As far as england goes-Botham has been our greatest ever all rounder-Flintoff/-not in the same league-for example Botham in 102 tests, scored 14 hundreds and had 27 five fors-how many has Flintoff had?is it 5 hundreds and 2 5 fors in 65 games-he has some work to do for me -good bloke but no Botham!

In my honest opinion it has to be Ian Botham then Gary Sobers then Imran Khan for the greatest all rounder. The only reason Beefy is ahead of Sobers is because the sheer extra positive influence Beefy had on his teammates. It is a great debate but these 3 fabulous cricketers have to make the top 3. Hopefully one day in the future Freddie Flintoff will join the group of Kings!

Why does eveyone blindly nominate Sobers as the greatest all-rounder? Look at his bowling stats. They just don't stand up to scrutiny. A strike rate of a wicket every 91 balls and an average of over 34 runs per wicket....the greatest all-rounder? Please don't make me laugh. Sure he got well over 200 wickets but that is because he never stopped bowling. When he tired, he just turned to slow left arm....when that didn't work he resorted to bowling chinaman. He was bound to pick up wickets even by the law of averages!!! I am not trying to diminish Sobers' status as one of the games truly great cricketers. He was obviously one of the greatest of all batsmen and capable of incredible feats with the bat in his hand. But please don't let nostalgia delude us into according him with accolades that he just does not deserve.

I would go with Imran Khan for the simple reason that he was a huge influence and inspiration to his peers, besides being a truly great all rounder. How he brough them up from the depths of exit to world cup glory in 1992 is ebbed in my memory.

I dont know who is the best allrounder. coz its difficult as all 20 are the greatest of their era. But in the 20 one man shud have had his place "Steve Waugh". He rightly is the greatest australian cricketer ever . Australia wud not be Australia without him and he was not a bad allrounder even.

Kapil Dev.

The worth of the greatest all-rounder, in my opinion, is how he turned around the fortune of his country by his skills. Clearly Windies were a great team without Sobers, Australia without Miller, England without Botham or Pakistan without Imran. Make no mistakes these players were superb but they were not inevitable so to speak for their country. But Kapil Dev was the linchpin on which India's fortune was based. Be it 5day or 1day he could do it all. And do it better than most. His century in 1983 WC is one of the best ever, his catch in the finals of the same WC one of the best(and certainly most important) of all WC finals and he was the leading wicket taker in the world even though he came from the land where no fast bowlers thrived. The most natural, talented and athletic all-rounder ever. Just watch how many games he played in his career....and then check in amazement that he played all of them in much less a span than any of his compatriot all-rounders.

To answer one of the previous contributors to this blog.
I am not blindly citing Garfield Sobers as the greatest all-rounder, I was lucky enough to have watched a large part of his career and can honestly say that although I have seen players better at separate parts of the game I have never seen any other player combine all the elements of the game at such a consistently high standard - as Sobers.

It has to be either Sobers or Imran Khan, if statistics based on averages are to be taken account.

If aggregates are to be taken into account then it becomes very difficult. Bear in mind that Flintoff, Pollock and Khallis have not finished their carriers yet.

Imran Khan has to be trated very high on account of his influence on the game and team. His influence was there even after he retired (wasim, waqar etc). Before he became captain Pakistan success record was below 50% and now its second only to Australia (neck to neck with England).

All the 20 nominated deserve their place, but I feel one who should also be rated highly is Alan Davidson, who played some incredible allround Test mtches for Australia, against the best teams of India, South Africa, England and West Indies. While "Davo" may not feature highly in runs and wickets stats, his allround fielding, batting and bowling efforts produced many wins for Australia.

Its tough to determine who is the best, however in my opinion Imran Khan is the best for the simple reason that he departed from the cricketing world, giving the game two of the most lethel fast bowlers Wasim and Waqar. It is a testimony of his selflessness that he transfered the art of reverse swing to his disciples and didn't take the secrets with him and was first one to introduce neutrality in the game and most importantly he bowled on placid tracks and still managed to gain impeccable bowling figures.So sincerity, sagacity,chrisma and glamour can be personified as Imran Khan

Personally I'd go with Imran. The man is the single greatest all rounder ever and his presence was the biggest of any cricketer I've ever seen bar Shane Warne.
Flintoff has the talent to be one of the greatest and the guy is still learning.

