Didn't realise hammie's stats were that good FP but do you reckon he would be as effective if he were to take on Eltons role as an actual all-rounder meaning he would bowl 10 overs in ODI's most of the time and bowl 15-20 overs in tests. I still think they're using him well ATM batting top 3 and being used as a "change" bowler which I rank as better than part time but not quite a front line bowler.
Can anyone give me an assessment on Prince Masurve ?? I notice he didn't bowl as much last season is that because the Rocks were stacked with bowlers or is he now just concentrating on he's batting ?? Is he a potential international all-rounder ??
Discussion
Where have all the all-rounders gone ??
Discussion
Veteran
jaybro wrote:Didn't realise hammie's stats were that good FP but do you reckon he would be as effective if he were to take on Eltons role as an actual all-rounder meaning he would bowl 10 overs in ODI's most of the time and bowl 15-20 overs in tests. I still think they're using him well ATM batting top 3 and being used as a "change" bowler which I rank as better than part time but not quite a front line bowler.
One thing for sure is he fits your criteria (in an earlier post I think) of taking wickets he does have a golden arm. I don't think you'd have him as one of your 5 bowlers in ODI, but certainly half of your fifth bowler say with Chigs or Williams or any bowler that struggles on the day, certainly good for 5, and as and when a partnership needs to be broken. In Tests I even tempted to throw him in as part of the equation can't see why he can't send down 10-15 per day. Again not as the 4 specialists, just like the Proteas will have Morkel, Steyn, Vern and Peterson PLUS Kallis and Duminy (all rounders) similarly we could employ Hami along those lines. A similar story can be made for Aus and their use of Watto.
Member actions
ShareVeteran
Can't image bligz being enticed back but he'd be in for sure. Why doesn't Waller bowl anymore? I guess from FP's list there are still some allrounders with the masakadzas and Williams..but hopefuls , like Chamu, have been pretty disappointing
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
Chamu is not an allrounder, as he can't bowl or bat to an international standard.
My All-time Zimbabwe XI
Neil Johnson, Brendan Taylor, Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower (w), David Houghton, Sean Williams, Heath Streak (c), Andy Blignaut, Paul Strang, Eddo Brandes, Blessing Muzarabani
Neil Johnson, Brendan Taylor, Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower (w), David Houghton, Sean Williams, Heath Streak (c), Andy Blignaut, Paul Strang, Eddo Brandes, Blessing Muzarabani
Member actions
ShareZCF Hall of Famer
FlowerPower wrote:[Working on ODI exclusively.]
Someone once said a genuine allrounder is one with a batting average higher than their bowling, e.g.
Jacques Kallis(31/45),
Neil Johnson(34/36),
Biffy (23/28),
Freddy Flintoff (24/32),
Going on that definition we have only ever had three allrounders (ODI), Neil Johnson (34.85/36.5), Duncan Fletcher (31.57/47.75) who only played 6, Dave Houghton (19/26.37) who only bowled 2 overs, which therefore leaves us with Johnson.
The others you mention, using the measure mentioned above, and a qualification criteria of at least 100 overs bowled the ranking works as follows:
1. NC Johnson (Bowling 34.85/Batting 36.5)
2. HH Streak (29.81/28.44)
3. GW Flower (40.62 /33.52)
4. H Masakadza (36.9/27.09)
5. PA Strang (33.05/22.24)
6. SM Ervine (38.0/25.85)
7. AG Cremer (30.2/16.63)
8. E Chigumbura (40.19/23.81)
9. GJ Whittall (39.55/22.54)
10. T Mupariwa (26.29/8.68)
11. EA Brandes (32.37/13.03)
12. GA Lamb (38.91/17.9)
13. KM Dabengwa (40.69/19.03)
14. CN Evans (40.38/18.19)
15. AM Blignaut (41.26/18.96)
Mupariwa makes the list largely thanks to an insane bowling average of 26.29. Surprisingly Hami, contra to common belief is a very useful "allrounder" ranking 4th (was shocked he's sent down more than a 100 overs!) Shingi (30.42/29.6) who unfortunately misses listing due to insufficient overs has a coefficient placing him just behind Neil! Cremer, Chigs and the Masakadzas rank higher than Andy Blignaut and Guy Wittall. Strang and Sean Ervine rank below Hami...
