PCFormat Forum Archive

KALSTER wrote:Thing is that all rounders have been one of our signature features for a long time. The more you reduce the number of all rounders, the more you weaken your batting line-up. I would also not be comfortable with increasing the number of hopeless batsmen in a side, unless the bowler was really worth it. Who is really worth it?

Personally, I believe sustained success in test cricket is about an individual who is exceptionally talented at a specific skill and you can use two current South African players as an example: Hashim Amla and Dale Steyn. You need one all-rounder, maybe two (no more) in a test side and he needs to be good.

The term 'all-rounder' is definitely used too loosely these days, instead of using it when it is really deserved. For example: Robin Peterson would probably be termed as an all rounder, since he is equally adept at both skills. The truth of the matter is that he isn't particularly skilled at either and is nothing but a bits-and-pieces cricketer. Some people even argued that Jacques Kallis wasn't a true all-rounder and although I'd be VERY careful to climb onto that bandwagon, I do understand the merit of the argument.

"What makes this knock by Elgar even more impressive is that he is doing it without his middle fingers. Both of them are directed at CSA."

Much LOL!

If Kallis isn't (wasn't) an all-rounder, then there is no such thing as an all-rounder.

KALSTER wrote:If Kallis isn't (wasn't) an all-rounder, then there is no such thing as an all-rounder.

It's a long story. Here's the article on Cricinfo when you have the time to read it:

Can Kallis really be called an allrounder?

PS - You had better read that, it took me almost 10 minutes to find the link!

TL;DR

Kallis would not have been in the side purely as a bowler, but the "gold standard" for an all-rounder is a myth.
There has never been a true all rounder by those standards.

Also, wicket-keeping all-rounders like AB

Mystical_Titan wrote:

KALSTER wrote:If Kallis isn't (wasn't) an all-rounder, then there is no such thing as an all-rounder.

It's a long story. Here's the article on Cricinfo when you have the time to read it:

Can Kallis really be called an allrounder?

PS - You had better read that, it took me almost 10 minutes to find the link!

Reading that article, it seems that he moved the goalposts so that Kallis would need to have been a worse batsman and a better bowler to have qualified as one of the best. Makes sense? I don't think so. Kallis had an 18 year career during which he scored at a MUCH better average than Botham and maintained a good level of bowling as well.

One could swing it around at say Botham's 33.54 average in Tests and a measly 23.21 in ODIs is too poor for him to qualify as a true all-rounder vs Kallis' 55.37 and 44.86. Then you are left with ONE "true all-rounder" in Garfield Sobers, which is nonsense IMO.

Oh my sack... Wayne Parnell, WAKE UP with the running!

PS: You had better respond to my take on the article. It took me almost 10 minutes to read the link!

Why is de Villiers keeping? Just turned on now.

Stuart wrote:Why is de Villiers keeping? Just turned on now.

'Cause otherwise there will be a massive political upheaval that Tsolekile wasn't selected.

KALSTER wrote:PS: You had better respond to my take on the article. It took me almost 10 minutes to read the link!

I didn't see the point in taking the debate further.

Okay, I'll admit: Around lunchtime yesterday I was thinking that Australia have Dale Steyn's number. He has proved mostly ineffective in this series, and this is going to be a long, hard slog.

What a legend!

Stuart wrote:Okay, I'll admit: Around lunchtime yesterday I was thinking that Australia have Dale Steyn's number. He has proved mostly ineffective in this series, and this is going to be a long, hard slog.

What a legend!

Anyone who writes off Dale Steyn and Hashim Amla does so at their peril! The only team member who still needs to come to the party is Graeme the batsman, but as a captain he has been inspiring.

Mystical_Titan wrote:as a captain he has been inspiring.

Nyet.

His entire captaincy has been plagued by bad or predictable decisions and some pettiness that would impress most 4 year olds.