I have followed cricket closely and it is not just about bowling at 90MPH or taking 10 wickets that makes someone an allrounder. It is also how the person led the team and especially his performance in crunch situation. It is someone who kept his performance consistently good and whom everybody feared and respected. And in this situation, again and again, we see Imran Khan's name pop up and stand out. For over 21 years he played cricket with style and an aura of dominance. The wickets that Dennis Lillee declared as "fast bowlers death" Imran produced some of his finest bowling and consistently took more wickets than anyone of his peers.

Whenever he put his mind to something, he would not only go for it and prove that he can do it better than anyone. Be it winning the worldcup from a point where Pakistan was almost eliminated. Or defeating the West Indies in 1988 (first test) in West Indies, when everyone thought it could not be done. Especially, coming from a 5-0 drubbing at their hands in the one day games.

Imran stands tall among his peers. Not only from his own generation, but from all. No wonder his legacy is still producing remarkable fast bowlers in the country. He is one of a kind and such players are born once in a 100 years.

It has to Be Imran... impeccable record in both forms of the game... and just look at his record and influence in his last 10 yrs... Test batting average of 51, bowling average of 19, away series draws to the Windies (kings at the time!!)... world cup win in 92... the list goes on..

Richard Hadlee, one of the 4 great allrounders of the 80's and a possible contender said that Imran was the best... Sobers batting record was impeccable, but his bowling record was average... Kallis seems to be doing a better job with the bowl..Botham would be the closest to Imran, but despite his impeccable record against the Aussies, he never really got going against the Windies... The others dont really stack up against these 3..

Putting Ravi Shastri in with Imran, Botham or Kapil is a joke. Even Tendulkar will qualify to be better allrounder than Shastri was.
I would go with Botham and Imran as the best allrounders ever with Kapil coming in close second. I never saw Sobers play, so i can't compare him with others. I hope Flintoff joins the gang soon.

Sobers- great batsman. So my pick is Imran Khan. Not only was he a great cricketer, he was a great captain and has completely changed the structure of Pakistan cricket. Without Imran Khan you wouldnt have Inzi, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis (and the long list of fast bowlers since). Also you wouldnt have guys like Mohd. Yousuf who comes from very humble origins because Imran changed the class structure of the game. Another thing he was better than Botham. Beefy did poorly against the West Indies. Imran was a constant thorn in their sides. If modern players are judged by how well they perform against the Aussies, then same should apply to these guys.

I am a huge fan of Imran Khan, without even looking at the records, but Imran did bat along side Javed Miandad, to help Pakistan towards World Cup Finals. BUT..my favourite all rounder would be Steven Waugh because I believe Steve was much more cool and calm in leading his side, and I always believe its easier to be a bowler than a RESPONSIBLE batsman, they are far and few, Australia has plenty, but then again Pakistan has plenty of Fast Bowlers. We love a responsible Batsman especially who can bowl.

I can very safely say that Imran Khan is the pick of the list!

And i have my arguments:

1. He was an outstanding bowler who mastered reverse swing, an art which no other allrounder or bowler had a hint of at that time.

2. He was a brilliant batsman who played with full responsibility, in accordance with the situation. His partnerships with other batsmen in pressure situations won world cup for Pakistan.

3. And the best thing about him was (and still is) his sheer inspirational presence. A captain who extracted the best from his playing 11 whatever and whenever he desired. A captain who has a brilliant track record against the mighty WIndies of the gone era. A captain who spotted players like Wasim, Waqar, Aaquib and Inzi from street cricket. And last but not the least, a Captain strong enough to inspire his side from the brink of elimination to the height of triumph in the World Cup in 1992 and that too against a heavily rated opponent.

With this three in one combination, is there any room for competition?

Ian Botham was very good. Unfortunately his prime lasted say only 5 years and then he was mostly a drag. Having played 100 test matches and not geeting 400 wickets , while playing mostly in green England pitches isnt that great.

Richie Benaud is also another guy that has to be rated very highly on account of his personailty.

Steve Waugh should definately be there. i dont understand why he is not. He has done so much more then some of the names on the list and not including him is slight injustice.

