All Rounders do not exist.

[Gollum]

1 minute ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

yaar koi bacha hi nhin debate krne ko....most topic we ppl are on same page

bore ho gaya hu ...getting someone out of denial feels like a challenge 

Many have tried, all have failed. Best of luck to you, may you survive the war with least casualty of your brain cells . 

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, Gollum said:

Many have tried, all have failed. Best of luck to you, may you survive the war with least casualty of your brain cells . 

not much of an effort is needed when facts are our friend 

[bowl_out]

I wouldn't bring Shankar's performance into this discussion..

 

But if you can't acknowledge Kallis, Garry Sobers, Kapil Dev as all rounders, God save you..

They can get into their respective sides purely on one of the skills..

 

 

[Khota]

6 hours ago, zen said:

@Khota   there is no harm in accepting your mistake! 

There is lot of harm in misstating facts.

 

 

[Khota]

6 hours ago, bowl_out said:

I wouldn't bring Shankar's performance into this discussion..

 

But if you can't acknowledge Kallis, Garry Sobers, Kapil Dev as all rounders, God save you..

They can get into their respective sides purely on one of the skills..

 

 

I agree with this statement 100%.

 

I am few of the fortunate ones who has seen KD in action. He was a true allrounder. He was the main strike bowler and could score quickfire runs. In almost 100 years of Indian cricket there is only one KD. That is the point of this thread that we are wasting time looking for all rounders if one comes along in 100 years.

 

Current breed is hit and miss part timers and not all rounders.

[Khota]

6 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

why did u assume when every here has mentioned 1000 times he is batsman who can bowl like jadhav ...and he did bat damn well

Now soon will kick rayudu out of the team

 

speaks volume of ur following of the game that u didnt even read when it was mentioned 100 time that he is a batsman who can bowl

Now you are redefiniing all rounders. I guess you are admitting that Shankar cannot bowl. If he cannot bowl he by definition is not an all rounder.

[Ankit_sharma03]

4 hours ago, Khota said:

Now you are redefiniing all rounders. I guess you are admitting that Shankar cannot bowl. If he cannot bowl he by definition is not an all rounder.

ofcourse he can bowl , the ones who cant are rohit, dhawan, kohli, rayudu ...shankar gives u 4-5 overs huge diff and as a 6th/7th bowler thats the job . 

Mainly he is a batting all rounder and now he has shown he is good enough to play as batsman only

[Rightarmfast]

I think its safe to say that Vijay Shankar is essentially a genuine No4 batsman. A genuine batsman. That he took 2 wickets means nothing. In that respect, even Javagal Srinath was an all rounder. He scored a few 50's!  

While Vijay Shankar is a batsman, Hardik Pandya and Krunal are garbage. Neither here nor there. They excel in neither and hence are a liability for team India. 

 

Please dont categorize Shankar as an allrounder, or you will be disappointed. 

[Khota]

2 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

I think its safe to say that Vijay Shankar is essentially a genuine No4 batsman. A genuine batsman. That he took 2 wickets means nothing. In that respect, even Javagal Srinath was an all rounder. He scored a few 50's!  

While Vijay Shankar is a batsman, Hardik Pandya and Krunal are garbage. Neither here nor there. They excel in neither and hence are a liability for team India. 

 

Please dont categorize Shankar as an allrounder, or you will be disappointed. 

Agree. The only reason I cannot be critical of Shankar is that he is outperforming frontline batsman so yes he so far is a a solid bat. He may twirll his arm a little bit which is bonus but it is his batting cannot be discounted right now.

 

Pandya's I really do not know.

 

kapil Dev could walk in the team as either a batsman or a bowler.

[Khota]

6 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

ofcourse he can bowl , the ones who cant are rohit, dhawan, kohli, rayudu ...shankar gives u 4-5 overs huge diff and as a 6th/7th bowler thats the job . 

Mainly he is a batting all rounder and now he has shown he is good enough to play as batsman only

If your economy rate is x3 that of other bowlers, no you cannot bowl. Yes his action is legal and all that but that does not make him a bowler.

[Ankit_sharma03]

4 hours ago, Khota said:

If your economy rate is x3 that of other bowlers, no you cannot bowl. Yes his action is legal and all that but that does not make him a bowler.

his career eco is 5.60 now find me bowlers whose eco is 3 times lesser then this , n u shud be the last guy talking about eco for when u want umesh in team whose career eco is around 6. For a poor guy like that he still was able to defend 11 runs in last over whereas umesh cudnt defend 14 ....says a lot about ur knowledge .

