This article is a completely different graphical look at the Test all-rounders and is a continuation of the similar articles related to ODI.

Just to recap, Bruce Henderson of BCG (Boston Consulting Group) had created these charts during 1968 to study the Growth-Share aspects of products/business units. This is an excellent way to study two related variables together. These are plotted on a graph which is split into four equal (or unequal) size quadrants. The placement of a particular player, gives excellent insight into the player's position in the galaxy of all-rounders. However please do not forget that this is clearly a two-dimensional graph between two related variables. Also these are all career figures.

I elected to do an analysis of all-rounders, to start with, for Tests since that offers the clearest two-dimensional look. The all-rounder, based on a traditional definition, is clearly a two-dimensional player, Batting and Bowling. We can derive a lot of insight into the position of all-rounders and their relative strengths by doing the BCG charts.

As usual the real test starts in the selection criteria. Unlike the ODI bowlers and batsmen where a straightforward runs/wkts cut-off was used. Here the situation is too complex for a simple cut-off. We have multiple tasks in front of us. We have to have a reasonable number of players, not too many nor too few. The all-rounder standard should not be diluted. After a lot of trial and error efforts, I have decided on the following criteria.

1. All players who have scored 2000 runs or more and captured 100 wkts or more will be automatically included. This gets 23 players in.

2. Out of the remaining, players who have scored 1500 runs or more and captured 75 wkts or more will be included if their Batting average is better than their Bowling average. The later condition ensures that very average all-rounders like Emburey, Prabhakar, Streak et al are excluded. This gets 9 players in. Some of the players who get in are Faulkner, Armstrong, Mushtaq Mohd et al.

3. Now to take away the bowlers who can bat, players who have scored below 25 runs per test will be removed. This means two players, Warne (21.9 rpt) and Kumble (19.0 rpt) go out. Very fair since these two are not really all-rounders.

4. Also to take away the occasional bowlers who are primarily batsmen, all players who captured below one wicket per test will go out. This is fair since this is an analysis of all-rounders. So Hammond (0.98 wpt), Jayasuriya (0.87 wpt) and Steve Waugh (0.55 wpt) go out. I have been quite hard-nosed about this definition and have not been influenced by the very loose definition of all-rounders. Even though Steve Waugh has been called an all-rounder, there is no way he can be classified as one in view of the fact that he has captured one wicket in two tests.

That leaves 27 all-rounders for analysis.

Now we go to the analysis. This time I will do two different BCG analyses. The first will be based on two qualitative measures, the Bowling average and Batting average. The second will be based on two quantitative measures, Wickets per test and Runs per test. The advantage with this method is that it is not longevity based and gives equal chances to players whether they scored 11126 runs or 1968 runs or captured 431 wickets or 75 wickets.

I have not made any adjustment for the period or home country. My very loose conclusion is that such adjustments are not needed in an all-rounder analysis. If a player played during a batting-centric period, he would have the opportunity to have better batting figures which should compensate for the expected lower bowling figures. If a player played during a bowling-centric period, he would have the opportunity to have poorer batting figures which should be compensated by the expected better bowling figures. Similarly if he played on batting-friendly pitches, his better batting figures should compensate for the lesser bowling figures and vice versa on bowler-friendly pitches.

The above represents a typical BCG chart. The players in the top-right quadrant, the red one, are the "Top all-rounders". They are to the right of the Batting average line and above the Bowling average line. The ones in the bottom right quadrant, the green one, are the "Batting centric all-rounders". They bat very well but can at best function as fourth/fifth bowler for the team. Similarly, the top left quadrant, the blue one, contains the "Bowling centric all-rounders". They are normally the leading bowlers for their teams but bat at 7/8. The bottom left quadrant, the black one, represents the "Average all-rounders". They play the supporting roles in both batting and bowling.

Now let us view the graphs. I experimented a lot with the sloping dividing lines, as suggested by Sriraman, but could not work out a clear formula. The basis for a proper slope could not be worked out. Hence I have stuck to the dividing lines parallel to the axes. However I have made two significant changes, as suggested by Murali. The lines are drawn now at the centre but the scaling on either side of the lines is different. This makes for very good viewing despite the lopsided data. Sobers and Kallis cause this lopsidedness on the batting front with their extraordinarily high batting averages. On the other side, Shastri and Hooper cause this lopsidedness with their 40+ bowling averages. The numbers are shown along with the player names. I have also shaded the quadrants with the appropriate colour.

First the qualitative one, based on averages. I have also made my comments on the positioning of players without drawing any conclusions.

Imran Khan and Miller are the leading all-rounders in this analysis. Aubrey Faulkner's presence would please the followers of Test cricket across the ages. The under-rated Trevor Goddard of South Africa is a surprise, but well-deserved, presence in this top quadrant. Botham is comfortably in this top group.

The batting centric group of all-rounders is led by the incomparable Sobers and Kallis, both with 55+ batting averages. There is another clutch of four all-rounders led by Greig, Brian McMillan (a surprise entrant - he just about makes it) and two greats of the 1910-20s, Armstrong and Woolley. Cairns just about misses the top quadrant. Two very average all-rounders, with awful bowling averages, Hooper and Shastri just about make it to this quadrant.

The bowling centric is a well-populated quadrant. This group is led by Pollock and has two greats of yonder, Noble and Rhodes. then we have Hadlee, Benaud and Wasim Akram.

The last group has Flintoff, Mankad and Vettori as clear residents. Vaas also belongs here. Bailey and Kapil Dev are on the borderline.

No Player            Runs   Avge  Wkts   Avge  ARIdx1

 1.Kallis J.H       11126  55.08   266  31.59   1.744
 2.Sobers G.St.A     8032  57.78   235  34.04   1.698
 3.Imran Khan        3807  37.69   362  22.81   1.652
 4.Miller K.R        2958  36.97   170  22.98   1.609
 5.Faulkner G.A      1754  40.79    82  26.59   1.534
 6.Pollock S.M       3781  32.32   421  23.12   1.398
 7.Mushtaq Mohammad  3643  39.17    79  29.23   1.340
 8.Goddard T.L       2516  34.47   123  26.23   1.314
 9.Greig A.W         3599  40.44   141  32.21   1.256
10.Hadlee R.J        3124  27.17   431  22.30   1.218
11.Noble M.A         1997  30.26   121  25.00   1.210
12.Botham I.T        5200  33.55   383  28.40   1.181
13.McMillan B.M      1968  39.36    75  33.83   1.164
14.Armstrong W.W     2863  38.69    87  33.60   1.152
15.Cairns C.L        3320  33.54   218  29.40   1.141
16.Rhodes W          2325  30.19   127  26.97   1.120
17.Woolley F.E       3283  36.08    83  33.92   1.064
18.Kapil Dev N       5248  31.05   434  29.65   1.047
19.Bailey T.E        2290  29.74   132  29.21   1.018
20.Mankad M.H        2109  31.48   162  32.32   0.974
21.Flintoff A        3845  31.78   226  32.79   0.969
22.Wasim Akram       2898  22.64   414  23.62   0.959
23.Vettori D.L       3962  30.71   325  33.87   0.907
24.Benaud R          2201  24.46   248  27.03   0.905
25.Shastri R.J       3830  35.79   151  40.96   0.874
26.Vaas WPUJC        3087  24.31   355  29.58   0.822
27.Hooper C.L        5762  36.47   114  49.43   0.738

I have presented the table above. The only additional field is the ARIdx1 value which is the Batting average / Bowling average. This is a far better measure than Batting average - Bowling average. An example will explain this. 50 and 30 would give an index value of 1.67 and a difference of 20. 40 and 20 would give an index value of 2.00 and the same difference of 20. It is clear that 40 and 20 is much better than 50 and 30. The difference of 10 in bowling is far more important.

