Message Board Archives

congrats lad.

Wicket Keeper Batsmen of good Calibre are rare....

wish you a long career at the highest level.

#ALLROUNDER OF THE TOURNAMENT!

In reply to powen001

so bowling don't count in an allrounders category? Just asking?

In reply to analyst-kid


Wicket-keeping is a specialist position, so you can be the wicketkeeper/batsman and be an allrounder as well.

In reply to analyst-kid
As I said recently you get it right .05% of the time, some of your statements are senseless.
All-rounders are bowlers and wicketkeepers who are also batsman.
Leave cricket to us that follow it, not from knowing names.

In reply to openning

In reply to openning


I does wonder bout dem to tell de truth, I am sure others thinking like him, only he brave enough to ask the question............man nuff uh dese does argue and keep nuff noise bout the cricket but dey ent know nain bout the cricket.......

In reply to analyst-kid

you ok mate?

any way...

Hope would have beaten them to get this award anyway

In reply to cherri

Since when the allrounder of a tournament include batsman/wicketkeeper combination? Kid is right and don't disagree because you just oppose his opinion without facts....Hope should be the PLAYER of the Tournamend and Holder the Allrounder of the tournament if you ask me!

In reply to powen001

Why do you also try to act you height?

In reply to WestDem

Ramdin was dropped for his batting, not his Wicket-keeping, you should know that wicket-keepers for some years now, are consider to be All-rounders.

In reply to WestDem


FUCK YOU..................WHO LET YOU OUT?.........

In reply to openning

Doan mind de &^%^^*((y

In reply to powen001

Shai has really come on. Matter ah fact, bad team strategy is mainly to blame for shai having poor test returns. He wasn't an opener and they made him open. Always said he'll make a good middle order bat. Because of his technique he would obviously struggle with the new ball.

I love his ODI play though, knocking about the spin in the middle good. Windies need players like him and Ambris in the middle. Enough of power hitters to do a specialist job. Hope, Ambris, Mohammed will make a good middle order in ODIs

In reply to cherri

Are you one of the intelligent ones that are in our cricket circles Beckles were referring to in that famous interview? You are so self centered its scary! I will give you another chance to prove you actually gat some sense!

In reply to openning

So based on you and dat IDIOT premise, can we say Gilchrist, McCallum and Sangakara may be the greatest allrounder ever?

In reply to WestDem


FUCK YOU......AGAIN........leff out de smileys cause I ent laughing.....you is a purebred skunt.........go and tell de people that organize the tournament that a wicketkeeper/batsman cayn be the allrounder...............

In reply to WestDem

No, Sir Gary is the greatest of them all, but Gilchrist and others made that position an all-rounder spot.
Check the International teams, and see which wicketkeepers are not batsman
I had this discussion with VOR, with Dujan coining Hamilton as the best Pure wicketkeeper

In reply to cherri

I am really trying hard here and I need your help in trying to be sane...do you really think I support what the organizer organized to have an informed opinion? Try for once to come off you high horse and see the big picture...allrounders were always about batting/bowling....how come none of them are ever mentioned in ICC rankings?

BTW this is your last chance to prove you are not an IDIOT like I think you are!

In reply to openning

Does this mean they are allrounders? You do realize even Bowlers are now better batsmen in general, or you don't care about that?

In reply to WestDem

I am aware Cherrie can look after her self, All-rounder for sometime was as you stated and some may still continue the old way, but no wicketkeeper is going to make an International eleven, if he is not a batsman.
I dont have to wait for the ICC to label a position, I can see it daily, from players selection.
Dhoni and Sanga maybe be retiring, but look at the players that are replacing them, they all can bat, and are expected to be among the top 5-6 batsman on the team.

Benn, Kraigg or Roach are not all-rounders, but Jason, Russell and Bravo are.

Them say my statements are senseless....what they really mean is that patriotism should make you blind.

Reifer, Powell and Holder to me vying for allrounders of the tournament

Reifer 16 wkts @ 19.68 and 189 runs @ 31.50 strike rate 70.26
Powell 10 wkts @ 21.70 and 356 runs @ 44.50 strike rate 114.10
Holder 18 wkts @ 14.55 and 213 runs @ 26.62 strike rate 122.41
Mayers 14 wkts @ 27.35 and 171 runs @ 34.20 strike rate 96.61

straight fight between Powell and Holder...but Holder's heroics with bat and ball today AND IN THE SEMIFINALS puts him over....but barely becuz Powell performed also in the two matches!

In reply to cherri

one of the fus ting dem tell u wen u starting out in cricket... of course, you can tell who don't even know where to put a box...

any 2 skills, done well... set you apart...

u got time...

In reply to SamlordPirate

From Wikipedia

An all-rounder is a cricketer who regularly performs well at both batting and bowling. Although all bowlers must bat and quite a few batsmen do bowl occasionally, most players are skilled in only one of the two disciplines and are considered specialists. Some wicket-keepers have the skills of a specialist batsman and have been referred to as all-rounders, but the term wicketkeeper-batsman is more commonly applied to them, even if they are substitute wicketkeepers who also bowl.

There is no precise qualification for a player to be considered an all-rounder and use of the term tends to be subjective. The generally accepted criterion is that a "genuine all-rounder" is someone whose batting or bowling skills, considered alone, would be good enough to win him a place in the team.[citation needed] Another definition of a "genuine all-rounder" is a player who can through both batting and bowling (though not necessarily both in the same match), consistently "win matches for the team" (i.e., propel his/her team to victory by an outstanding individual performance). By either definition, a genuine all-rounder is quite rare and extremely valuable to a team, effectively operating as two players.

Cricinfo profile for AB de Villiers

I am with WestDem here on this one. I have never heard anyone call a WK an allrounder because he can bat. I have always heard the term wicketkeeper-batsman.