 

but but umesh is a bowler so what if he leaks more and cant defend more runs u want him to satisfy ur lust for the word specialist. But but u want rayudu who cant bat against pace n bounce.....give tons of runs with poor fielding just for the lust of word specialist ....perfomance can go to hell 

 

even if u dnt wanna bowl him the guy is a bloody good batsman n fielder n can play easily ahead of 

 

 

[bowl_out]

18 hours ago, Khota said:

I agree with this statement 100%.

 

I am few of the fortunate ones who has seen KD in action. He was a true allrounder. He was the main strike bowler and could score quickfire runs. In almost 100 years of Indian cricket there is only one KD. That is the point of this thread that we are wasting time looking for all rounders if one comes along in 100 years.

 

Current breed is hit and miss part timers and not all rounders.

Yes. So is Sachin Tendulkar who is a once in a century kind of batsman. Kapil Dev the all rounder is kind of equivalent of Sachin the batsman.

And your argument of saying if someone is not KD class we shouldn't play that all rounder is like saying if someone is not Sachin class we shouldn't play that batsman.

 

You select the team based on what each player offers and how best you can utilize their strengths. You didn't have a Kapil Dev in 2011, still Yuvraj the all rounder stepped in to win you the WC. Is he Kapil class? Probably not. Was he effective in playing to the plan? Definitely yes. And that's what matters.

 

That said, I hate bits and pieces cricketers who don't have a core strength - the likes of Axar Patel, Stuart Binny, Rishi Dhawan etc. They will neither make it to the team on bowling or batting prowess. These are different from players like Vijay Shankar, Kedar Jadhav who have a primary role that they are accountable for, which is batting. What they offer with the ball is a bonus. But if they fail as batsmen, they should be held accountable and booted out.

 

Hardik Pandya has a clearly defined role in LOIs. He is required to bowl 10 overs and provide lower order hitting. But in Tests, he becomes a bits and pieces play with no accountability. He might score 40 runs and take a wicket but there is no basis to say if that is a good performance. And, there is no clearly defined role that I can critique him for.

I would rather go with a Vijay Shankar like player in Tests where I hold him responsible for batting but he can bowl 10 overs a day to give a break to the main bowlers if required.

 

In essence,

-Kallis/KD type all rounders are a boon

-If you don't have them look for VS/Yuvi type of players that have clear roles defined

-bits and pieces players are a strict no-no except maybe in T20s

 

[Khota]

5 hours ago, bowl_out said:

Yes. So is Sachin Tendulkar who is a once in a century kind of batsman. Kapil Dev the all rounder is kind of equivalent of Sachin the batsman.

And your argument of saying if someone is not KD class we shouldn't play that all rounder is like saying if someone is not Sachin class we shouldn't play that batsman.

 

You select the team based on what each player offers and how best you can utilize their strengths. You didn't have a Kapil Dev in 2011, still Yuvraj the all rounder stepped in to win you the WC. Is he Kapil class? Probably not. Was he effective in playing to the plan? Definitely yes. And that's what matters.

 

That said, I hate bits and pieces cricketers who don't have a core strength - the likes of Axar Patel, Stuart Binny, Rishi Dhawan etc. They will neither make it to the team on bowling or batting prowess. These are different from players like Vijay Shankar, Kedar Jadhav who have a primary role that they are accountable for, which is batting. What they offer with the ball is a bonus. But if they fail as batsmen, they should be held accountable and booted out.

 

Hardik Pandya has a clearly defined role in LOIs. He is required to bowl 10 overs and provide lower order hitting. But in Tests, he becomes a bits and pieces play with no accountability. He might score 40 runs and take a wicket but there is no basis to say if that is a good performance. And, there is no clearly defined role that I can critique him for.

I would rather go with a Vijay Shankar like player in Tests where I hold him responsible for batting but he can bowl 10 overs a day to give a break to the main bowlers if required.

 

In essence,

-Kallis/KD type all rounders are a boon

-If you don't have them look for VS/Yuvi type of players that have clear roles defined

-bits and pieces players are a strict no-no except maybe in T20s

 

Sachin was great but India was fortunate to have plenty of batsman who were close enough.

 

As far as Yuvraj was concerned he was a batsman, excellent fielder and a part time spinner. Not an allrounder.

 

KD could walk into any team as a batsman or a bowler, atrait almost impossible to duplicate.

 

Shankar is doing well as a batsman but dont get excited about his bowling because that is an art that requires full time devotion.

[Khota]

8 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

his career eco is 5.60 now find me bowlers whose eco is 3 times lesser then this , n u shud be the last guy talking about eco for when u want umesh in team whose career eco is around 6. For a poor guy like that he still was able to defend 11 runs in last over whereas umesh cudnt defend 14 ....says a lot about ur knowledge .