I think Imran Khan is the greatest allrounder of all times. His test batting and bowling averages and strike rates are way ahead of the contemporaries and even some of the modern day counterparts. If you combine the 4 basic statistics which are batting average, batting strike rate, bowling average and bowling strike rate for both tests and one days, you will see him some distance clear of the pack. To round off, he won the world cup and his career as a captain was as good as anyone had in the game. To bat and bowl that well and to captain a team like Pakistan simultaneously, needs professional skills of the highest order and Imran had these in abundance.
Sir Gary Sobbers is being termed by many as he all time best. Without anything taking away from this legend, he only played one one day game. We know how differnt the dynamics of the two modes of the modern day game are.
Beefy will rank second and was another extremely talented cricketer. Kallis will come third while Kapil and Sir Richard Hadlee follow.Wasim Akram should have been heading the list but he transformed very little of his batting potential into results.

Oh lord...Flintoff was nominated above the likes of Jayasuriya and Kallis?? What are you blokes thinking?

Why is Andy Flower always left of such lifts? I would consider him at least Adam Gilchrists equal. He always seemed to be playing in a team on the verge of defeat if he didn't come up with the goods. His overall career average exceeds that of Gilchrist now as well

Of the 4 top all-rounders of the 80s and 90s (Imran Khan, Ian Botham, Richard Hadlee and Kapil Dev), by far the run-away winner is absolutely Imran Khan, no doubt. Aside from being a great bowler and a very good batsmen, his leadership skills were tops. He picked and inspired a Pakistani team that was in the pits thru first round to out-class England in the Cricket World Cup 1992 final. Since these 4, there has not been a genuine all-rounder and I doubt we will see someone of Imran's caliber any time soon.

I ll go for Imran Khan, being a Pakistani I am well aware of the great influence he had on the cricketers in Pakistan. He was not only a great allrounder and a great captain but he left behind him a great legacy of fast bowlers who went on to conquer the world and still I have not seen any better bowlers than Wasim and Waqar, and whatever they were they owe it to Imran Khan. He was such a selfless man, he never kept his skills to himself and shared it with the youngsters. So just because of the fact that he made Pakistan emerge on the World Cricket scene as a great force I ll go for Imran Khan!!

Sir Gary Sobers is the standout and accepted top, but as an Aussie I will stand by Keith Ross Miller.

There are two schools of thought on the allrounder. Most modern allrounders are players who would really be picked just a bowler or just as a batsman and would not be considered in the other discipline for selection (taking the top 5 allrounders from the ICC, LG list Flintoff, Kallis, Pollock, Vettori and Pathan would never make the cut in both disciplines). So, the additional talents just make them a more worthwhile addition then just a specialist.

The classical thought is that an allrounder can be picked for either skill.

The heretics thought (plaguing both England and now Australia) is that allrounders are picked for having neither skill - but contributing enough all around to be useful (Symond and Watson jump to mind - but look at the England teams of the 90s for stranger "allrounder" choices. Irani anyone?).

Sobers certainly qualifies for the double selection criteria, however he doesn't match my criteria as top-dog - admittedly a tough one.

An allrounder, in my book, must be able to and expected to win matches in both aspects of the game.

Sobers could - but was not expected to. He was often the major batting firepower (as a career batting average of over 57 makes clear) but was never considered the strike bowler of the team. Certainly not in his spin-mode, but also not in his seam mode. His bowling average of 34 does not lie. He could be a winner on any given day - but you didn't expect it of him with the ball.

Miller was a clear matchwinner. Batting down mostly at 5, he did something that was not expected of the middle order batsmen then - something that Gilchrist gives Australia today - a counter attack drom down the order. While you usually expected to win the game once you overcome the top 4, Miller came and won the game for you time and again. Average of 37 is far better then what Flintoff, originally considered a batting allrounder, can boast.

As a bowler his qualification is clear. An average of 23 with one match-winning performance after another.

Should someone ask me, who would you say was a better PLAYER overall, I may go with Sobers - merely for being in the top 3 or 4 batsmen ever. However, if you asked me to pick a team (like we did in school), I would go with Miller first, and that, in my mind, is the better test.

I agreee with Tom Sugar. To say that Sobers could easily have held a place in either discipline is simply not true, his bowling stats dont hold up. On the other hand you have Imran who was the greatest bowler in the world for a time (holds the all time highest rating since WW1) and his career stats still hold up even though he played some years without being able to bowl due to injury, averaged 51 with the bat in his last ten years and then of course his influence on team mates and captaincy (World Cup 92) is legendary and almost in a league of its own. Also Imran was a pioneer of reverse swing bowling and an imperative character in the fast bowling culture of Pakistan.

