td]9.26 [/td][td]0.93 [/td][td]10.19 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]A Flintoff [/td][td]79 [/td][td]8.86 [/td][td]1.27 [/td][td]10.13 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]N Kapil Dev [/td][td]131 [/td][td]7.63 [/td][td]1.53 [/td][td]9.16 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis [/td][td]166 [/td][td]4.82 [/td][td]1.20 [/td][td]6.02 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

Only Imran dropped few spots on combined list rest remained same.

Super one. The more analysis I see, the more I am in awe of Botham.

Cairns and especially Vettori are interesting too. They quietly sneak into such lists without any hoopla. Just being great servants of NZ Cricket.

 

[Buffet]

Yup. If you score more than 50 runs a test and take 3 wickets, there is not much else you could do.

For me the most interesting number was the last row.

In a set of consecutive 10 tests, how many time did an AR score 500 runs or more, take 30 wickets or more and do it with a batting average > bowling average.

Botham did it 32 times out of possible 93 instances (102 matches equals to 93 possible instances of 10 matches together). Thats nearly 35% of his career. For early a 3rd of his career England played with 12 players. 10 regular players + Botham the batsman and Botham the bowler.

Imran did it 7 times out of 77 instances = about 9%

Kapil did it 11 out of 122 = about 9%

Sobers did it in 35 in 84 possible instances = 42%

Keith Miller did it in 24 out of 46 instances = 52%

Sobers, Miller and Botham are always rated as genuine all rounder who contributed with bat and ball at same time more frequently. They are rare breed and very valuable for teams.

 

[jeetu]

Super one. The more analysis I see, the more I am in awe of Botham.

Cairns and especially Vettori are interesting too. They quietly sneak into such lists without any hoopla. Just being great servants of NZ Cricket.

Vettori in tests is kind of like Afridi in ODI, great peaks offsets by greater lows. Cairns case was helped by low number of test matches he played. He did his best for the opportunities.

One of the earliest A/R stats i did was comparison of 80's A/R's performance by 5 years interval. Please see if you can find some conclusion based on it.
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?108261-Kapil-Imran-Hadlee-Botham

 

[Hasan123]

Making the team on batting or bowling merit, and contributing in the other facet.

 

[aloo paratha]

At least being able to make the team off one facet. Somebody like Ben Stokes or Shakib al Hasan can make the team off batting and bowling alone.

 

[Ab Fan]

Kallis was a good enough bowler in first part of his career but in the later half, he focussed more on his batting and that restricted his bowling a bit more. Overall, he is a genuine all-rounder and I have no doubt about it.

Shaun Pollock is an ATG bowler who could bat a bit though. Not a genuine all-rounder and neither is Ashwin who is again just a bowler who could bat a bit.

 

[jeetu]

Kallis was a good enough bowler in first part of his career but in the later half, he focussed more on his batting and that restricted his bowling a bit more. Overall, he is a genuine all-rounder and I have no doubt about it.

Shaun Pollock is an ATG bowler who could bat a bit though. Not a genuine all-rounder and neither is Ashwin who is again just a bowler who could bat a bit.

Kallis was never the reliable strike bowler as can be seen from his low 5W hall. With Kallis and similar A/R like Sobers i tend to focus o Wickets per matches. In Kallis case it less than 2 which puts him between regular bowler and part timer. Some years of each.
His best bowling years were from 1999-2003 , where he was performing decently with ball. Then again from 2006-2008 but mostly went under 2 wickets per match.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td] Career averages [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Bowl Av [/td][td]5W [/td][td]Wickets Per Match [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]overall [/td][td]166 [/td][td]292 [/td][td]32.65 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1.76 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1995 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]- [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.00 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1996 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]- [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.00 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1997 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]25 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.40 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1998 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]24 [/td][td]31.83 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.60 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1999 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]22 [/td][td]25.77 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.20 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2000 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]17 [/td][td]33.82 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.55 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2001 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]35 [/td][td]26.65 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.69 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2002 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]31 [/td][td]26.9 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]3.44 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2003 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]19 [/td][td]38.42 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.38 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2004 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]12 [/td][td]48.41 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.09 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2005 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]20 [/td][td]39.35 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.82 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2006 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]32.73 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.88 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2007 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]20 [/td][td]25.75 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]2.22 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2008 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]29 [/td][td]28.37 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]1.93 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2009 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]41.71 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.17 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2010 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]12 [/td][td]47.83 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.09 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2011 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]232 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.20 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2012 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]28.27 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.22 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2013 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]34.9 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.25 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[Ab Fan]