So this may very well be a case of nostaligic hang over than a vanishing of allrounder (we actually never had). Just my two cents worth, from a statistical viewpoint, kind of reminds me of people who argue that Waller and Mutizwa have ugly technique, but their figures give a different story....
Good post FP,
But i differ with one POV.
I dont think its a case of nostalgia.
The difference is, we always knew what the old guys were capable on their day of. the A/Rs of a decade ago were shockingly inconsistent. But we always knew that marillier was capable of a matchwinning 21 ball 50. As was bliggie. Who today has the balls to try going for that at a fragile point against quality attacks? We knew friend could pound them, an emering ervine looked good. And streak became pretty rock solid and dependable.
I dont think we have the same feeling with Cremer and Shingi here. Perhaps elton.
The other thing is, like today- old school guys were prone to top order collapses. But there was ALWAYS at least 1 guy between 6,7,8,9 that would hold it together to look respectable.
Member actions
ShareZCF Hall of Famer
btw,
also think waller has the balls to try and pull something of. But he is a top 5 batsman atm.
ten years ago he would be a number 8 who would be rolling the arm a bit.
also think waller has the balls to try and pull something of. But he is a top 5 batsman atm.
ten years ago he would be a number 8 who would be rolling the arm a bit.
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
Waller would probably have been like Dirk Viljoen but better, bat at 8 and bowl a bit (as the Dogg said).
My All-time Zimbabwe XI
Neil Johnson, Brendan Taylor, Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower (w), David Houghton, Sean Williams, Heath Streak (c), Andy Blignaut, Paul Strang, Eddo Brandes, Blessing Muzarabani
Neil Johnson, Brendan Taylor, Murray Goodwin, Andy Flower (w), David Houghton, Sean Williams, Heath Streak (c), Andy Blignaut, Paul Strang, Eddo Brandes, Blessing Muzarabani
Member actions
ShareZCF Hall of Famer
ZIMDOGGY wrote:btw,
also think waller has the balls to try and pull something of. But he is a top 5 batsman atm.
ten years ago he would be a number 8 who would be rolling the arm a bit.
totally agree but with no 'Andy Flower' type players up the top Malcolm has been propped up the order ...... still waiting for an assessment of Prince Masurve anyone ????
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
Masvaure is a long way from doing enough to be a credible international candidate, even by our standards. He had an improved season, but there is a lot more for him to do.
The Third Innings
Member actions
ShareVeteran
eugene wrote:Chamu is not an allrounder, as he can't bowl or bat to an international standard.
yaaaaaws ... one can only be an allrounder if they bat and bowl at international standards :roll: still, I see the allrounder has a chance to play some cricket abroad this season - good on him!
I do agree that in the past we'd still have a chance of a total with either Heath, or Bligz or Douggie ... or before that Whittal still to bat. There has been a mental shift though ... these guys do not have anywhere near the same sort of belief - they all seem to be far more nervous about failure - or desperation to not perform (as witnessed in Vusi's century) - it's slightly different but often has the same result...
Shingi (one of Cremer and Meth who seems to be considered a cross format player) seems to be turning into a lower order grafter which can only work in tests, so in the LO format we have a true dearth of lower order hitters for sure
Member actions
Sharehow about this for an allrounder
bowling average 36.0
batting average 99.94
differance between batting and bowling average =63.94
bowling average 36.0
batting average 99.94
differance between batting and bowling average =63.94
Member actions
ShareVeteran
herb wrote:how about this for an allrounder
bowling average 36.0
batting average 99.94
differance between batting and bowling average =63.94
That would be a decent batting all rounder. But take care, this must be sustained over sometime (hence my arbitrary 100 overs bowled entry criteria).
Moving from this and refocusing on debate at hand, the more I think about it the more I think what most around here are talking about are finishers (Afridi, Freddy Flintoff, Watto, bowlers who can crank it up when needed) who could also be "alrounders" but more to the point great strikers of the ball.