Cricketing world seems to have forgotten Sri Laankan allrounder Sanath Jayasuriya who thrilled with his superb opening partnetship with his one time fellow opener Romesh Kaluwithrana who together have accumulated many opening century partnerships within the restricted overs' period. I strongly believe Sanath should be considered as a contender.

Undoubtedly, Imran Khan deserves to hold the title of Greatest All Rounder. Simply, for being a one of the best captain of the cricket team, who was capable of leading and transforming weak team into a winning team, as we can’t forget the example set by him and his peers by winning the world cup 1992. Secondly, for giving a new dimension to a fast bowling, picking young talent and then training them, for instance players like wasim akram and waqas younis, who became the deadliest bowlers later. Thirdly, the inspiration and the style he left in the cricket to a certain extent that every young cricketer wants to bowl and lead like Imran Khan. Forthly, for his outstanding record as he took 362 Test wickets and scored nearly 4000 runs (average-wise, he tops the four great all-rounders of the 80s). He is one of only two players to take ten wickets in a Test and score a hundred, one of only a handful to take 40 wickets in a Test series (and that too on Pakistani pitches). There are so many other achievements.

Posted by Adeel ANSARI, France

Hi, I really like this feature on the greatest allrounders. Generally, I agree with your selection of the top 20 allrounders. However, to place Ravi Shastri in the top 20, ahead of Chris Cairns, is highly questionable. Compare the statistics of both in both Test and One day cricket. There is not too much difference in their batting averages, but Cairns's bowling average in both forms of the game is far superior. I'd be interested to know the thoughts of the panel and other cricinfo readers on this one.

Imran, to me is the greatest of allrounders. Not only for the results he produced while batting or bowling (during the era of 80s wickets and teams around), but also for the marvels he achieved with his captaincy. And yet there is another big factor,whic almost no other allrounder in cricket has managed to achieve, i.e. inspiring the generation of cricketers in the world in general and in Pakistan in particular.

Well, the stats of the players also partly depend on the team and country they play for. So it would be unfair to make a decision on the basis of averages only. Another measure could be the difference in team's performance in the absence of the player under observation. And I think Imran has done wonders for Pakistan. Just have a look at his team that played in world cup 1992! Many similar examples could be observed throughout his career. Incredible stuff for sure!

What about Christopher Cairns? If Freddies in the list Chris got more runs and more wickets in less matches, same number of 50s and 100s but the small matter of 11 more 5 fors as a test player.

I would have to say that the competition has to be between Iam Botham and Imran Khan. I would say that Imran would have the edge because he also had the burden of being captain and the worse feilding side in the world.

Imram Khan in my opinion is the greatest allrounder to play the game of cricket. He is also a true ambassador of the game. Just imagine the number of pace bowlers evolved in Pakistan since his retirement, I am not sure if anyone in any given sports have the impact what Imran Khan single-handedly did for years. I just hope that he takes over the board in Pakistan and make the game more exciting.

I think imran khan deserves to be the winner.From a mere first change medium pacer Imran transformed in to a fearsome fast bowler and put shiver down the spine of the Gavaskar's and richards'.As time passed Imran became the best batsman of his side-most reliable man in crisis.He gained respect as a captain of the perennially fractious pakistan team.When made captain in 1982 Imran took pakistan cricket to a new height.Pakistan started winning tornaments and series after series.His skills as a cricketer and as a captain reached its absolute best whenever played against the fearsome westindies side-the best team during his time.Again,he gifted Pakistan cricket with talents like Wasim,Waqar,Inzamam,Mushtaq,Aqib who became seasonal players and served the legacy left by Imran.His was also the age of Kapil,Botham and Hadlee-but he was on par with all these players and the most successful all of them at captaincy.IHad Imran not been the captain in 1992 till now pakistan might not think of winning the wc.He transformed the pakistan team which i think even The DONs or the Waughs would be at sea when cptatining in to from a procession of solosist into an orchestra.Imran should be the gratest all-rounder as he is a combination of a greatfast bowler,a soundbatsman and the best captain along with Benaud among the 20.

