Greatest all rounders of all time

Status
Not open for further replies.
chunkyshanhawk53

chunkyshanhawk53

Striker
Contributor
given how he is tearing up the IPL, Stokes is clearly the best in the world right now

Historically where does he sit?

Sobers at number 1

Botham
Imran Khan
Kallis
Kapil Dev
Hadlee (averaged 27 with the bat so qualifies I reckon)
Flintoff

How good can Stokes be?
 


Not as good as Kallis in his pomp with bat or ball yet.
Better with the bat than Flintoff but Flintoff was better with the ball.

Too young to comment on the others. Stokes is brilliant though and I think you get more than just his stats, if that makes sense.
 
The Voice Of Reason said:
Sobers and IT the best two I have seen
Click to expand...
Agree. otham like Stokes was one of those players who was always involved, the ball seemed to follow him around and he could change any game.

Sobers was the best ... this from cricinfo

"As a batsman he was great, as a bowler, merely superb, but would have made the West Indies side as a bowler alone. He was remarkably versatile with the ball, bowling two styles of spin - left-arm orthodox and wrist spin, but was also a fine fast-medium opening bowler. His catching close to the wicket may have been equalled but never surpassed, and he was a brilliant fielder anywhere."
 
I am too young to have seen Sobers, so my list is as follows

SITB
Imran Khan (he got better with age, unlike Beefy)
Kapil Dev
Richard Hadlee (the best bowler of the 4 from the age of the all rounder)
Kallis
Freddie

I have perhaps been a little harsh on Kallis, but only because all rounders were better in the olden days.
Stokes will do well to be up there with these greats, Botham won so many tests by himself from his debut up to the mid 80s. Botham would have made it into the England team as a bowler and a batsman during this time, plus he was a fantastic slip fielder.
 
On pure ability........ Sobers.
On stats.......Kallis
Stokes is up there, on ability, with Botham, and the scary part is, he is still improving !
 
If Stokes can end up matching Flintoff with the ball and be nearer Kallis (stat wise) rather than Freddie with the bat then that would see him better Beefy in my eyes come the end of his career...he could also help us win The Champions Trophy or a world cup 50 over and play a big part in an Ashes series victory...every little helps ;)
 
As a kid I only caught the tail end of Sobers' career but for me he will always be the greatest.
I always wonder what Mike Procter's Test stats would have been had he been born 25 years later.
Stokes has the potential to match Botham but at the moment is in the Tony Greig category ie flashes of brilliance but not consistant enough.
 
Flintoff was decidedly average but for a 2 year spell between 2004-2006 IMO, 5 hundreds and only 3 five wicket hauls would back that up too.

I think Stokes is a much better cricketer than Flintoff and will go on to prove this.

As for the rest - Kallis was one of the greatest batsmen of all time but never had the ability to win a game with the ball. Hadlee one of the greatest bowlers who could throw the bat a bit. Sobers will most likely stand out at number 1 forever, with Botham, Imran and Kapil Dev the best of the rest.
 
Sobers
Botham (up to back injury in mid 80s he was fantastic)
Khan
Dev
Hadlee
Kallis (stats wise superb but played in a team with other class players smith, pollock, Donald etc, likes Botham, dev, Khan and hadlee carried their teams at times particularly with ball).
Flintoff
Stokes (room to move up list but bowling average still higher than batting average like Freddie so that needs to change to become a great).
 
Shaun Pollock anyone? Averaged 32 and 23 with bat and ball in test matches. Wasn't exactly a blockbuster name or character being a quiet ginger lad, but his record holds up against the very best.

I always feel Flintoff is massively overrated in this country, nowhere else in the world would he be mentioned on a list of all time greatest all rounders. There was a small period of time where he was very good (mainly with ball in hand), but ultimately he fell well short of where he should have been.
 
Dexter said:
Shaun Pollock anyone? Averaged 32 and 23 with bat and ball in test matches. Wasn't exactly a blockbuster name or character being a quiet ginger lad, but his record holds up against the very best.

I always feel Flintoff is massively overrated in this country, nowhere else in the world would he be mentioned on a list of all time greatest all rounders. There was a small period of time where he was very good (mainly with ball in hand), but ultimately he fell well short of where he should have been.
Click to expand...
Pollock is a great call actually. The thing is with him is that he was probably more steady with the bat rather than match winner. I'm pretty sure Freddie will have more 100s and 50s than pollock although with the ball a prime pollock was dynamite.
 
botham for me, always will be

Kallis is the stats man choice

hadlee better bowler

those three in that order in my watching cricket era
 
Dexter said:
Shaun Pollock anyone? Averaged 32 and 23 with bat and ball in test matches. Wasn't exactly a blockbuster name or character being a quiet ginger lad, but his record holds up against the very best.

I always feel Flintoff is massively overrated in this country, nowhere else in the world would he be mentioned on a list of all time greatest all rounders. There was a small period of time where he was very good (mainly with ball in hand), but ultimately he fell well short of where he should have been.
Click to expand...

Excellent post and agreed wholeheartedly on both points.

Pollock was probably more in the Hadlee mould due to the superiority of his bowling, but he was a better batsman IMO, he just underachieved a bit in that facet for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top