The way people keep referring Bligs convinces me that what we are talking about is a high strike rate finisher. Bligs has a SR of over 100, but an average comparable to that of Prosper. What does this mean? He can crack a couple but not consistently enough to be relied on. The more you have to chose from the less likely you are to get all rounders.
Another point in the past due to our limited but very good pool of players "all rounders" were more prevalent.
Member actions
ShareVeteran
FlowerPower wrote:The way people keep referring Bligs convinces me that what we are talking about is a high strike rate finisher. Bligs has a SR of over 100, but an average comparable to that of Prosper. What does this mean? He can crack a couple but not consistently enough to be relied on.
I'm sure he's referring to Bradman (from the batting average) ...
Yeah, I had my issue with Bligz, BUT, he was pretty fearless coming in down the order - rather an occasional match turning innings than a number of steady going-nowhere-innings for me! He could also bowl fast at times. He's been away so long that I should certainly revisit my assertion that he'd "be in for sure" ... but if he were match ready he'd be a shoe-in
Member actions
ShareVeteran
betterdays wrote:
FlowerPower wrote:The way people keep referring Bligs convinces me that what we are talking about is a high strike rate finisher. Bligs has a SR of over 100, but an average comparable to that of Prosper. What does this mean? He can crack a couple but not consistently enough to be relied on.
I'm sure he's referring to Bradman (from the batting average) ...
Yeah, I had my issue with Bligz, BUT, he was pretty fearless coming in down the order - rather an occasional match turning innings than a number of steady going-nowhere-innings for me! He could also bowl fast at times. He's been away so long that I should certainly revisit my assertion that he'd "be in for sure" ... but if he were match ready he'd be a shoe-in
Spot on better days... :oops: how did I miss that...the blueprint for the modern day all rounder Sir Donald Bradman!
Member actions
ShareZCF Hall of Famer
Gorgeous Gavin Ewing could have been that man but not to be.
We still have butters,bliggy and douggie just sitting there on the sidelines, who roils come back for decent pay. Butters is playing social cricket.
Then there is ervine in exile, and mire.
Hammy is our all rounder now in these guys absence.
We still have butters,bliggy and douggie just sitting there on the sidelines, who roils come back for decent pay. Butters is playing social cricket.
Then there is ervine in exile, and mire.
Hammy is our all rounder now in these guys absence.
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
ZIMDOGGY wrote:Gorgeous Gavin Ewing could have been that man but not to be.
We still have butters,bliggy and douggie just sitting there on the sidelines, who roils come back for decent pay. Butters is playing social cricket.
Then there is ervine in exile, and mire.
Hammy is our all rounder now in these guys absence.
Deja Vu :)
Member actions
ShareZCF OriginalZCF Hall of Famer
We don't have any allrounders and none are on the horizon. We should stop looking, it is a waste of energy and focus.
What we do have are some bowlers who can contribute with the bat - Cremer, Shingi, Meth...
...and some batsmen who can contribute with the ball - Hami, Williams, Waller.
Chigs falls into either of these categories depending on which day of the week it is because he almost never is strong enough to be picked as a bowler or batsman and sometimes isn't strong enough to be picked as either.
Our batsman who have some bowling talent should be enouraged to work hard on their secondary role as should all our bowlers work on their batting. Hami's contributions of late should be an example. We don't have a full allrounder, most teams rarely have a good one, but we can get supporting contributions from players picked for another discipline.
What we do have are some bowlers who can contribute with the bat - Cremer, Shingi, Meth...
...and some batsmen who can contribute with the ball - Hami, Williams, Waller.
Chigs falls into either of these categories depending on which day of the week it is because he almost never is strong enough to be picked as a bowler or batsman and sometimes isn't strong enough to be picked as either.
Our batsman who have some bowling talent should be enouraged to work hard on their secondary role as should all our bowlers work on their batting. Hami's contributions of late should be an example. We don't have a full allrounder, most teams rarely have a good one, but we can get supporting contributions from players picked for another discipline.
The Third Innings
Member actions
Share