Now let us view the second graph, which is quantitative one, based on per test values. I have again made my comments on the positioning of players without drawing any conclusions.

Faulkner is comfortably placed in the top group. Botham and Miller are in this top group. Cairns is a surprise resident of this quadrant and this is a reminder to the New Zealanders that there were two top quality all-rounders there.

The batting centric group of all-rounders is led by Sobers and Kallis. Their wickets per test value is quite low, either side of 2.0, to let them move to the top quadrant.

The bowling centric is again a well-populated quadrant. This group is led by Hadlee and Imran Khan. Mankad moves up into this quadrant.

The last group is led by Bailey and Rhodes.

No Player            Runs   RpT  Wkts   WpT  ARIdx2

 1.Sobers G.St.A     8032  86.4   235  2.53   136.9
 2.Hadlee R.J        3124  36.3   431  5.01   136.6
 3.Faulkner G.A      1754  70.2    82  3.28   135.8
 4.Botham I.T        5200  51.0   383  3.75   126.1
 5.Imran Khan        3807  43.3   362  4.11   125.5
 6.Cairns C.L        3320  53.5   218  3.52   123.9
 7.Mankad M.H        2109  47.9   162  3.68   121.6
 8.Goddard T.L       2516  61.4   123  3.00   121.4
 9.Kallis J.H       11126  79.5   266  1.90   117.5
10.Miller K.R        2958  53.8   170  3.09   115.6
11.Benaud R          2201  34.9   248  3.94   113.7
12.Pollock S.M       3781  35.0   421  3.90   113.0
13.Greig A.W         3599  62.1   141  2.43   110.7
14.Wasim Akram       2898  27.9   414  3.98   107.5
15.Kapil Dev N       5248  40.1   434  3.31   106.3
16.Flintoff A        3845  48.7   226  2.86   105.9
17.Noble M.A         1997  47.5   121  2.88   105.2
18.Vettori D.L       3962  39.6   325  3.25   104.6
19.Armstrong W.W     2863  57.3    87  1.74    92.1
20.Vaas WPUJC        3087  27.8   355  3.20    91.8
21.Mushtaq Mohammad  3643  63.9    79  1.39    91.6
22.McMillan B.M      1968  51.8    75  1.97    91.3
23.Shastri R.J       3830  47.9   151  1.89    85.6
24.Rhodes W          2325  40.1   127  2.19    83.9
25.Bailey T.E        2290  37.5   132  2.16    80.8
26.Hooper C.L        5762  56.5   114  1.12    78.8
27.Woolley F.E       3283  51.3    83  1.30    77.2

The second table is presented here. The ARIdx2 value is simply RpT + WpT x 20. The 20 has been derived based on these all-rounder figures rather than the all-tests figures.

We can take a batting average of over-40 and a bowling average of below-20 to be a Bradmanesque all-rounder. No one exists like this. Even if we change to 40-plus and below-22 we have no one. Looking at the two charts, we can conclude that Miller, Faulkner and Imran Khan are right there in the leading group. It is of interest that Faulkner played for a weak team and Miller for a strong team. Pollock and Botham also belong there. The summary figures for the four top all-rounders are presented below. It will be difficult to question the credentials of any of the five. Only Botham is slightly out of place in this group. Even then his bowling average is better than the best Indian bowler ever, Bedi at 28.71.

Player            Runs@Avge   Wkts@Avge  Idx1    RpT  WpT   Idx2

Faulkner G.A      1754@40.79   82@26.59  1.534  70.2 3.28  135.8
Miller K.R        2958@36.97  170@22.98  1.609  53.8 3.09  115.6
Imran Khan        3807@37.69  362@22.81  1.652  43.3 4.11  125.5
Pollock S.M       3781@32.32  421@23.12  1.398  35.0 3.90  113.0
Botham I.T        5200@33.55  383@28.40  1.181  51.0 3.75  126.1

Kapil Dev (31.05 and 29.65) does not belong to this group. Also if his bowling figures are adjusted because of bowling in the sub-continent, then his batting figures will get adjusted the other way. Similarly Hadlee (27.17 and 22.30) has too low a batting average. The bowling averages of Sobers and Kallis are quite high (31.59 and 34.04).

Finally let me conclude with a request to send in constructive comments which add value to the article. Bouquets or brickbats, it does not matter. If this article makes a young cricket follower look up GA Faulkner and Keith Miller in the records and marvel at their achievements, I would have achieved something.

My next article is a fascinating one analyzing Test Series. The Test Series, with their myiad variations as compared to the single tests provides scope for some interesting insights.

An important announcement to the readers. I have created an open mailid to which the comments and suggestions, not meant for publication, can be submitted. The mail id is ananth.itfigures@gmail.com. Since the readers would have to use a mail route I give the readers my assurance that the mail id is safe and will never be used by me for anything other than communicating with the reader specifically. This will not be part of any group mail nor will mails be cc'd.

	Ian Botham: as close as you can get to the most balanced allrounder © Getty Images

The beauty of cricket lies in the variety of different roles players can assume when they play the game. I contend there exists a continuum, with specialist bowlers at one end, specialist batsmen at the other, and a range of different types of allrounder in between. The terms “bowling allrounder” and “batting allrounder” are often used in reference to particular players, and it follows that in between these two categories, there must be a group of players whose allround capabilities are perfectly balanced; that is, they bat equally well as they bowl.

If my continuum does exist, then it should be possible to quantify each player’s position along this line, and to determine who the “perfectly balanced” allrounders have been in the game’s history.

Concerning myself with just Test cricket, I started with two extremes: the “purest” batsman was surely Brian Lara, who scored 11,953 runs in 131 Tests, but failed to take a wicket, the only scorer of 10,000 runs to do so. At the other end of the scale, we have South Africa’s Mfuneko Ngam, who was only trusted with the bat once in his three Tests, scoring 0 not out, but was good enough as a bowler to take 11 wickets.

Of the 2551 Test players at the time of writing, 1085 failed either to score a run or take a wicket, and these may be regarded as our specialist players (either batsmen or bowlers), leaving 1467 players who can theoretically be regarded to some degree as allrounders. Readers may not be convinced of the allround credentials of Rahul Dravid, who has one wicket to go along with his 10,823 runs, and so we need to weed out these genuine batting specialists who by some freakish circumstance, have ended up with a small number of wickets.