Sir Gary is the best of all. Simply because of the reason he played cricket among the greatest players.
He batted right from opening slot to down the order
His body language was exceptional. He had a high backlift and good follow through and he was capable of playing three or four strokes for any goodlength delivery. He played on lively pitches and his batting style was really superb.
How many of the modern cricket followers know that he was a great bowler capable of bowling leg spin, off spin, genuine fast and cutters and he used new ball very well. Sir Gary is the BEST and no one is near him. And he was a great fielder with amazing reflexes. I will say that Sir Gary was the complete cricketer - not even Sir Don !

I completely second the view of the person who is baffled to see Ravi Shastri's name on the list. Surely, if a player of Shastri's calibre with pretty mediocre performances can find a way into a list consisting of Imran Khan, Gary Sobers and the like, then we might as well include Tendulkar and Ganguly in a list of top all-rounders.I wonder if this has anything to do with Shastri's being on one of Cricinfo's expert panels. Besides, I dont see why players who played for low-performing teams but scripted defining roles in their teams' recognition should not figure in this list. What about players like Heath Streak, who did not attain the same level of fame just because he played for Zimbabwe? Also, what about Santh Jaysuriya, who sort of revolutionised one day cricket at a crucial juncture in the mid 90s? He was (still is) also a top fielder and a prolific wicket taker. (definitely more prolific than Ravi Shastri)

Very nice of Cricinfo to get all interactive but surely they could have chosen a more contentious topic. Just as 'The Greatest Batsman' is stultifyingly simple (i.e. that Aussie, you know, the one who averaged 99.94, duh) as is this.

Sir Garfield Sobers not only merits a place in a World XI on his batting (average high 50s). But was also a wonderful bowler. Despite his bowling average being slightly higher than exceptional (low 30s) he was able to bowl fast, orthodox and wrist spin. The only such cricketer ever to perform so many disciplines so well at Test level. Then you note that he was one of the best fielders ever to grace the game and, as with the question of the Don, it's really rather boring. Sobers wins it not just by a bit, but by a mile. Pollock, Flintoff, Dev, Hadlee, Imran are not fit to tie Sober's boots.

Silly.

Ian

It just has to be Sobers as the greatest. He would have been counted as a truly great batsman on its own BUT he could bowl very good fast medium AND he could bowl both wrist and finger spin. He was the complete all rounder, no one else can match him. I was fortunate enough to see him 150 at Lord's when he had been up all night drinking rum!!! Of the greats who were around together; Imran Khan comes 1st better than Botham with bat and ball. Then Botham. Then Hadlee - the best bowler of the lot but inferior with the bat (just) and then Kapil Dev.

To be a good all rounder, by definition, requires proficiency in all aspects of the game. In my opinion there is no one that's done this better than Sobers. The basis on this is Sobers batting capability. He would very often tear some of the best bowlers of the time apart. Match that with excellent, match winning bowling and outstanding fielding and you have the most reliable and dependable cricketer. Imran Khan i would have to say comes in second,Botham third.

Gary sobers was the complete cricketer. On his day he came off the pitch as fast as most of his comtemporaries.He was an amazing fielder in any position,who took many sharp catches at short leg. As a batsman Sobers easily ranks in the top five of all times list.How then can Sir Gary not be the greatest all rounder of all times by far? Imran Khan comes in second followed by Ian Botham.

Very nice to see all the comments here. I suspect the number of west indians posting here must be miniscule compare to those from India, Pakistan, Australia and the UK.

To quote former Aussie captain Ian Chappell : " The difference between Sobers and the next best all-rounder is similar to the difference between Bradman and the next best batsman."

Please remember that Garry Sobers was selected to the West Indies side initially as a swing bowler, batting at no. 9 in his first test. At age 21, he scored his first hundred which he converted to 365 not out..........the second highest not out score in test history after that other small-island left hander's 400*.

His close in fielding at slip / leg-slip off spinners and at short leg off any bowling (even when he was the senior pro in the side) is probably unsurpassed. I have watched Imran, Botham, Kapil and Hadlee extensively and they most definitely lack the reflexes and fielding genius of Sobers. He was one of the few who was clearly the best at all aspects on his team.

Also, while some great cricketers tend to slow down with age, Garry Sobers in his 18th Year in test cricket, aged 35, took on a young rampaging Dennis Lillee and co. for the Rest Of the World at the MCG and scored 254. The great Don Bradman said afterwards: "Having seen all the players of the last 50 years, I believe that Sobers' was the greatest exhibition of batting seen in Australia. I have seen nothing equal to it in this country".