Kallis was never the reliable strike bowler as can be seen from his low 5W hall. With Kallis and similar A/R like Sobers i tend to focus o Wickets per matches. In Kallis case it less than 2 which puts him between regular bowler and part timer. Some years of each.
His best bowling years were from 1999-2003 , where he was performing decently with ball. Then again from 2006-2008 but mostly went under 2 wickets per match.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td] Career averages [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Bowl Av [/td][td]5W [/td][td]Wickets Per Match [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]overall [/td][td]166 [/td][td]292 [/td][td]32.65 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1.76 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1995 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]- [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.00 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1996 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]- [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.00 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1997 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]25 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.40 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1998 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]24 [/td][td]31.83 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.60 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 1999 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]22 [/td][td]25.77 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.20 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2000 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]17 [/td][td]33.82 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.55 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2001 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]35 [/td][td]26.65 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.69 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2002 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]31 [/td][td]26.9 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]3.44 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2003 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]19 [/td][td]38.42 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]2.38 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2004 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]12 [/td][td]48.41 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.09 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2005 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]20 [/td][td]39.35 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.82 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2006 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]32.73 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.88 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2007 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]20 [/td][td]25.75 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]2.22 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2008 [/td][td]15 [/td][td]29 [/td][td]28.37 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]1.93 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2009 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]7 [/td][td]41.71 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.17 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2010 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]12 [/td][td]47.83 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.09 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2011 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]232 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]0.20 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2012 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]11 [/td][td]28.27 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.22 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]year 2013 [/td][td]8 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]34.9 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]1.25 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[/table]

Kallis used to bowl long spells for a good part of his career but eventually in the later part, he started concentrating more on his batting and it was after then that his job was just to make sure that the premium fast bowlers are fresh enough and force the batsmen to take chances against him.

You can't discard kallis just by a statistical argument of taking 2 wickets per match. Remember he played 166 tests, so in such a long period, there will be lots of instances when his weaker suit may not look good enough.
292 tests wickets still is a good reading for a batting All-rounder.

 

[Suleiman]

Qualitatively, you have to make it into the team on at least one skill alone be it batting or bowling. Too many players and selectors think that having some batting skill and some bowling skill, but mediocrity in both constitutes as being an all rounder. That's what a bits and pieces player is.

Look at all the famous allrounders of the past, they all could make it into the team on batting or bowling alone and the other skill was a bonus.

Except Afridi, he had so many skills that it was hard to choose. He was an allrounder's allrounder

 

[Rana]

Need to genuinely have the ability to win a match in both batting and bowling. Not random one off knocks that tailenders play such as Hassan Ali and his 50 against New Zealand

So when called upon, should be able to display batting skills that are befitting of a lower middle order batsman and when bowling he should be trusted with pivotal overs in the game, to try and tilt the balance into his team’s favour with the ball. Not the odd few overs just to add a 5th, 6th option

 

[Rana]

I’ll tell you some players who I consider genuine All rounders

1. Andre Russell
2. Shakib Al-Hassan
3. Ben Stokes (needs to improve his bowling a bit)
4. Angelo Mathews (his bowling has gone down hill)
5. Mohammad Nabi (very underrated and has lost a lot of his natural ability over the years)

Potential genuine All-rounders (emerging)