Similarly, at the other end, we cannot seriously regard the likes of England’s Bill Bowes (68 wickets) as a bowling allrounder, even though he scored 28 runs in 15 Tests, so from that end, we also need to establish a point beyond which a player can be regarded as a bowling specialist only, even though he may have scored the odd run here and there.

It will probably be obvious by now that the simplest (and perhaps most effective) way of establishing our continuum is to divide the number of runs a player has scored by the wickets he has taken. Using our two extremes, Dravid comes out with an allround index of 10823, while Bowes’ is 0.41. The index for true allrounders, of course, lies within a much a narrower range, and with absolutely no theoretical basis for my conclusion, other than matching the results with my observations of players over many years, it seems that the figure of 14 is the point of equilibrium, where a player’s batting is perfectly balanced with his bowling.

In fact no-one with 20 Tests under their belt has an index of exactly 14, but some come near. Of the megastars in the game’s history, Ian Botham (13.58) comes the closest, while Jack Gregory (13.48), Ray Illingworth (15.05) and Chris Cairns (15.23) also seem to be extraordinarily balanced in their contributions with both bat and ball, the latter two obviously having a slight bias in favour of their batting. The closest with a 20-Test minimum is the little remembered nineteeth-century allrounder from England, William Barnes (14.22). The following table lists those whose indices lie in between 13 and 15:

Index	player	        M	runs	wkts
13.02	Mankad, MH	44	2109	162
13.12	Boje, 	N	43	1312	100
13.39	Hirst, GH	24	790	59
13.48	Gregory, JM	24	1146	85
13.58	Botham, IT	102	5200	383
14.22	Barnes, W	21	725	51
14.37	Nasim-ul-Ghani	29	747	52
14.41	Ratnayeke, JR	22	807	56
14.68	Madan Lal, S	39	1042	71

How far can we deviate from this balanced centre before we can no longer call the player an allrounder? At the bowling end, the figure appears to be around 7. Wasim Akram comes in on exactly that figure, while Dominic Cork (6.60) and Ray Lindwall (6.59) just had too much fire-power with the ball compared to their output as batsmen to be considered genuine allrounders. Alan Davidson (7.14) and Richard Hadlee (7.46) are rightly included, as is the rapidly-improving Mitchell Johnson (7.38).

Index	player	         M	runs	wkts
6.53	Wickramasinghe	40	555	85
6.59	Lindwall, RR	61	1502	228
6.60	Cork, DG	37	864	131
6.67	DeFreitas, PAJ	44	934	140
6.80	Schwarz, RO	20	374	55
6.91	Briggs, J	33	815	118
7.00	Wasim Akram	104	2898	414
7.00	Edmonds, PH	51	875	125
7.14	Cairns, BL	43	928	130
7.14	Davidson, AK	44	1328	186
7.25	Hadlee, RJ	86	3124	431
7.38	Johnson, MG	21	694	94
7.46	Hadlee, DR	26	530	71

At the other end, we probably need to wander much further from our centre to capture all those who we might consider batting allrounders. Extending the index from 14 to 100 allows the inclusion of Jeremy Coney (98.81), but excludes Doug Walters (109.33), which might be considered fair enough. Wally Hammond (87.34), Scott Styris (86.37) and Chris Gayle (77.49) are also included.

Index	player	         M	runs	wkts
71.15	Jayasuriya, ST	110	6973	98
74.94	Hathurusingha 	26	1274	17
75.47	Shoaib Malik	23	1132	15
76.33	McCabe, SJ	39	2748	36
77.49	Gayle, CH	82	5502	71
79.30	Styris, SB	29	1586	20
82.00	Ryder, J	20	1394	17
86.37	Cronje, WJ	68	3714	43
87.34	Hammond, WR	85	7249	83
92.20	Astle, NJ	81	4702	51
98.81	Coney, JV	52	2668	27
102.17	Wyatt, RES	40	1839	18
103.74	Umrigar, PR	59	3631	35
109.33	Walters, KD	74	5357	49
109.60	Hazare, VS	30	2192	20

Finally, there happen to be exactly 50 players whose indices fall in between 10 and 20 – these are the players who I consider to be closest to being perfectly balanced in their allround contributions.

Index	player	        M	runs	wkts
10.52	Imran Khan	88	3807	362
10.59	Mohd Rafique	33	1059	100
10.67	Tapash Baisya	21	384	36
10.95	Boyce, KD	21	657	60
10.99	Vettori, DL	92	3220	293
11.05	Pathan, IK	29	1105	100
11.60	Knight, BR	29	812	70
11.63	Harper, RA	25	535	46
11.63	MacGibbon, AR	26	814	70
11.65	Emburey, JE	64	1713	147
11.88	Lewis, CC	32	1105	93
11.94	Intikhab Alam	47	1493	125
11.99	Strang, PA	24	839	70
12.02	Giffen, G	31	1238	103
12.09	Kapil Dev, N	131	5248	434
12.15	O'Keeffe, KJ	24	644	53
12.58	Dharmasena 	31	868	69
13.02	Mankad, MH	44	2109	162
13.12	Boje, 	N	43	1312	100
13.39	Hirst, GH	24	790	59
13.48	Gregory, JM	24	1146	85
13.58	Botham, IT	102	5200	383
14.22	Barnes, W	21	725	51
14.37	Nasim-ul-Ghani	29	747	52
14.41	Ratnayeke, JR	22	807	56
14.68	Madan Lal, S	39	1042	71
15.05	Illingworth, R	61	1836	122
15.06	Holford, DAJ	24	768	51
15.23	Cairns, CL	62	3320	218
16.00	Patel, DN	37	1200	75
16.03	Durani, SA	29	1202	75
16.07	Nadkarni, RG	41	1414	88
16.31	Brown, FR	22	734	45
16.50	Noble, MA	42	1997	121
16.67	Prabhakar, M	39	1600	96
16.72	Flintoff, A	75	3645	218
16.89	Hall, AJ	21	760	45
16.97	Sinclair, JH	25	1069	63
17.32	Julien, BD	24	866	50
17.35	Bailey, TE	61	2290	132
17.40	Miller, KR	55	2958	170
17.66	Binny, RMH	27	830	47
17.83	White, C	30	1052	59
18.31	Rhodes, W	58	2325	127
18.98	Ulyett, G	25	949	50
19.46	Abdul Razzaq	46	1946	100
19.51	Amarnath, L	24	878	45
19.58	Hopkins, AJY	20	509	26
19.62	Atkinson, DStE	22	922	47
19.82	Phadkar, DG	31	1229	62

So there we have it: a classification of players into five groups, Bowlers (Indices 0 to 7), Bowling Allrounders (7 to 10), Balanced Allrounders (10 to 20), Batting Allrounders (20 to 100) and Batsmen (above 100). These boundaries are purely subjective, and will no doubt promote some comment – but don’t forget, this is NOT an analysis of who the BEST allrounders are!

