It would be nice to see Thomas Odoyo on the list of Great Allrounders. He surely must be up there as the greatest never to play test cricket.

I agree absolutely that Kapil Dev was perhaps the most gifted crickteer of all times. His batting was explosive against speedsters as well as any type of spinners. His shot making had no limitations whatsoever. On his day he could dispatch all the bouncers to the square leg boundary with ferocious hooks. He could drive any spinner with extraordinary ease just by getting to the pitch of the ball. It was a pity that he could not really do justice to his prodigious talent as a batsman. Kapil was also an absolutlely effortless fielder. He could move with grace and attack the ball. He had a very good throwing arm. I hardly remember Kapil dropping a catch in his entire career. His bowling of course was excellent in the first half of his career. I think he was a born all rounder, a natural in all departments of the game.

Somehow I feel a great all rounder missing from the twenty is Alan Davidson of Australia. Instead of naming two wicket keepers, a genuine all rounder like Alan Davidson should have been included.

I cannot vouch about the voting but Gary Sobers is perhaps the best of all and Jack Kallis following close behind on the strength of stats as well as variety of skills.

Hi there

a few years back I worked up an article on the theme of Greatest allrounder trying to get a sense of how the then current crop of Chris Cairns, Flintoff, Pollock etc compared to the recognised greats. I sent the list to a cricket journalist at the time but it never made print so I am happy for the opportunity to throw this into the pot.The system grew out of an interest to better understand the relative achievements of the top all-rounders and while they feature prominently in the top 20 given their capacity for involvement in all innings of a match the fact that the top 5 features two standout players who qualify for batting skills (Bradman) and bowling skills (Barnes) alone would seem to indicate that the balance is about right.

I used test stats to come up with a formula for match contributions and came up with the following top 20. S. Barnes, G. Sobers, R. Hadlee, A. Faulkner, D. Bradman, C. Grimmett, I. Botham, I. Khan, M. Muralitharan, C. Cairns, W. O’Reilly, M. Mankad, T. Goddard, J. Gregory, J. Kallis, S. Pollock, K. Miller, M. Marshall, S. Warne, A. Davidson.One thing to come out of this list I guess is the lack of attention that the likes of Faulkner have received and also spinners in general (beyond Richie Benaud). The system used a minimum qualification of 20 tests to get around some of the difficulties that come from trying to incorporate players from the earliest Test matches whose bowling averages would skew things. By this 20 test minimum Procter doesn't make the list but if you include his appearances for the Rest of the World XI vs England in 1970 (the five matches were initially given Test status)and his three Super Tests in World Series Cricket (which was full blooded competition all the way) his stats expand to 15 matches, 689 runs at 34.45 and 65 wickets at 17.57 so there is no doubt he would have readily fit into the Hadlee-Botham-Dev-Khan grouping and may have resembled Khan the most.
I also developed the system to pick the best teams for each country and overall. It is too big to post here (as if this post wasn't long enough already!) but if anyone or the ed. is interested I can send a copy.

Thanks for the opportunity to get involved in such informed debate.

Ian

It is unfortunate that Kapil Dev played for a team that was not strong enough to win test matches against the bog boys. And I suspect that is the reason why he is always viewed as the least successful of the four great alrounders of the 1980s. Although some of his performances were truly spectacular efforts, the lack of support from his teammates meant that India almost always lost - just think of his 9 for 83 against the Windies on home soil 1983/84 and his cavalier batting in England 1982.

My pick for the greatest alrounder has to be Garry Sobers simply because he was the greatest batsman of his era and could offer his team THREE! different bowling options.

Imran Khan, Keith Miller and Ian Botham would be second with little daylight between them. All three were match winners with bat or ball.

Next would be Kapil Dev, Mark Procter, Richard Hadlee, Shaun Pollock and Vinoo Mankad.

Only then can you throw in players like Richard Hadlee, Jacques Kallis, Andy Flintoff, Tony Greig, Richie Benaud, Wasim Akram et al.

The reason that Kapil is not being ranked as highly as Imran or Headly is that he was inconsistent. Further, like Botham his prime time was ended in first 5 years and gradualy turned into more a useful cricketer than a match wining player. As a batsman he was a natural stroke player rather a batsman who uses his instinct. This is admirable but again, he performed inconsistently. If some one has doubt about this, he or she should look at his career book bit closely. To able to produce a one match wining performance in more than 10 matches does not imply that that player is match wining.

The one very important thing is the quality of the game, which statistics rarely adequately reflects. Whoever has seen Imran’s and Headley’s bowling cannot rank Kapil as a bowler higher than them. Similarly, his batting quality is not comparable with Imran’s who was quite consistent in his batting too.

Ian, I for one would be very interested if you'd just briefly post some of your lists, as choosing Greatest XIs is something I find very fascinating.