But in powen fashion I can see how both sides right.

In reply to powen001

I know that keeper/batsmen are popularly considered allrounders but are they officially so? If so it would be challenging to do comparative analyses for ranking purposes. Was Clyde Walcott and allrounder? Dujon? How would you rank Dujon against other allrounders of the time. I think Dujon was an exceptional batsman but an average keeper who was fortunate to have a battery of fastbowlers to keep to. His scalps though would imply he was a great keeper.

If some of you here are right that keepers are now officially allrounders,maybe there should nevertheless be a separate category for them. There are hardly any "specialist " keepers around now so maybe they should be assessed on a combination of batting stats and keeping performance that is based on metrics that go beyond wickets taken.

In reply to nick2020

Thanks. Wiki gives the global consensus view.

In reply to analyst-kid

Thats the perils of passing through the Kolij. You goin get cuss now and then cause you been trained to ask why and say why and not just ask what. Stay strong and continue to strive to be an opinion shaper and not just an opinion reporter.

Much ado about nothing. Keepers up until recently weren't listed as allrounders because the term was used in relation to batting and bowling skills.

Clearly keepers didn't bowl. However ever keepers are more and more required to be batsmen and not mere tailenders and specialist keepers.

So to me there's no harm in including those who keep and bat high as allrounders.

In reply to jen

thanks for your observations Jenn

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Thank You FUZZY.

It really is that simple...but some people love to hold on to their guns and moonshine ad nauseum.

oh and in case some of yall still confused...

please note that the # was the ACTUAL name of the AWARD

unless yall think it is fake news and we all heard wrong.

In reply to Logic

Bro...them could talk, laugh and cuss me all them like but an allrounder in cricket is a guy who can bat and bowl with a measured degree of success. An over 25 avg with the bat and a sub 30 ave with the ball denotes an allrounder at List A LEVEL.

It is to me an insult to the hard working efforts of the guys who work so hard at these two disciplines to award a wicketkeeper batsman over them...I am not devaluing Hope's efforts...Hope was tremendous..even super. But he is no superior allrounder to Holder or Powell!

In reply to FuzzyWuzzy

Show me though where keepers are listed as all rounders recently? Certainly not on cricinfo. I will leave the best one for the short man.

In reply to powen001

ICC All-Rounder Rankings

So if AB de Villiers is indeed an allrounder you are telling me that he cannot make the top 10 in any format?

ICC.

Also why is it all the "all-rounders" happen to fit this bowling and batting stereotype? I guess the ICC sticking to their guns and moonshine ad nauseum [sic]?

Some commies like to justify their favs place in teams by trying to influence peoples thought chain.Umtil ICC, Wisden, MmCC change the definition of an Allrounder it is a multipositional fielding player who can both bowl and bat with some significance. Watering it down doesnt do justice to those who exert so much in bowling 20 or more overs, fielding all over the place and then scoring consistently.

A keeper is essentially a one place fielder who is fitted with gloves because he will stop a lot of pass balls. Put gloves on all the slips and you basically get a bunch of keepers

Gilchrist etc only changed the way teams look at justifying a WK contribution vs carrying extra baggage. Gilchrist batting skills were too unique to pass up compared to his iron gloves at the beginning of his career. Others copied.

The term batting keeper is used somewhat but it hasnt really been official either after all these years. Nothing stops a team from using a guy who can only keep but cant hold an end to survive if they are certain about batting 1-6 scoring tons every match. After,Gillispie scored his Ton his skipper told him thats good but you were picked to take wickets; if you did you wont have to bat so long,you not an allrounder

In reply to Scar

And that has not changed as yet. Until then the status quo remains.

BTW WestDem is one of the posters who knows his cricket

In reply to nick2020

De facto vs de jure

In reply to openning

... so this is a recent event. I too call them all-rounders, but would not knock someone if they felt differently.

In reply to nick2020

as always...

your ability to comprehend is challenged because of your love for the superficial.

TAKE YOUR ARGUMENT UP WITH THE REGIONAL BODY WHO NAMED HOPE "ALL ROUNDER OF THE TOURNAMENT"!!

or to quote someone else.

Frankly my dear, I dont give a damn.

In reply to powen001

I am more and more compelled to agree with you on my inability to comprehend but for some reason it is often limited to your posts.

We went from discussing if a wicket keeper who makes runs is considered an all-rounder to you telling me I should air my grievances with the people who did it?

You claimed that wicket keeper batsmen are the new way of doing it and that us dinosaurs are clinging to the old ways. I showed cricinfo and the end all be all body in the ICC.

Well, I tried.

BECUZ THE REGIONAL AUTHORITIES DO SOMETHING DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEANS IT IS RIGHT BY INTERNATIONAL CRICKETING STANDARDS.


....but it is over...I will let it rest.

In reply to analyst-kid

Powen had nothing so he resorted to that.

Don't worry you have been exonerated.

In reply to nick2020

someone is trying hard to americize cricket.

A Player who made runs consistent and take catches as well as save runs in the field is an allrounder

In reply to nick2020

youre trying too hard.

The announcer stated exactly as I posted and you trying to pick another non sensical argument with me....

sorry...go play in another sand box with kitty litter in it.

while you are at it...ask them why they changed the name from Batsman/men to Batters too cause surely that is Powens fault again.

In reply to cherri

Oh shyte now!! Looka muh crosses!!

In reply to powen001

Not going to comment on the fact that none of the WK batsmen are in the top 20 in any format in ICC rankings huh? I guess that is a nonsense statement.

Powen boy you ain't easy.

In reply to TheTrail

In reply to nick2020

Has any wicketkeeper ever won the all-round player of any series, for runs scored, stumping and catches?