Click here for the full list.

The main article received a high number of quality responses. A number of useful suggestions were provided and the exchanges were conducted without the acrimony that had been the feature of earlier exchanges. I thank the readers for this trend and hope that this will be continued in future.

The final table has been slightly modified based on tweaks in the Performance parameter as suggested by Hamish and Kartik. Details at the end.

I had mentioned that I would do an in-depth article on selected all-rounders incorporating more measures, as suggested by readers. Some of the relevant points mentioned by readers are summarised below.

1. Take care of an all-rounder being the first/second bowler (e-g., Imran/Hadlee) vs fourth/fifth bowler (e-g., Sobers/Kallis).
2. Take care of quality of wickets captured.
3. Take care of quality of bowling faced by the all-rounder in batting.
4. Equalise Batting and Bowling to a greater extent.
5. Take into account Bowling strike rates.
6. Reduce the weight for longevity measures.
7. Take into account Fielding data.
8. Take into account Captaincy data.

I have considered all these requests and incorporated whatever is possible and quantifiable. The response to these points are given below in the same order.

1. This has been taken care of in a round-about manner. I have determined the % of Balls bowled by the bowler to the Balls bowled by the team. This will clearly give an idea of the bowling importance of the bowler. In addition the % of wickets captured by the bowler to that captured by the team is also deternined to do a more informed determination of the bowler status.
2. Has been done by assigning the dismissed batsman's batting average to each wicket captured by the player. Capturing the wicket of Tendulkar will add 54.23 to the kitty while dismissing Zaheer Khan will add only 11.77 to the sum. Fair enough.
3. Has been done by assigning an opposite team's actual weighted bowling strength, based on balls bowled and bowling average, to each run scored by the player. Take three centuries scored by Kallis. The 115 against Zimbabwe will be weighted with a value of 46.47, the 105 against Pakistan will be weighted with a value of 35.40 and the 139 against Bangladesh will be weighted with 59.98. Cannot do more.
4. Has been done in different ways.
5. Has been done. The longevity weightings have been halved.
6. Not done since the Bowling Strike rate is a constituent part of the Bowling Average. I am aware that separating the Bowling Accuracy and Bowling Strike Rate and doing a differential weighting of the two measures will change the dynamics of the calculations. However I see no reason for doing the same separately since the Bowling Average is a universally accepted figure encompassing both. If Sobers has higher bowling strike rate, he makes up for it partly with his accuracy and this is already reflected in his relatively high Bowling Average. Doing the Strike Rate in addition will penalize players doubly.
7. Not done since an all-rounder analysis should take only Batting and Bowling. Fielding does not become part of a player's all-round abilities. If a fielder fields at first slip, he would get a number of catches. If he fields at long-on, he will get very few catches.
8. Not done because a player's captaincy ability does not add to his all-round abilities. It is an opportunity given to him which he does very well (as Imran did) or poorly (as Botham did). However what about Hadlee who never captained New Zealand. It was not because he did not have captaincy skills, rather it was because NZ board did not want to overload him. He cannot be penalised for this. Similar situation exists with Kallis/Miller et al.

The criteria for selecting the elite group of all-rounders is the following.

• 2500+ runs.
• 25.00+ Batting average.
• 100+ wickets.
• Bowling average less than 40.

13 players qualify. Out of these, Vettori is excluded since, surprisingly, his bowling average is higher than his batting average and that is not the sign of a world class all-rounder. Hadlee also has a sub-30 batting average but he makes up with an outstanding bowling average. The following 12 all-rounders qualify.

No Player          Runs   Avge    Wkts   Avge

 1.Sobers G.St.A   8032  57.78     235  34.04
 2.Kallis J.H      9761  55.46     240  31.23
 3.Imran Khan      3807  37.69     362  22.81
 4.Miller K.R      2958  36.97     170  22.98
 5.Botham I.T      5200  33.55     383  28.40
 6.Pollock S.M     3781  32.32     421  23.12
 7.Hadlee R.J      3124  27.17     431  22.30
 8.Kapil Dev N     5248  31.05     434  29.65
 9.Cairns C.L      3320  33.54     218  29.40
10.Flintoff A      3494  32.35     206  32.21
11.Goddard T.L     2516  34.47     123  26.23
12.Greig A.W       3599  40.44     141  32.21

All these players have the figures to qualify as all-rounders. They could all bat at no.7 and above and would feature in all their teams as one of the top 5 bowlers.

However since this list is primarily a post-WW2 list, a separate analysis is done for all the all-rounders who have played their games before 1948. This list is shown at the end.

The following parameters have been used with the weightings allotted.

1. BAT - Runs Scored (7.5 points):

The weighting has been reduced by 50% to 7.5 points. One point per 1500 runs and limited to 7.5 points.

2. BAT - Batting Average (10 points):

The range is from Sobers (57.78) to Hadlee (27.17). The point allocation ranges from 0.0 for Batting Average of 25.00 to 10.00 for Batting Average of 60.00.

3. BAT - Bowling Quality faced (10 points):

The range is from Botham (34.38), a surprise indeed, to Miller (43.63), indicating the average quality of bowlers during 40s-50s. Botham's number puts paid to the wrong presumption that he was a flat-track-bully and did not do well against good quality bowling.

The point allocation ranges from 0.0 for Bowling quality value of 50.00 to 10.00 for Bowling quality value of 30.0.

4. BAT - % of Team Runs scored (5 points):

The range is from Sobers (15.78%) to Pollock (7.68%), both understandable. The point allocation ranges from 0.0 for TRS % of 0.00 to 5.00 for TRS % of 16.0.

5. BOW - Wickets captured (7.5 points):

The weighting has been reduced by 50% to 7.5 points. One point per 60 wickets and limited to 7.5 points.

6. BOW - Bowling Average (10 points):

The range is from Hadlee (22.30) to, not surprisingly, Sobers (34.04). To a great extent Sobers has made up his poor strike rate with his accuracy. The point allocation ranges from 0.0 for Bowling Average of 40.00 to 10.00 for Bowling Average of 20.00.

7. BOW - Wickets Quality (5 points):

I have always felt that Flintoff consistently captiured top order wickets. This is more than borne by these numbers. The range is from Flintoff (34.85) to Cairns (29.29). Incidentally 84 of Flintoff's 206 wickets (over 40%) are of batsmen with Batting Averages exceeding 40.0.

The point allocation is from 0.0 for Wkt quality of 25.0 to 5.0 for Wkt quality of 35.0.

8. BOW - % of Team Balls (5 points):

As stated already this is a clear indication of the player's importance to the bowling attack. Kallis is clearly the lowest with a % of Team Balls bowled value of 15.22, less than a sixth, indicating that he was, at best, South Africa's fifth bowler. On the other hand, Imran Khan bowled 27.27% of his team balls making him to be the top bowler.

The range is from 0.0 for Team Balls % of 10.0 to 5.0 for Team Balls % of 30.0.

