How Good Is Timothy Bresnan?

[yorker_129-7]

To try and be diplomatic about this, Bresnan is the better batsman at the moment (although I would never bat him higher than seven), however Broad has a greater potential to be a high-class batsman going forward.

To suggest either is in any way a shoddy batsman is to do them a disservice in my opinion. England are very fortunately to have, in their likely first XI, quality batting down to 9 and with a more than useful batsman (Swann) coming in at 10. Even Jimmy is no rabbit.

[Arthur Crabtree]

i don't think anyone could claim that Bresnan has Broad's finesse. Bresnan is well organised and disciplined, but he times the ball like a bowler. Broad times the ball like someone with talent, but he lacks the will to build an innings, and he recklessly goes aerial too often. I'd say Broad has the ability to be a better batter, but may not have the character. Bresnan thinks more like a batter but lacks the gift. Probably they'll do as well as each other.

[Arthur Crabtree]

kallis and Sobers are all rounders. You can be an all rounder without being world class at both disciplines.

[HarryPotter]

To try and be diplomatic about this, Bresnan is the better batsman at the moment (although I would never bat him higher than seven), however Broad has a greater potential to be a high-class batsman going forward.

To suggest either is in any way a shoddy batsman is to do them a disservice in my opinion. England are very fortunately to have, in their likely first XI, quality batting down to 9 and with a more than useful batsman (Swann) coming in at 10. Even Jimmy is no rabbit.

Very good analysis.

[HarryPotter]

Kallis and Sobers are the best all-rounders to have played the game, and to question their role as an allrounder is ridiclous IMO.

Well we can disagree then.

However Kallis would never get picked as a front line bowler.

Sobers was, but frankly as a bowler did not perform as a front line.

So in my eyes they cant be Test all rounders as they would not be front line bowlers / did not perform as such.

[ddb]

Wow...not sure what to reply to that.

Who's the greatest all rounder in your opinion? Seems to me you've ruled all of them out.

[HarryPotter]

I would only consider post WW2 as before that its so hard to keep perspective.

However, thats sort of my point, the strict criteria of all rounder in Tests is almost impossible to achieve. Players have done it for portions of their career, players have achieved it with bith disciplines, but at different times. But players capable of front line bowling and batting top 6 in Tests are few and far between.

Imran
Miller
Botham (first half of his career only)

I never said my expectations were reasonable.....

[ddb]

So pointless...ok.

[OffStumpYorker]

I would only consider post WW2 as before that its so hard to keep perspective.

However, thats sort of my point, the strict criteria of all rounder in Tests is almost impossible to achieve. Players have done it for portions of their career, players have achieved it with bith disciplines, but at different times. But players capable of front line bowling and batting top 6 in Tests are few and far between.

Imran
Miller
Botham (first half of his career only)

I never said my expectations were reasonable.....

Sober and Kallis are superior to Miller and Botham, and Imrans batting really only came of age in the later part of his career. This is how I'd rate the All rounders since WWII

1.Sobers
2.Kallis
3.Imran
4.Millar
5.Benaud
6.Botham
7.Dev
8.Pollock
9.Hadlee
10.Cairns

Barry Richards could arguably have been in the top 10, but he never really had a test career due to Aphartied.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Proctor? Barlow? (instead of Richards?)

Nice to see Geoff Miller rated so high for both disciplines.

[Alviro Patterson]

Broad is more of a swashbuckling batsman whilst Bresnan is more gritty and will protect the wickets of his batting partner and himself.

[OffStumpYorker]

Proctor? Barlow? (instead of Richards?)

Nice to see Geoff Miller rated so high for both disciplines.

Proctor like Richards never really had the chance to shine at the highest level. Which Barlow are you refering to Mildred?

[HarryPotter]

I would only consider post WW2 as before that its so hard to keep perspective.

However, thats sort of my point, the strict criteria of all rounder in Tests is almost impossible to achieve. Players have done it for portions of their career, players have achieved it with bith disciplines, but at different times. But players capable of front line bowling and batting top 6 in Tests are few and far between.

Imran
Miller
Botham (first half of his career only)

I never said my expectations were reasonable.....

Sober and Kallis are superior to Miller and Botham, and Imrans batting really only came of age in the later part of his career. This is how I'd rate the All rounders since WWII

1.Sobers
2.Kallis
3.Imran
4.Millar
5.Benaud
6.Botham
7.Dev
8.Pollock
9.Hadlee
10.Cairns

Barry Richards could arguably have been in the top 10, but he never really had a test career due to Aphartied.

By my particularly strict definition Sobers and Kallis cannot make it because they were not front line bowlers.

5-10 were not top 6 batsmen, except for Botham early in his career (first half) and even that was in a poor England side.

You seem to rate batting greatness over bowling greatness.

Barry Richards was a very PT bowler? I think yuou mean Procter. You could argue that over others like Rice I guess but unless you have performed at Test level its a difficult arguement to make. Procter didnt perform as a batsman in the few Tests he had, though you could argue he had little chance batting down the order.

[OffStumpYorker]

Kallis Bowls an average of 12.3 overs per Innings, Sobers bowled 22.3 overs per test, in comparrison to say Botham who bowled 21.3 overs per innings, and Imran who bowled 22.8 overs per Innings.

So I can see you point about Kallis, however Kallis doesnt bowl regularly due to the Saffa's have a resonable pace attack with Donald and Pollock, then Steyn and Morkle, now with Philander and De lange in the unit he bowls even less. However, Basedon the amount of overs he bowled Sobers on par with Botham and Imran in terms of being considered a front line bowler.

Unless you have another definition of front line.

[HarryPotter]

On Imran specifically he averaged 44 with the bat and 19 with the ball during the 80s.

From 83 onwards he maintained his cumulative batting average at 40+. This was in the 80s when a top line batsman averaging 40+ was a very good player.

Yes he stopped bowling at the end of his career and was fabulous with the bat but it should not take away from his batting performances earlier.

If you can find a similar 10 year period where Sobers or Kallis averaged under 30 with the ball (while averaging 50+ with the bat, their main area) I will happily agree they are better ARs.

You could argue that Imran didnt contrinute weight of runs like a top order batsman would have (in the 80s 3500 runs from 50 Tests would be reasonable, he got 2500) so thats why my expectation of batting ARs is 3 wickets a match, not 4 which you would look for from a front line bowler.

I dont think you will find Sobers or Kallis taking 3 wickets a match at sub 30 for a 10 year period which is why I rate Imrans AR performance so highly.