Sobers has to be the greatest allrounder of all times. Apart from the batting, he was a very versatile bowler- the only reason his average was high was that he was mainly supporting Hall, Griffith and Gibbs. Unfortunately I've never seen him play, but I'm convinced that he was the greatest. No. 2, according to my father (one of the most knowledgable fans there is) is Mike Proctor, who was the equal of any bowler in the world today and would be one the best batsmen around too. Then, probably Imran Khan and Keith Miller.

Just one bone I have with this discussion, that wicketkeepers are included. How can you logically compare a player like Gilchrist with a plyer like Proctor, two fine players with two very different skill sets? Instead players like Davidson and Jack Gregory should be included, as their greatness is unquestioned. Also, I think plyers like Shastri and Wasim ("Shaz and Waz!") were too dominant in one field of the game. Why not include genuine allrounders like Cairns or Aubrey Faulkner?

How can you have two wicketkeepers in the mix when they don't bowl. The traditional allrounder bats and bowls. They should be allocated a separate category of "Wicketkeeper / Batsman". Also I believe that for all Garry Sobers' greatness as a batsman, his variety as a bowler and his resulting high average lessens the achievements. Jacques Kallis status is lessened by the high bowling average as well. My choice for the best allrounder of all-time is Imran Khan. He has a comparatively high average (37.69) with the bat and a very low average (22.81) with the ball. A close second would be Keith Miller who has very similar numbers (36.98 bat, 22.98 ball)to Imran Khan. The difference in averages (batting minus bowling) may be greater with Sobers and Kallis but I believe the fact that both Imran Khan and Keith Miller took in excess of 3 wickets per Test cancels out any difference as Sobers and Kallis' only took 2 wickets per Test. After all the batsmen might set the match up but the bowlers will usually win it for you.

Kapil was a fine player, but I would put him second after Vinoo Mankad for the title of the best Indian all-rounder. Kapil ought to have retired at 350 wickets. His delayed exit and diminished powers after 350 have, sadly, left a bad aftertaste.
If we expand our discussion of all-rounders to include players who played mostly First Class cricket then I would put Dr. W. G. Grace at the very top and Frank Woolley pretty high up too. Test cricket came late in life for 'WG' and I don't think he ever took it very seriously as a competition. But his contribution to batting (his unifying of front- and back-foot play and subsequent batting landmarks he set), the sheer dominance he achieved by virtue of his personality and reputation, his passion for the game (the length of his career: 43 seasons!) and his shrewdness would make him the captain of my all-time cricket eleven.

Oh yes, I almost forgot; what about including Tony Greig?

I think it is fair to loosen the scope of the term all-rounder to include wicketkeeper-batsmen. 'Wickies' have invariably remained unsung heroes.

I am not going to argue about the greatest allrounder ever, and therefore the greatest cricketer ever, for that crown can rest only on the head of Sobers in my mind. Next would be a tie between Kapil, Imran, Botham and Hadlee.

Now I am an Indian. Somebody said that Kapil was not as good a batsman as Imran. I would advise you to take a look at their batting statistics in both versions of the game, as also how they fared against the 100+mph attacks of West Indies and others. Kapil was way superior to Imran in terms of batting potential, though Imran scores more as a tremendous fast bowler, who too I believe bowled at over 100 mph.

Regarding batting alone, I actually rate Sobers and especially the Batting Emperor Viv above even Bradman in terms of ABILITY. Viv, though before my time, was I think the greatest, most talented, most devastating and most entertaining player that ever held, holds or will ever hold a bat. He played in an era of uncovered pitches, with no protective gear, no batsman-friendly rules, and one-hundredth the financial security that post-90 batsmen have immensely benefitted from, many of who are glorified mediocres.

Kapil I think had the batting potential only a shade below Viv, Sobers and Bradman. He was amazing as his entire efforts were put into his bowling for which unlike Imran, he did not possess much natural talent.

One needs to only look at the way he played the superfast bowlers of WI, Australia, England, and Pakistan in their homegrounds. Especially his 72 in 38 deliveries against Roberts, Garner, Holding and Marshall in their pomp in bowler-friendly conditions in the WI! That I think is tens of thousands of times greater than any knock in the post-90 era, where bowlers are just meant to be clubbed around.

I think if he had chosen to be a specialist batsman, he would have had a few significant all-time batting records to his name, and would have gone down as the second greatest destroyer of fast bowling that ever was, is, or will be, just behind Emperor Viv.

Anup you think kapil whatever he was was shade below viv, bradman and sobers than this shade must have thickness that no other matter has in the whole universe. the problem is when you exxagerate about kapil you deny him his due status which is very high by any standard. think rationally , Kapil no way

Mr. Anup it seems that you have never seriously followed cricket. imran himself had said it many times that he wasnt really a gifted player but that he worked real hard to become a genuine fast bowler and those who had played with him testify to hard work he put in. his evolution from 1971 to 1976 speaks for it.