9. BOW - % of Team Wickets (5 points):

This is another indicator of the all-rounder's place in the bowling attack. The previous one indicates the effort put in. This indicates the results. Kallis is clearly the lowest with a % of Team wickets captured value of 16.59, again less than a sixth, indicating that he was, at best, South Africa's fifth bowler. On the other hand, Imran Khan has captured 37.07% of his team wickets making him to be the top bowler. It should be noted that the team wickets are accumulated only in matches where the all-rounder bowled. This is to take care of the 7 matches in which Imran played as a pure batsmen.

The range is from 0.0 for Team wickets % of 10.0 to 5.0 for Team wickets % of 40.0.

10. ARF - All Round performances in Tests (10 points):

This is a great measure of the individual match performances. I have changed the criteria to 100+ runs & 4+ wickets for P1 performances and 75+ runs & 3+ wickets for P2 performances. These are AND conditions and not OR conditions. Since completing the previous article I have realised that this is a true measure of the all-rounder's contributions in individual Test matches since he contributes heavily to the team performance by excelling in both batting and bowling.

0.5 points are alloted for each P1 performance and 0.25 points for each P2 performance.

Sobers is the undisputed leader in this category. His performances are listed below. This table will outline his greatness. In 93 Tests he has excelled with P1 level all-round performances in 11. He has done P1/P2 level performances in 24 Tests (more than 25%).

Sobers G.St.A 
P1 1960 0490 Eng Win (3+1) 4 wkts & 145 runs (145+  0)
P1 1960 0491 Eng Win (3+2) 5 wkts & 141 runs ( 92+ 49)
P1 1962 0526 Ind Win (4+1) 5 wkts & 153 runs (153+  0)
P1 1962 0529 Win Ind (0+5) 5 wkts & 154 runs (104+ 50)
P1 1966 0608 Win Eng (5+3) 8 wkts & 174 runs (174+  0)
P1 1966 0610 Ind Win (3+2) 5 wkts & 103 runs ( 50+ 53)
P1 1968 0629 Eng Win (1+3) 4 wkts & 113 runs (  0+113)
P1 1968 0636 Win Eng (3+3) 6 wkts & 247 runs (152+ 95)
P1 1969 0646 Aus Win (2+3) 5 wkts & 126 runs ( 13+113)
P1 1971 0685 Win Ind (2+2) 4 wkts & 187 runs (178+  9)
P1 1972 0695 Win Nzl (4+0) 4 wkts & 177 runs ( 35+142)

P2 1958 0448 Win Pak (1+2) 3 wkts & 132 runs ( 52+ 80)
P2 1961 0506 Win Aus (5+0) 5 wkts &  85 runs ( 64+ 21)
P2 1963 0546 Win Eng (0+3) 3 wkts & 154 runs (102+ 52)
P2 1965 0584 Win Aus (3+0) 3 wkts &  93 runs ( 69+ 24)
P2 1965 0588 Win Aus (2+2) 4 wkts &  87 runs ( 45+ 42)
P2 1966 0605 Win Eng (0+3) 3 wkts & 161 runs (161+  0)
P2 1966 0607 Win Eng (4+1) 5 wkts &  97 runs (  3+ 94)
P2 1966 0609 Win Eng (3+0) 3 wkts &  81 runs ( 81+  0)
P2 1968 0643 Win Aus (4+0) 4 wkts &  86 runs ( 19+ 67)
P2 1969 0654 Win Eng (2+1) 3 wkts &  79 runs ( 29+ 50)
P2 1971 0684 Win Ind (3+0) 3 wkts & 112 runs (  4+108)
P2 1971 0686 Ind Win (1+2) 3 wkts & 132 runs (132+  0)
P2 1973 0726 Win Eng (3+0) 3 wkts &  95 runs ( 21+ 74)

To view all players' performances click here.

11. ARF - Average Runs scored / Wickets captured per Test (5 points):

This rounds off the individual Test all-round performances. I total the Runs and 25 times the Wickets and divide the sum by the number of Tests played. This is a clear parameter of consistency and all-round delivery. This is slightly biased in favour of the bowling since an average of 100 runs per Test has been achieved only by one batsman while 4 wickets per Test by 48 bowlers.

The range is from Hadlee (161.6) to Greig (122.8).

The point allocation is from 0.0 for ARF value of 100 to 5.0 for ARF value of 160.0 and above.

Based on these calculations the top all-rounder list is given below.

No Player           Bat     Bow     A/R    Total

 1.Sobers G.St.A   26.47   14.64   12.74   53.86
 2.Botham I.T      17.32   20.91    9.12   47.34
 3.Imran Khan      15.11   25.90    5.72   46.73
 4.Hadlee R.J      12.54   26.85    7.22   46.61
 5.Kallis J.H      25.28   13.97    7.27   46.52
 6.Pollock S.M     13.57   24.39    4.62   42.58
 7.Cairns C.L      15.52   16.36    7.84   39.73
 8.Kapil Dev N     13.80   21.12    4.10   39.01
 9.Miller K.R      12.07   19.28    6.00   37.35
10.Goddard T.L     14.65   17.30    4.68   36.64
11.Flintoff A      14.52   16.86    4.89   36.27
12.Greig A.W       18.69   12.40    5.09   36.17

As expected Sobers is comfortably on top, this time with a cushion of nearly 14%. He is the undisputed leader in Batting and All-round performances and has acceptable Bowling values. What has really tilted the table in his favour is his consistent delivery of all-round performances. No one else has matched him.

Botham comes next and is just ahead of Imran Khan. He has acceptable fogures in all three areas and this has helped him move to the second place.

Then three greats occupy the next three positions and these are closely bunched. This trio is led by Imran Khan and followed by Hadlee and Kallis. They are separated by fractions of a point and should really considered as a group. Imran Khan and Hadlee excel in Bowling and have reasonable Batting figures. Kallis has an excellent batting figure and just about reaches the Bowling mark.

My suggestion to the readers is not to split hairs among these three. A slight change in parameters will move them up or down. I would say that let us take Imran as the first among these three equals. For that matter I would suggest that we take Botham as the first among the four equals since the four all-rounders are within a single % point of each other.

Then come Pollock, Cairns and Kapil Dev. Those who query Cairns' higher position than Kapil must understand that Cairns has better Batting and Bowling average figures than Kapil Dev. If people refer to Kapil's taking wickets on the Indian soil, one can point out Cairns' scoring runs on those difficult New Zealand pitches. Cairns is again an under-rated all-rounder.

Sobers is the best batsmen, followed by Kallis. Hadlee is the best bowler, closely follwed by Imran Khan. Sobers is the comfortable leader in the Test match performance area, followed by Botham.

To view the parameter values and the calculated Index values for these 12 all-rounders click here.

A look at the pre-World War all-rounders:

Using Hammond's last Test during 1948 as a cut-off, I have selected all-rounders of the pre-WW2 era, lowering the cut-off to 1000 runs and 50 wickets. The calculations have also been slightly adjusted to provide for the lower cut-off levels, lower batting averages and lower bowling averages. The table is given below.