1. Hardik Pandya
2. Faheem Ashraf (The guy can bat and needs to produce an innings of real substance. Bowling can also be improved)
3. Jason Holder (maybe he is in the established category all ready but could do with some more scores to his name)

 

[Sidilicious]

I’ll tell you some players who I consider genuine All rounders

1. Andre Russell
2. Shakib Al-Hassan
3. Ben Stokes (needs to improve his bowling a bit)
4. Angelo Mathews (his bowling has gone down hill)
5. Mohammad Nabi (very underrated and has lost a lot of his natural ability over the years)

Potential genuine All-rounders (emerging)

1. Hardik Pandya
2. Faheem Ashraf (The guy can bat and needs to produce an innings of real substance. Bowling can also be improved)
3. Jason Holder (maybe he is in the established category all ready but could do with some more scores to his name)

TBH, its easy to be an AR in LOI like Andre Russell. An AR in Test is what really makes a true AR, IMHO.

Thus, I can think of only 2 proper ARs
1. Shakib
2. Stokes

There are a few upcoming ones, but none other that would match my criteria of taking 30 wickets and scoring 500 runs over 10 tests and batting average > bowling average.

The analysis [MENTION=53377]jeetu[/MENTION] and I did separately was on the test ARs whose career has finished. Shakib and Stokes were not part of our considerations.

 

[jeetu]

Kallis used to bowl long spells for a good part of his career but eventually in the later part, he started concentrating more on his batting and it was after then that his job was just to make sure that the premium fast bowlers are fresh enough and force the batsmen to take chances against him.

You can't discard kallis just by a statistical argument of taking 2 wickets per match. Remember he played 166 tests, so in such a long period, there will be lots of instances when his weaker suit may not look good enough.
292 tests wickets still is a good reading for a batting All-rounder.

I agree with you on most parts. However lack of wickets per match is probably the biggest reason i consider Sobers ahead of Kallis when it comes to greatest Batting A/R.

 

[jeetu]

I’ll tell you some players who I consider genuine All rounders

1. Andre Russell
2. Shakib Al-Hassan
3. Ben Stokes (needs to improve his bowling a bit)
4. Angelo Mathews (his bowling has gone down hill)
5. Mohammad Nabi (very underrated and has lost a lot of his natural ability over the years)

Potential genuine All-rounders (emerging)

1. Hardik Pandya
2. Faheem Ashraf (The guy can bat and needs to produce an innings of real substance. Bowling can also be improved)
3. Jason Holder (maybe he is in the established category all ready but could do with some more scores to his name)

Statistically there not a big gap between Strokes and Holder when it comes to tests.
[table=width: 600, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Runs [/td][td]Bat Avg [/td][td]100 [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Bowl Avg [/td][td]5W [/td][td]Ave Diff [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RA Jadeja (INDIA) [/td][td]2012-2018 [/td][td]39 [/td][td]1395 [/td][td]32.44 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]185 [/td][td]23.5 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]8.93 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Shakib Al Hasan (BDESH) [/td][td]2007-2018 [/td][td]53 [/td][td]3692 [/td][td]39.69 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]196 [/td][td]31.88 [/td][td]18 [/td][td]7.81 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Mohammad Hafeez (PAK) [/td][td]2003-2018 [/td][td]51 [/td][td]3595 [/td][td]39.94 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]53 [/td][td]33.84 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]6.09 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Ashwin (INDIA) [/td][td]2011-2018 [/td][td]64 [/td][td]2331 [/td][td]29.5 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]336 [/td][td]25.44 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]4.05 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]VD Philander (SA) [/td][td]2011-2018 [/td][td]55 [/td][td]1485 [/td][td]25.16 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]205 [/td][td]21.54 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]3.62 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JO Holder (WI) [/td][td]2014-2018 [/td][td]35 [/td][td]1554 [/td][td]30.47 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]86 [/td][td]28.5 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1.97 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]BA Stokes (ENG) [/td][td]2013-2018 [/td][td]46 [/td][td]2779 [/td][td]33.89 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]112 [/td][td]33.25 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0.64 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CR Woakes (ENG) [/td][td]2013-2018 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]1012 [/td][td]30.66 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]72 [/td][td]32.94 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]-2.27 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MM Ali (ENG) [/td][td]2014-2018 [/td][td]52 [/td][td]2614 [/td][td]32.27 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]145 [/td][td]39.05 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]-6.78 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[FastBowlingAllrounder]