Ahmed, I have followed cricket from the early 90s from when I entered my teens. Though my favorite sport is tennis, I have also read a lot on cricket about the pre-90 eras. What I say is based on what I know and understand.

I never said Kapil as a batsman, was in the class of Sir Vivian, Sobers or Bradman. They are in a class of their own. Kapil, as also Imran, Botham and Hadlee, not to mention every other man that ever held, holds or will ever hold a bat, with the possible exceptions of Kanhai, and the South African Richards and Pollock would be echelons below their league. What I said is that Kapil, though below them was very close to them in terms of only natural batting talent. He did not probably justify even 20% of that inborn talent. Yet he was almost the second most destructive batsman of the 70s and 80s era after Sir Vivian. In an era of uncovered pitches, no batsman protecting rules, absence of decent protective gear, and very little money, (all of which have been in the game from around '90) Sir Vivian and Kapil were the only two batsman with strike rates of 100+. Had Richards retired in '86 as he had intended to at first, and Kapil too by '90 when he was in terminal decline, they both would have retired with s/r over 100. Strike rates of 100+ in those pre-90 conditions would be like having a s/r of 250 today. Had Kapil started his career in the post-90 era and today he would have a s/r of well over 200, and Sir Vivian would probably have compelled all the bowlers around to take up batting fulltime. Would today's sloggers like Afridi and Dhoni last a couple of deliveries in those eras? The likes of Lara, T'kar, Gilchrist and Ponting would be lucky to have s/r of even 70 in those periods. What I wanted to say about Kapil was with regard to his inborn batting talent and nothing else. But what he was ultimately as a batsman was only what part of that talent he translated into performance which was very low.

As for Imran, all I said was that of the four great allrounders of the 70s and 80s, Kapil in my mind was the most talented batsman and Imran the most talented bowler. He is the only one from the subcontinent who I believe bowled at over 100mph, the rest being from West Indies like Roberts, Croft, Clarke, Holding, Marshall, Patterson, or from Australia like Lillee, Thompson or from England like Snow. They were monsters and were faster than what Shoaib, Lee, Bond, Tait, Malinga or Harmison can even dream of being. Through just hard work, one can never bowl at that pace. All I said was that I think Imran was much more talented with the ball than the bat.

You seem to in disagreement with whatever I have said - you disagree about Kapil's natural batting talent, as also Imran's bowling one.

Mr. Anup,
imran had worked hard to become the class act that he was and that does not underestimate his merits. same is true for anyone who is not perhaps that talented naturally but keeps working hard to become better. if you had seen him bowling in his first test at edgbeston in 1971 , he hardly looked like a bowler. about kapil look he averaged 30 or so with bat, which in my opinion is good enough when i compare it with great allrounders of the game, why does anyone has to provide excuses for this average. and then bringing metaphysics into cricket that he was shade below bradman, sobers and richards when u havent seen them playing. there is no way you can measure the talent, it is tested and it comes out in the arena. i dont doubt the greatness of kapil but i disagree with the approach likes of you have taken. as far my opinion is concerned i think imran khan was better than any other and for reasons mentioned in his section of blogs.

To me Kapil was as good as the other three of his generation namely Imran, Botham and Hadlee. In my book, I would always rate Kapil and Imran higher than the others simply because they hailed from the sub-continent which is known as a fast bowler's hell. Cricketers are demi gods in this part of the world and are always expected to deliver against all odds. To do well in these extreme conditions of pressure is indeed a tribute to the mental qualities of both Kapil and Imran.

Kapil is his prime was sublime as a batsman, bowler and fielder, especially in one day cricket. He was an athlete who rarely dived but still seemed to be in the right places. He took some great catches, had a wonderful throw and was a captain's dream when it came to bowling at the death. He was absolutely majestic in the eighties and arguably the most complete one day player of his generation. He was not quite the same force towards the end of his career but that was inevitable given the longevity of his career.

Imran, on the other hand was perhaps the shrewder of the two, one who had a wonderful cricketing brain and could adapt with ease to different situations. Imran could both attack and defend depending on the situation. As his bowling declined in the latter part of his career, Imran devoted all his attention to improving his batting and could command a place in both the one day and test teams as a batsman alone. There is no better example of this than the 1992 World Cup when Imran held the batting together by batting at No3 and No4 in crucial games. Kapil was perhaps more talented and instinctive than his counterpart from Pakistan, but inconsistent and did not do justice to his batting talent. In his latter years, the Indian Team management failed to use Kapil effectively as a pinch hitter in ODIs, something that England did with great success in the case of Botham.