No Player         Runs   Avge  Wkts   Avge  Index

1. Faulkner G.A   1754  40.79    82  26.59  38.99
2. Tate M.W       1198  25.49   155  26.16  34.31
3. Gregory J.M    1146  36.97    85  31.15  32.47
4. Hammond W.R    7249  58.46    83  37.81  30.15
5. Noble M.A      1997  30.26   121  25.00  29.30
6. Armstrong W.W  2863  38.69    87  33.60  26.16
7. Rhodes W       2325  30.19   127  26.97  26.02
8. Kelleway C     1422  37.42    52  32.37  23.68
9. Woolley F.E    3283  36.08    83  33.92  22.71

Faulkner, the great South African all-rounder is the leader. He is the one all-rounder who would have clearly walked into the all-time all-rounder table. Incidentally Faulkner gets an unadjusted valuation of around 34.5 points. The two Australian all-rounders, Alan Davidson and Richie Benaud are missing from the two tables. They were two genuine all-rounders who would have graced any era.

Final tweak on performance parameter:

This is a slightly revised final Table based on two very valid suggestions made by Hamish and Kartik re performances.

Hamish has suggested that since there is a clear skew, in favour of the batsmen, in fixing the P1 and P2 criteria as 100r/4w and 75r/3w, it should be changed to either P1=100r/5w... or P1=75r/4w. This is a valid suggestion, based on sound statistical analysis and the P1-P2 limits have been changed to 80runs/4wkts and 60runs/3wkts respectively. The point allocation has been changed to 0.5 and 0.3 to reflect the narrowing of gap between P1 and P2.

Kartik has made a valid suggetion to penalize the very poor performances. This makes sense since virtual non-contribution has to be recognized as we do the above-average contributions. I have taken a cut-off of 40 runs (equivalent to 1w/20r) as the point below which a test is deemed to be a failure for an all-rounder. Suitable adjustment has been made for treating tests like the one Imran played as a batsman. Equivalent runs are taken to compensate for wickets. The penalty has been fixed at 0.15, which is half the P2 value and is quite fair.

The revised table is given below.

No Player           Bat     Bow    A/R    Total

01.Sobers G.St.A   26.47   14.64  13.74   54.86
02.Botham I.T      17.32   20.91  11.07   49.29
03.Imran Khan      15.11   25.90   7.37   48.38
04.Hadlee R.J      12.54   26.85   8.72   48.11
05.Kallis J.H      25.28   13.97   7.17   46.42
06.Pollock S.M     13.57   24.39   6.37   44.33
07.Kapil Dev N     13.80   21.12   5.35   40.26
08.Cairns C.L      15.52   16.36   8.19   40.08
09.Miller K.R      12.07   19.28   6.55   37.90
10.Goddard T.L     14.65   17.30   5.18   37.14
11.Flintoff A      14.52   16.86   5.34   36.72
12.Greig A.W       18.69   12.40   5.24   36.32

As I had mentioned earlier there are no major differences. The gap between Sobers and others has come down slightly. The only significant move is that Kapil Dev and Cairns have exchanged places. The other minor change is that there is now a larger gap between Hadlee and Kallis so much so that I would consider the second best as the trio Botham, Imran and Hadlee with Botham as the first amongst equals.

This can be taken as the final table.

To view the complete table with all values, please click here.

	Garry Sobers: a champion with both bat and ball © Getty Images

Possibly the best responses in the first 12 hours itself.

Based on these responses I have decided that my follow-up post will be to do a far more rigorous and in-depth analysis of only the very best 10 or so all-rounders, excluding the also-rans like Vettori/Vaas/Hooper/Shastri et al. Then I can be very strict and demanding in my parameters since I will be looking at the best. There is no need to worry about very low batting or bowling averages of these pretenders, upsetting the balance of algorithms.
Many thanks.

Who is a Test all-rounder? There prevails a peculiar idea of all-rounders. A bowler who can bat a bit (Abid Ali) or a batsmen who can turn his arm a bit (Sehwag) or a bowler who chances his way to a hundred (Agarkar), at various times have been dubbed as all-rounders.

That is a very low-level expectation of an all-rounder. Let us raise the bar substantially. An all-rounder should be capable of winning matches consistently with his batting or bowling. Since this is a subjective statement, let us lay down some rules to be used as the basis for our analysis.

He should have scored a minimum of 2000 Test runs at an average of 20.00 or above. The limit of 20.00 is necessary to exclude long-career bowlers such as Warne and Kumble getting into the All-rounders list. Much as I admire their batting skills I am not ready to accept them as all-rounders. He should have taken a minimum of 100 Test wickets. There is no need to have a limit of average since the all-rounder with the worst bowling record among this lot, Carl Hooper, with a bowling average of 49.43 is still considered as a genuine all-rounder. If I incorporate a cut-off limit of 40.00 for bowling average, Ravi Shastri and Hooper go out.

The rationale behind these two cut-off numbers is that, on an average, it takes 25-30 Tests to score 2000 runs and take 100 wickets. So we are looking at players who have played these many Tests at the minimum. 21 players qualify under these criteria. Wally Hammond misses out based on this citeria. Jayasuriya just misses out by two wickets. Steve Waugh also misses out by a few wickets.

There is a piquant situation what with Vettori, Vaas and Akram vaulting over the bar meant for all-rounders. Well, we cannot question the numbers. Vettori has a higher batting average than Craig Spearman while Vaas and Akram have acceptable 23+ and 22+ batting averages.

How do we analyse all-rounder performances? Once we set the minimum criteria and select the players it becomes easy to classify them. This time I have anticipated readers' comments and got the analysis done under the following three classifications. Finally I have a composite Index determination process based on these three classifications.

1. Performance based
2. Longevity based
3. Individual match performances.

1. Career Performance based:

The simplest and a very effective method of evaluating player performances is by measuring their averages. The batting average has to be as high as possible and the bowling average has to be as low as possible. So we subtract the bowling average from the batting average and arrive at, what we call, an All-rounder Index 1. The higher this index is, the more effective the all-rounder is. Let us now see the complete table, on this criteria.