Kallis was a good enough bowler in first part of his career but in the later half, he focussed more on his batting and that restricted his bowling a bit more. Overall, he is a genuine all-rounder and I have no doubt about it.

Shaun Pollock is an ATG bowler who could bat a bit though. Not a genuine all-rounder and neither is Ashwin who is again just a bowler who could bat a bit.

Kallis always focused on his batting more. Although at the start of his career he might have been able to make the team on bowling alone because he had the ability to hit 140km/h. Towards the latter half of his career, he became more of a support bowler so overall, I think he is a batting all rounder, rather tha genuine all rounder.

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

Sub 33 bowling average and 35+ batting average.

 

[Rana]

Statistically there not a big gap between Strokes and Holder when it comes to tests.
[table=width: 600, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Span [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]Runs [/td][td]Bat Avg [/td][td]100 [/td][td]Wkts [/td][td]Bowl Avg [/td][td]5W [/td][td]Ave Diff [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RA Jadeja (INDIA) [/td][td]2012-2018 [/td][td]39 [/td][td]1395 [/td][td]32.44 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]185 [/td][td]23.5 [/td][td]9 [/td][td]8.93 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Shakib Al Hasan (BDESH) [/td][td]2007-2018 [/td][td]53 [/td][td]3692 [/td][td]39.69 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]196 [/td][td]31.88 [/td][td]18 [/td][td]7.81 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Mohammad Hafeez (PAK) [/td][td]2003-2018 [/td][td]51 [/td][td]3595 [/td][td]39.94 [/td][td]10 [/td][td]53 [/td][td]33.84 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]6.09 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Ashwin (INDIA) [/td][td]2011-2018 [/td][td]64 [/td][td]2331 [/td][td]29.5 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]336 [/td][td]25.44 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]4.05 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]VD Philander (SA) [/td][td]2011-2018 [/td][td]55 [/td][td]1485 [/td][td]25.16 [/td][td]0 [/td][td]205 [/td][td]21.54 [/td][td]13 [/td][td]3.62 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JO Holder (WI) [/td][td]2014-2018 [/td][td]35 [/td][td]1554 [/td][td]30.47 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]86 [/td][td]28.5 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1.97 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]BA Stokes (ENG) [/td][td]2013-2018 [/td][td]46 [/td][td]2779 [/td][td]33.89 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]112 [/td][td]33.25 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]0.64 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CR Woakes (ENG) [/td][td]2013-2018 [/td][td]26 [/td][td]1012 [/td][td]30.66 [/td][td]1 [/td][td]72 [/td][td]32.94 [/td][td]2 [/td][td]-2.27 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MM Ali (ENG) [/td][td]2014-2018 [/td][td]52 [/td][td]2614 [/td][td]32.27 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]145 [/td][td]39.05 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]-6.78 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

Right, I completely forgot to mention Moeen Ali

A GENUINE all-rounder and I mean it when I say this. His Stats as a bowler sort of let him down. He is a much better bowler than his stats suggest

 

[Ab Fan]

I agree with you on most parts. However lack of wickets per match is probably the biggest reason i consider Sobers ahead of Kallis when it comes to greatest Batting A/R.

I never compared Kallis with Sobers. I can't even comment on how good Garfield Sobers weaker suit was, although he had a very poor SR of 92 with the bowl.

I was just stating the point that Kallis definitely qualifies as an all-rounder. It is just that his batting takes the shine over the fact how useful he was with the bowl.