Bowling first on that flat wicket at the Wanderers was about as inspiring as cat videos
How about when he allowed his batsmen to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory against India by not getting the 16 runs they needed?
How about his personal mission to keep Klusener off the team for not agreeing with him?
Match-fixing accusations?
Scoring 130 in an ODI against England and then asking for a runner because his legs were tired? That was audacity. Then having that request denied and claiming the decision to force a professional athlete to display some athleticism was unsporting... that was douchbaggery

He is a much better batsman that he is a captain.
Every good innings he plays as a batsmen earns him credit as being "inspirational" or a "captains knock"
Correct me if I am wrong, but every test Hansie Cronje scored a century in SA went on to win.
Hansie not really the gold standard for captains, but you could argue those were inspirational knocks.

Smith skates thru on decent enough captaining ability and flashes of batting brilliance. That seems good enough for sycophants.

The Australian air is getting to this man!

The captaincy is pretty much the only thing keeping Smith in at the moment. Australia's never been his favourite opposition, especially not with Johnson in there. And that was before Johnson found such magic form.

That said, we seem to have a history here. Every time one of us says something bad about Smith he turns it around in the next game, so let's see what happens.

The captaincy is pretty much the only thing keeping Smith in at the moment.

I never understood the tenacity with which Smith has held onto the captaincy.

His batting has suffered for it and I think if he had gone back to just being a batsmen in the mid 2000's he would have been THE south African batsmen of his generation. We would not have missed Kallis as much in his retirement.

Stuart wrote:The Australian air is getting to this man!

I agree and as such I'll refrain from getting into a debate. It's almost sure to be a waste of time.

Sorry for not being a Graeme Smith ****-rider

hamin_aus wrote:Sorry for not being a Graeme Smith ****-rider

Are you at least sorry for just being a ****-rider in general?

No regrets here - it's my passion

hamin_aus wrote:No regrets here - it's my passion

You have certainly made that crystal clear.

For the record, my refusal to start a debate on Graeme Smith was simply due to the fact that each person is entitled to their own opinion and I can certainly respect that, regardless of whether or not I agree with you. I could have written a essay explaining to you why I disagree with your statements, but that would have done little, if anything, to change your opinion, so I decided to let the matter rest.

hamin_aus wrote:I never understood the tenacity with which Smith has held onto the captaincy.

Stuart wrote:

hamin_aus wrote:I never understood the tenacity with which Smith has held onto the captaincy.

FFS this is the only active thread on these forums - what else am I supposed to do

Granted, he's made some mistakes along the way (show me anyone who hasn't), but he's been at the forefront of SA's rise to # 1 and he certainly deserves some credit for the way he's led the team over the last 10 years.

hamin_aus wrote:

Stuart wrote:

hamin_aus wrote:I never understood the tenacity with which Smith has held onto the captaincy.

FFS this is the only active thread on these forums - what else am I supposed to do

Troll the Android fans in the smart phone thread.

http://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Austra ... B-20140225

Warner hints at cheating AB
2014-02-25 14:27

Cape Town - Australia opener David Warner believes the Proteas deliberately "worked on the ball" to generate reverse swing in the second Test at St George's Park in Port Elizabeth that concluded last Sunday.

The South African attack found greater reverse swing, especially on Day 4 when the Aussies collapsed from 126/0 to 216 all out.

Dale Steyn, who took 4-55, looked unplayable at times as South Africa won by 231 runs to level the three-Test series at 1-1.

Warner, speaking to SkySports Radio, said that while both teams tried to make the ball reverse by throwing it in on the bounce across the outlying wickets, he felt South African wicketkeeper AB de Villiers went a step further.

"We were actually questioning whether or not AB de Villiers would get the ball in his hand and, with his glove, wipe the rough side every ball," said Warner, who went on to say it was another thing they (Australia) would bring to the attention of the umpires.

...

Warner hints at cheating AB

The only point worth making is that if Australia had won, Warner wouldn't have said anything.