It is fitting that a cricketer of Sobers' ability was voted 2nd to the incomparable Bradman in both Wisden's Top 5 of the 20th Century AND ESPN's Legends of Cricket by a large INTERNATIONAL panel of experienced journalists, players and officials.

Therefore, while it is nice that you get an opportunity to voice your opinions here, they are obviously in sharp contradiction to those who have seen more, played more and know more cricket than the majority of posters here.

Ask yourself this : How many of your above 'greats' get mentioned in the same breath or sentence as the supreme Don Bradman by journalists, commentators and players the world over.

Garry Sobers was not simply an all-rounder, he was a phenomenal athlete with an unbelieveable variety of cricketing abilities.

This is clearly a race for 2nd place as the undisputed King of all-round cricketers and the most complete cricketer of all time is Sir Garfield Sobers.

for those of you who think 235 wickets at 34 avg is mediocre bowling.......look at the figures:

ICC LG player ratings for allrounders : Imran Khan-517; Kapil Dev - 432; Hadlee - 483, Ian Botham - 645, Garry Sobers - 669.

In my opinion, Sir Garfield Sobers would have a slight edge above the rest as the Greatest All Rounder. But, its a very difficult task to really distinguish among the several legends as some of them have not played enough ODIs. Its all about the impact a cricketer has on the opposition and also Cricket as general. Its an awe created by his performance in all aspects of the game. Sir Gary had profound impact throughout his carrer on all oppositions in all departments. And above all, his captaincy had a very major impact. This shows its not always physical but also logical aspects of a performance that has a impact over the result of a match. Its hard to analyze a thought performance of a cricketer easily. Everyone has his own style. Imran Khan impressed as a great leader. Kapil Dev's performance, contribution and fitness was such an inspiration to many Indian cricketers. Botham had an unbelievalbe "awe" effect in his performance which even now thrills. Hadlee's phenomenal bowling skills in unparallel. Kallis scores consistently and also takes wickets regularly to be a threat to the opposition all around both in Tests and ODIs. And Akram's superb ODI statistics is amazing, but he fares slightly bad in the batting departement. So if I go by impact, Sir Gary scores heavily to be on the top followed by Imran Khan, Kapil Dev, Ian Botham and Jacques Kallis.

I only agree with a few of the 20 all-rounders. I definitely agree with Sobers, Imran Khan, Miller, Botham, Rhodes, Procter, Hadlee, Kapil Dev,and Noble, but no list is complete without Faulkner, Giffen, Hirst, Grace, Woolley, Hammond, J.H. Sinclair, Armstrong, Davidson, Les Ames, J.M. Gregory, T.L. Goddard or Ulyett.

If you look at Kallis and Sobers great all rounders i prefer to say batting all rounders they would get into most team on either merit. Sobers does have the stats to his favour though that is due to his batting bowling average is good 34 but doesntback it up with strike rate. Imran could have opened the bowling for any team in any era infact i bet pakistan wouldnt mind him know. for batting temperament was peffect and would be probably 5 or 6 in current australian team. add natural leadship qulaities and you have a winner.

Clearly the best - just look at his record. Absolutely stunning! And when he got that huge double ton for the rest of world against the aussies in oz

Gary Sobers the full package if anyone can bowl at that high standard in ALL departments and bat with avg 50+ over a long period should be the greatest cricketer ever
yeah to all those who love stats to back up the reasoning stop reading the books and watch the game
He would easily(casualy) walk into any team and still stamp his auhtority
you think its nostelga well try telling that to those who played against/for him and all you will get is awesome

There was a TV show in the 1980s called "Who's the Greatest" hosted by Brian Moore, which pitched Ian Botham Vs Garry Sobers. Those in the audience were invited to listen to the debate and then vote for a winner.

The ex-England captain Mike Denness made the case for Sobers by stating that as a batsmen he would be worried if Sobers made no runs as it would inspire his bowling. He and Garry Sobers knew that the trully great all-rounder is someone who habitually makes a decisive contribution for the team. If Sobers had failed with the bat, he would succeed with the ball.

The point was also made that unlike Botham, Sobers was a successful captain, making him a true all-rounder.

Sobers won the vote then and he wins my vote now.