There are reasons why I rate Kapil & Imran higher than Hadlee and Botham.

1) They bowled very well in the sub-continent as their record testifies. Contrastingly, Hadlee and Botham, always made excuses not to tour the sub-continent. The classic example was the 1987 WC.
2) Both Kapil and Imran had exemplary records against the WI and Australia, best teams of their generation. Kapil took nearly 100 test wickets against WI and Pakistan each. 3 of Kapil's test hundreds were against the WI pace battery. Botham scored 14 hundreds but interestingly none against the WI. Twice Botham was part of an England team that was whitewashed by the WI, 5-0. This clearly indicated that he was marginalised and mediocre. Hadlee always played in bowler friendly conditions and NZ rarely ever played the WI in the eighties barring one or two series.
3) Both Kapil and IMran were World cup winning captains, something that stirred the imagination of the cricket crazy public in both countries. Kapil did it when he was just 24, Imran did it when he was almost 40, again a tribute to his adaptability, cricketing acumen and never say die spirit.
4) It would be interesting how Kapil and IMran's career would have finished had they been playing for NZ or England. I have no doubt that both of these cricketers would have finished with over 500 test wickets.

Out of listed 20 great Allrounders, let me narrow down the list to best five. That is Garry Sobers, Kapil Dev, Ian Botham, Imran Khan and Richards Hadlee. Garry Sobers is generally referred to as the greatest Allrounder of all time. He was no doubt a great batsman but on bowling front, he was not more than an ordinary bowler (200 odd wickets in 91 tests). overall his batting exploits were too great that added along with his ordinary bowling, he still ended up being called a great Allrounder. I would rather select from remainig four Allrounders. Having closely watched all these greats in action, I will term Kapil Dev as the best Allrounder. He is the only player in the history to have made more than 5000 runs and taken more than 400 wickets. He was one of the most powerful hitters of the ball and also among the best bowlers of his time. Many a times he bailed out his team from difficult situations with both bat and ball. Who can forget his 175* against Zimbabwe in 1983 world cup when his team was struggling at 17 for 5. He played better when the stakes were high. His batting record is much better against the West Indies, the best team of his time. Botham on other hand always struggled against West Indies. As they say statistics don't tell even half the story, its true in Kapil's case as well. He was much better batsman and bowler than his magnificent stats show. His arrival brought a sense of fresh air in Indian team where fast bowlers were a rare commodity. He changed the way game was played in the country. Fast bowlers hunt in pairs but unfortunately for Kapil, he was a lone warrior fighting alone without any good support from other end most of the time. Many a times he never got the opportunity to bowl in second innings due to that. Unlike other great all arounders, he played most of his cricket on unsupportive Indian pitches and still ended up with 434 test wickets, a world record then. Being a seamer its hard to believe that he never ever missed even a single test match on fitness grounds in his entire career of 16 years. In fact the only time he was dropped was for one match due to non cricketing reasons. His contemporaries Botham, Hadlee and Imran skipped or missed many tours or home series due to fitness or personal reasons. In fact Hadlee and Botham always remained reluctant in visiting subcontinent due to unsupportive conditions. Apart from his all round achievements, he was an inspirational captain also. Winning the 1983 world cup was a jewel in his crown. On consolidating all the facts and figures, I would rate Kapil Dev as the best Allrounder

For agression and leadership it was Imran. No one else comes close to him for the killer instinct. His records are really good too so I would say he was the best all rounder I have seen in action.
I have not seen Sobers or Bradman so no comments about them.

Kapil can be regarded as the best cricketer India has ever produced. Be it batting, bowling, fielding or captaining, he was an inspiration. His marathon innings of 175* at the time when India were reeling at 17 for 5 is one of the best one day knocks in the times of crisis. Neither the media nor the players themselves expected to win the WC. He motivated the team to the most memorable WC victory at Lords.

Though Amarnath got the MOM award, Kapil's catch of Viv Richards took the game away from the Windies. A truly entertaining cricketer who played with a lot of grit and determintation, Kapil had that never say die attitude which is lacking in most of the NextGen cricketers. To sum it up, a strong contender to be in the Top 5 Allrounders. By the way, I feel that even Chris Cairns needs to be included in the list.

Kapil Dev was greatest all-rounder there ever was no-one can come close to beating him as the greatest.

Kapil would be, in my book, the best ever allrounder cricket has seen so far. The reasons have been spelt out clearly in the earlier responses particularly by Ganesh Ramamurthy above.
I have watched him play with his other contemporaries and Kapil does stand out with his batting, bowling, fielding achievements as well as his captaincy achievements. I hope all these aspects are taken into consideration. I also agree that Sobers, Imran, Botham, Hadlee and Kapil are the cream of the lot. Hope it is a fair assessment by cricinfo.