Allrounders - analysis

[chickenfeet]

Analysis of the allrounder poll. Probably dead boring to non cricket types.

It's interesting how perception and the facts can be at odds. Here are the career test records of everyone who attracted a vote in the poll:

Player	Matches	Runs	Batting	Wickets	Bowling	Catches
			Average		Average
Wasim Akram	104	2898	22.64	414	23.62	44
Ian Botham	102	5200	33.54	383	28.40	120
Richard Hadlee	86	3124	27.16	431	22.29	39
Sanath Jayasuriya	108	6837	40.21	96	34.36	78
Jacques Kallis	110	9066	57.74	219	31.33	109
Imran Khan	88	3807	37.69	362	22.81	28
Keith Miller	55	2958	36.97	170	22.97	38
Gary Sobers	93	8032	57.78	235	34.03	109

Now, there's a tricky bit to identifying allrounders as they tend to be either batsmen who bowl or bowlers who bat. In this case we can see two clear leaders in each category.

For batsmen who bowl Gary Sobers and Jacques Kallis stand head and shoulders above the pack and are practically impossible to separate. Sobers was the overwhelming winner of the poll, which stands to reason, while Kallis attracted one third place vote. This rather reinforces my view that he may be the most under-rated player of all time. Interestingly both of them have similar fielding records too and I'm not sure I've seen a better close fielder than Sobers.

In the bowlers who bat category Keith Miller and Imran Khan are clear standouts and, again, well nigh impossible to split. Imran did quite well in the voting, Miller less so though one of his supporters was perhaps the most knowledgeable of the voters (the other was me!).

It's interesting to me that a player like Botham attracts quite a lot of support when he clearly is not nearly at the standard of the leaders but then I have heard apparently sober people suggesting that Flintoff is a test class batsman so I probably shouldn't be.

Final thought, imagine a team with our four top picks, add Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne and the five best batsmen you can think of and imagine playing against that line up. Especially if you had to bowl to it!

Comments

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

I think Kallis suffers because he doesn't appear to have the blow-you-away personality one associates with the greatest all-rounders. I did pause over Richard Hadlee's button, as I think he's a great, especially as he had to carry a weak team (though one can argue he wouldn't have got nearly so many wickets in a strong one), but he doesn't quite give me that sense of something extra, either.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I think Kallis suffers because he doesn't appear to have the blow-you-away personality one associates with the greatest all-rounders

I think that's true. Also he he isn't the right guy at the right time to be built up by the press. If he were a black South African we would be hailing him as an all time great. Just as if Botham or Flintoff were Eton and Oxbridge they would not have been lionised in quite the same way (I call this the 'Trimmer effect' wit due acknowledgement to Evelyn Waugh).