 

but but umesh is a bowler so what if he leaks more and cant defend more runs u want him to satisfy ur lust for the word specialist. But but u want rayudu who cant bat against pace n bounce.....give tons of runs with poor fielding just for the lust of word specialist ....perfomance can go to hell 

 

even if u dnt wanna bowl him the guy is a bloody good batsman n fielder n can play easily ahead of 

 

 

His 5.6 that you quote is a meaningless number. He was yielding x3 runs and that makes a part time bowler.

[Rightarmfast]

There's a reason why the great Wasim Akram didnt like being tagged as an allrounder. Theres a reason few people talk about Shaun Pollock as an all rounder.

You have to justify your position. Akram, Pollock and the likes were essentially bowlers who could at times hit a few runs. Not that they werent talented as batsmen. But they clearly knew what they were good at.

Whereas players like Heath Streak, Chris Cairns, Lance Kluesener were closer to the definition of an all rounder. These players could open the bowling, and had the quality of bowling against quality batsmen, and knew how to hold a bat.

 

Bowling at 140 is not free ticket to be included in the squad. Saini, Mavi etc are there to do the job much better than a garbage like Pandya. His overall economy of 5.6 is thanks to meaningless matches in India. His average is close to 40. In a total of 45 matches, he has gone wicketless over 16 times! Thats a bloody high percentage of non performance. He has taken just 1 wicket over 15 times! So about 31 ODI's with very minimal bowling performance, how do you classify such a player as a good bowling prospect?

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

5 hours ago, Khota said:

His 5.6 that you quote is a meaningless number. He was yielding x3 runs and that makes a part time bowler.

hows it meaningless as it his international eco, if it doesnt suppourt ur argument its meaningless....wah

on days even bhuvi has given 100 runs in odi.....

reality shankar won us the game and specialist bowler like umesh cudnt with more runs

 

yea u can at he is part time bowler but the guy has shown he is good enough to play as batsman and his bowling is a bonus .....check the history part timer has also won u matches. Its all about how much value u bring to the team

Edited March 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[Khota]

5 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

hows it meaningless as it his international eco, if it doesnt suppourt ur argument its meaningless....wah

on days even bhuvi has given 100 runs in odi.....

reality shankar won us the game and specialist bowler like umesh cudnt with more runs

 

yea u can at he is part time bowler but the guy has shown he is good enough to play as batsman and his bowling is a bonus .....check the history part timer has also won u matches. Its all about how much value u bring to the team

My arguements are solid. Let me ask you a simple question. Next ODI who will be the worst pace bowler for team India? I know the answer but you will beat around the bush.

[Ankit_sharma03]

36 minutes ago, Khota said:

My arguements are solid. Let me ask you a simple question. Next ODI who will be the worst pace bowler for team India? I know the answer but you will beat around the bush.

how dumb are u to not understand despite being told again n again he is batsman who can bowl 

why on earth wud he be the best pacer ....main wud do better.his 1st job is batting . Its like expecting jadhav to be best spinner

 

u wnt say a word about his batting coz that were he has shut ur mouth and thats his job ....he is batsman who can bowl 

read that 100 times coz u aint getting it

 

despite being the worst he did what many specialist fail to do .....still took 2 wkts whereas shami went wkt less

 

ur arguments are logic n fact less .......

 

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[Khota]

14 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

how dumb are u to not understand despite being told again n again he is batsman who can bowl 

why on earth wud he be the best pacer ....main wud do better.his 1st job is batting . Its like expecting jadhav to be best spinner

 

u wnt say a word about his batting coz that were he has shut ur mouth and thats his job ....he is batsman who can bowl 

read that 100 times coz u aint getting it

 

despite being the worst he did what many specialist fail to do .....still took 2 wkts whereas shami went wkt less

 

ur arguments are logic n fact less .......

 

 

How dumb are you that now you are redefining all rounders. You are changing the definition to suit your needs. Shankar brings batting to the table not bowling. He needs to do both to be called all rounder.

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, Khota said:

How dumb are you that now you are redefining all rounders. You are changing the definition to suit your needs. Shankar brings batting to the table not bowling. He needs to do both to be called all rounder.

no shankar brings bowling , please follow him from FC cricket he is batsman who can bowl 

stop watching baseball watch cricket

 

M not redefing anything - what he is he is.....i have written n so have many here tons of times . Ur redefining becoz u cnt comment on his batting now . He has owned a place as a batsman only now