No  Player         LBt LBw Ctry BatAvg Bow  BowAvg  ARIdx1

 1. Kallis J.H              Saf  55.46 RFM  31.23    24.23
 2. Sobers G.St.A   ~   ~   Win  57.78 LM   34.04    23.75
 3. Imran Khan              Pak  37.69 RF   22.81    14.88
 4. Miller K.R              Aus  36.97 RF   22.98    14.00
 5. Pollock S.M             Saf  32.32 RFM  23.12     9.20
 6. Goddard T.L     ~   ~   Saf  34.47 LFM  26.23     8.24
 7. Greig A.W               Eng  40.44 RFM  32.21     8.23
 8. Botham I.T              Eng  33.55 RFM  28.40     5.15
 9. Hadlee R.J      ~       Nzl  27.17 RFM  22.30     4.87
10. Cairns C.L              Nzl  33.54 RFM  29.40     4.13
11. Rhodes W            ~   Eng  30.19 LSP  26.97     3.23
12. Kapil Dev N             Ind  31.05 RFM  29.65     1.41
13. Bailey T.E              Eng  29.74 RFM  29.21     0.53
14. Flintoff A              Eng  32.35 RFM  32.21     0.14
15. Mankad M.H          ~   Ind  31.48 LSP  32.32    -0.84
16. Wasim Akram     ~   ~   Pak  22.64 LFM  23.62    -0.98
17. Benaud R                Aus  24.46 RLB  27.03    -2.58
18. Shastri R.J         ~   Ind  35.79 LSP  40.96    -5.17
19. Vaas WPUJC      ~   ~   Slk  23.97 LFM  29.31    -5.35
20. Vettori D.L     ~   ~   Nzl  26.65 LSP  34.44    -7.79
21. Hooper C.L              Win  36.47 ROB  49.43   -12.96
Note: ~ indicates Left handed batsman/bowler.

No real surprises here. Kallis is one of the most under-rated players ever. He comes in, does his job in a quite manner and walks away. However he has an outstanding batting average of 55+ (dropped recently because of his disastrous series in England) and a very acceptable bowling average of 31+. Thus the difference is 24+. Gary Sobers is the supreme all-rounder and his index value is around 23. Imran is in third position, by virtue of his Batting Average of 37.69 (8 more than Srikkanth!) and a very low Bowling Average of 22.81 (7 fewer than Brett Lee!). Imran is followed by the mercurial Miller and the under-rated Shaun Pollock.

At the other end of the table, the spinning all-rounders occupy the low positions, led by Hooper who has a difference of nearly -13.

As an alternative, we could divide the Batting Average by the Batting Average and arrive at, what we call, an All-rounder Index. The higher this index is, the more effective the all-rounder is. This table is almost similar to the first table and is not shown.

2. Longevity based:

As a second alternative, we normalise all performances to a common base, say, Runs. Using a commonly accepted norm of a wicket as equivalent to 20 runs, we derive a table of Total Runs scored + Runs derived. Then we rank these players.

No  Player         LBt LBw Ctry   Runs  Bow  Wkts ARIdx2

 1. Kallis J.H              Saf   9761  RFM  240   14561
 2. Kapil Dev N             Ind   5248  RFM  434   13928
 3. Botham I.T              Eng   5200  RFM  383   12860
 4. Sobers G.St.A   ~   ~   Win   8032  LM   235   12732
 5. Pollock S.M             Saf   3781  RFM  421   12201
 6. Hadlee R.J      ~       Nzl   3124  RFM  431   11744
 7. Wasim Akram     ~   ~   Pak   2898  LFM  414   11178
 8. Imran Khan              Pak   3807  RF   362   11047
 9. Vaas WPUJC      ~   ~   Slk   2996  LFM  348    9956
10. Hooper C.L              Win   5762  ROB  114    8042
11. Vettori D.L     ~   ~   Nzl   2745  LSP  257    7885
12. Cairns C.L              Nzl   3320  RFM  218    7680
13. Flintoff A              Eng   3494  RFM  206    7614
14. Benaud R                Aus   2201  RLB  248    7161
15. Shastri R.J         ~   Ind   3830  LSP  151    6850
16. Greig A.W               Eng   3599  RFM  141    6419
17. Miller K.R              Aus   2958  RF   170    6358
18. Mankad M.H          ~   Ind   2109  LSP  162    5349
19. Goddard T.L     ~   ~   Saf   2516  LFM  123    4976
20. Bailey T.E              Eng   2290  RFM  132    4930
21. Rhodes W            ~   Eng   2325  LSP  127    4865
Note: ~ indicates Left handed batsman/bowler.

This is a tribute to the longevity of the all-rounders. Kallis is again in the top position, follwed by Kapil Dev, Botham, Steve Waugh, Sobers and Pollock. The olden day all-rounders who have not played in too many matches are at the lower end of the table.

3. Individual match performances:

Here we take a simple yardstick. Since we are analysing individual match all-round performances we have to look at a measure which brings out the all-round ability of the player. We need both runs and wickets. One cannot compensate the other. I have defined an 'A' level all-round performance as one in which a player scores a minimum of 100 runs and captures 5 wickets and a 'B' level all-round performance as one in which the player scores 75-99 runs and captures 4 wickets. I understand that match conditions, pitch conditions, quality of opposition, match result et al are relevant factors. However that will complicate the issue and we are only looking at all-round performances here. So I will limit myself to the runs scored and wickets captured.

No  Player        Ctry   A-Perf   B-Perf
                         Tests    Tests

 1. Sobers G.St.A  Win     7        8
 2. Botham I.T     Eng     7        4
 3. Greig A.W      Eng     4        4
 4. Cairns C.L     Nzl     2        9
 5. Kallis J.H     Saf     2        6
 6. Miller K.R     Aus     2        5
 7. Mankad M.H     Ind     2        4
 8. Imran Khan     Pak     2        3
 9. Hooper C.L     Win     2        2
10. Flintoff A     Eng     1        5
11. Pollock S.M    Saf     1        4
12. Kapil Dev N    Ind     1        3
13. Goddard T.L    Saf     1        2
14. Benaud R       Aus     1        2
15. Vettori D.L    Nzl     1        2
16. Wasim Akram    Pak     1        1
17. Vaas WPUJC     Slk     1        1
18. Hadlee R.J     Nzl     0        7
19. Shastri R.J    Ind     0        4
20. Rhodes W       Eng     0        1
21. Bailey T.E     Eng     0        0
Note: A-Perf: 100 or more runs and 5 or more wkts in same test.
      B-Perf: 75-99 runs and 4 wkts in same test.

Sobers stands supreme with 15 stand-out performances. Botham is equally good. Greig shows that he is a much under-rated all-rounder as does Chris Cairns. Kallis seems to have a more even distribution of run scoring and wicket capturing.

4. Final All Rounder Rating Index:

Finally, as we normally do always, a composite calculation involving the five key factors with suitable weightings. The formula is explained below.

				  Weightage    Computation methodology

Batting average     30.00      The maximum for an average of 60.00 and above
Runs scored         15.00      The maximum for a Runs scored value of 10000 and above
Bowling average     30.00      The maximum for an average of 15.00 and below
Wickets taken       15.00      The maximum for a Wickets taken value of 500 and above.
Test perfs          10.00      One point per 'A' performance + 0.4 point for 'B' performance.

Total              100.00

It can be seen that the two longevity measures carry only 30% of the total and the other 70% are allotted to performance nased measures. The final table is given below.

No  Player        LBt LBw Ctry  Runs BatAvg  Wkts BowAvg   ARIdx

 1. Sobers G.St.A  ~   ~  Win   8032  57.78   235  34.04   69.15
 2. Kallis J.H            Saf   9761  55.46   240  31.23   67.74
 3. Botham I.T            Eng   5200  33.55   383  28.40   61.27
 4. Imran Khan            Pak   3807  37.69   362  22.81   60.81
 5. Pollock S.M           Saf   3781  32.32   421  23.12   58.95
 6. Hadlee R.J     ~      Nzl   3124  27.17   431  22.30   56.71
 7. Miller K.R            Aus   2958  36.97   170  22.98   54.05
 8. Kapil Dev N           Ind   5248  31.05   434  29.65   53.98
 9. Wasim Akram    ~   ~  Pak   2898  22.64   414  23.62   50.88
10. Cairns C.L            Nzl   3320  33.54   218  29.40   49.49
11. Greig A.W             Eng   3599  40.44   141  32.21   48.24
12. Goddard T.L    ~   ~  Saf   2516  34.47   123  26.23   45.27
13. Vaas WPUJC     ~   ~  Slk   2996  23.97   348  29.31   44.01
14. Flintoff A            Eng   3494  32.35   206  32.21   43.39
15. Benaud R              Aus   2201  24.46   248  27.03   42.74
16. Rhodes W           ~  Eng   2325  30.19   127  26.97   40.83
17. Mankad M.H         ~  Ind   2109  31.48   162  32.32   40.04
18. Bailey T.E            Eng   2290  29.74   132  29.21   38.06
19. Vettori D.L    ~   ~  Nzl   2745  26.65   257  34.44   37.52
20. Shastri R.J        ~  Ind   3830  35.79   151  40.96   33.81
21. Hooper C.L            Win   5762  36.47   114  49.43   28.67
Note: ~ indicates Left handed batsman and bowler.

Let us come to a conclusion.

The top 5 all-rounders of all time are Sobers, Kallis, Botham, Imran Khan and Pollock. Hadlee and Kapil Dev run these 5 close. No surprises except that Kallis is so close to Sobers at the top.

Sobers stands supreme at the top, helped by 8032 runs at an average of 57.78, 235 wickets at an average of 34.04 and 15 outstanding performances in Tests. Kallis would have to perform at this high level for couple of more years to overtake Sobers.

Kallis has come first in two of these measures. He has been a vastly under-rated all-rounder. However one cannot question his credentials - 9761 runs at an average of 55.46 and 240 wickets at an average of 31.23. Independently these figures would be considered great as a batsman and acceptable as a bowler.

Botham is deservedly in the third position helped by his match-winning performances. Imran Khan's reasonably high batting average and very low bowling average have propelled him to the fourth position. Pollock is another all-rounder not normally given his due. He has got a batting average higher than Greame Hick and a bowling average 2.5 below Shoaib Akhtar.

At the other end, the three spinning all-rounders are there. All have barely acceptable batting and bowling averages. Vettori's high bowling average lets him down.

The Australians coined a new definition of an all-rounder, viz., the wicketkeeper. I wanted to do an analysis of the wicketkeepers. However I have decided to do a separate piece on that for two reasons. The first is that this article has become quite long, but more importantly, the players who have the toughest job in cricket deserve their own special article. Hence that will be covered in a later article.

PS: Anticipating readers' requests and in order to have a more complete coverage I have lowered the bar to 1500 runs, 20.00 Batting Avge and 75 wickets and presented a concluding report. Initially I thought of lowering the bar only for pre-1970 players but decided to enlarge the scope. So we now have Steve Waugh, Walter Hammond, Mushtaq, Faulkner, Jayasuriya et al in the Top-20. 17 new all-rounders have come in. I re-iterate that my suggested cut-off is still the earlier one and this table has been presented only for information.

No  Player         LBt LBw Ctry  Runs BatAvg Bow Wkts BowAvg ARIdx

 1. Sobers G.St.A    ~   ~  Win  8032  57.78 LM  235  34.04  69.15
 2. Kallis J.H              Saf  9761  55.46 RFM 240  31.23  67.74
 3. Botham I.T              Eng  5200  33.55 RFM 383  28.40  61.27
 4. Imran Khan              Pak  3807  37.69 RF  362  22.81  60.81
 5. Pollock S.M             Saf  3781  32.32 RFM 421  23.12  58.95
 6. Hadlee R.J       ~      Nzl  3124  27.17 RFM 431  22.30  56.71
 7. Miller K.R              Aus  2958  36.97 RF  170  22.98  54.05
 8. Kapil Dev N             Ind  5248  31.05 RFM 434  29.65  53.98
 9. Waugh S.R               Aus 10927  51.06 RFM  92  37.45  53.83
10. Wasim Akram      ~   ~  Pak  2898  22.64 LFM 414  23.62  50.88
11. Hammond W.R             Eng  7249  58.46 RFM  83  37.81  50.18
12. Cairns C.L              Nzl  3320  33.54 RFM 218  29.40  49.49
13. Greig A.W               Eng  3599  40.44 RFM 141  32.21  48.24
14. Mushtaq Mohammad        Pak  3643  39.17 RLB  79  29.23  46.59
15. Faulkner G.A            Saf  1754  40.79 RLB  82  26.59  46.30
16. Goddard T.L      ~   ~  Saf  2516  34.47 LFM 123  26.23  45.27
17. Jayasuriya S.T   ~   ~  Slk  6973  40.07 LSP  98  34.35  44.09
18. Vaas WPUJC       ~   ~  Slk  2996  23.97 LFM 348  29.31  44.01
19. Flintoff A              Eng  3494  32.35 RFM 206  32.21  43.39
20. Benaud R                Aus  2201  24.46 RLB 248  27.03  42.74
21. Lindwall R.R            Aus  1502  21.15 RF  228  23.03  42.45
22. Noble M.A               Aus  1997  30.26 ROB 121  25.00  41.76
23. Rhodes W             ~  Eng  2325  30.19 LSP 127  26.97  40.83
24. Armstrong W.W           Aus  2863  38.69 RLB  87  33.60  40.25
25. Mankad M.H           ~  Ind  2109  31.48 LSP 162  32.32  40.04
26. Reid J.R                Nzl  3428  33.28 RFM  85  33.35  38.58
27. Streak H.H              Zim  1990  22.36 RFM 216  28.12  38.32
28. Bailey T.E              Eng  2290  29.74 RFM 132  29.21  38.06
29. Vettori D.L      ~   ~  Nzl  2745  26.65 LSP 257  34.44  37.52
30. McMillan B.M            Saf  1968  39.36 RFM  75  33.83  37.26
31. Woolley F.E      ~   ~  Eng  3283  36.08 LSP  83  33.92  36.54
32. Shastri R.J          ~  Ind  3830  35.79 LSP 151  40.96  33.81
33. Illingworth R           Eng  1836  23.24 ROB 122  31.20  31.83
34. Prabhakar M             Ind  1600  32.65 RFM  96  37.30  30.51
35. Abdul Razzaq            Pak  1946  28.62 RFM 100  36.93  30.50
36. Klusener L       ~      Saf  1906  32.86 RFM  80  37.91  28.78
37. Hooper C.L              Win  5762  36.47 ROB 114  49.43  28.67
38. Emburey J.E             Eng  1713  22.54 ROB 147  38.41  25.24