Matt Prior

[Richard]

At least, now that you're picking a keeper on the basis of his batting, you've got a keeper that's capable of batting six. If you are going to prioritise the batting ability, it has to be of some worth, not like Geraint.

Geraint was honestly believed by most people to be capable of being at least as good as Prior has been so far, especially after his first 4 Tests and his 2003 season. He just completely disappointed everyone with his batting for most of his career. It was easy (for me) to see why he was persisted with for so long.

No-one thought Jones' production from WI '04 to Aus '06/07 was acceptable, they just believed he had it in him to turn things around. With hindsight he probably didn't, but watching him on the rare occasions he went well you always thought he could be very good indeed.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Decent enough standing back (although shelled two he might've taken in the Loins game), but doesn't inspire confidence standing up. Dunno how often he's kept to Hauritz, but was untidy generally.

Reckon he found it hard because it was the first time he'd ever seen Hauritz spin it...and they play for the same state side.

 

[Uppercut]

Geraint was honestly believed by most people to be capable of being at least as good as Prior has been so far, especially after his first 4 Tests and his 2003 season. He just completely disappointed everyone with his batting for most of his career. It was easy (for me) to see why he was persisted with for so long.

No-one thought Jones' production from WI '04 to Aus '06/07 was acceptable, they just believed he had it in him to turn things around. With hindsight he probably didn't, but watching him on the rare occasions he went well you always thought he could be very good indeed.

That is really typical of any keeper though, isn't it? Brad Haddin, Dinesh Ramdin, Brendon McCullum, MS Dhoni and Mark Boucher all have that in common- their run output in tests doesn't match how good they look at the crease.

 

[Richard]

That is really typical of any keeper though, isn't it? Brad Haddin, Dinesh Ramdin, Brendon McCullum, MS Dhoni and Mark Boucher all have that in common- their run output in tests doesn't match how good they look at the crease.

I'd say that applies to Ramdin only TBH (along with Geraint). Haddin and McCullum are both good batsmen as they look like they should be - only just short of being Test-class for that alone - and Dhoni and Boucher never quite look "right" to me. Always give the impression of being two-dimensional players rather than specialists. And Ramdin only looks like he should average 28-30 or so; Geraint looked, to me, like he could've averaged 43-44 or so. Check back my posts from 2004, 2004/05 or so - I repeatedly said he was more talented with the bat than anyone except Vaughan at that point playing.

Yet in the end there was nothing to choose between Geraint and the present Ramdin.

 

[Uppercut]

I'd say that applies to Ramdin only TBH (along with Geraint). Haddin and McCullum are both good batsmen as they look like they should be - only just short of being Test-class for that alone - and Dhoni and Boucher never quite look "right" to me. Always give the impression of being two-dimensional players rather than specialists. And Ramdin only looks like he should average 28-30 or so; Geraint looked, to me, like he could've averaged 43-44 or so. Check back my posts from 2004, 2004/05 or so - I repeatedly said he was more talented with the bat than anyone except Vaughan at that point playing.

Yet in the end there was nothing to choose between Geraint and the present Ramdin.

Maybe it's just how I feel watching them personally then. Haddin has two fifties and one century from fifteen tests, and to me he looks far, far better than that.

 

[Richard]

The centuries and half-centuries thing has, IMO, a fair bit to do with where he bats.

Batting four or five - which I think he'd be perfectly capable of doing if neccessary - would probably see him get more. As it is, though, he's done the job required of him at seven pretty damn well so far.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Jones didn't have the patience to supplement his weaknesses as a batsman. Not everyone is good at everything, but Jones couldn't handle not scoring, and got out softly too often as a result.

 

[Richard]

I don't think it was a question of lacking patience. I think it was merely a case of trying to play shots too early. IMO, he had the talent to play as he did once he got his eye in - but was no good at changing his game as an innings went on; at starting circumspectly.

If you bowled top of off-stump at Jones for 5 overs, he could and did have the patience to block it out - he'd not be trying to play shots that weren't there. Jones didn't change his game in response to anything - that, not that he changed too much when the rate was slow, was his problem.

 

[tooextracool]

Geraint Jones was a very talented batsman, possibly more talented than most in our side at the time. But he had very poor shot selection and thats what ultimately resulted in his failures in international cricket. Occasionally, he played some blinders, but more often than not he was poor.

 

[wpdavid]

Geraint Jones was a very talented batsman, possibly more talented than most in our side at the time. But he had very poor shot selection and thats what ultimately resulted in his failures in international cricket. Occasionally, he played some blinders, but more often than not he was poor.

My over-riding of Jones was how often he was bowled throgh the gate after playing a few pretty shots.

 

[tooextracool]

My over-riding of Jones was how often he was bowled throgh the gate after playing a few pretty shots.

He did get out occasionally like that but I don't think he had any serious technical weaknesses. Geraint often batted in a carefree and often brainless manner. Frequently, he would come in and play expansive drives and pulls without being set. He was a compulsive hooker and a dodgy player of spin who often tried to sweep his way out of trouble despite not being a very good player of the sweep shot. If he batted with patience and application he might have been a good player, but such a thing has never existed really for Geraint as even when he was scoring his one and only test match 100 he batted in a rather crass manner

 

[aussie]

England are stuck with Prior until/if he regresses with bat or gloves until Davies - hopefully steps up. Since a pure keeper can never play in tests (Foster), given Flintoff can't ever play as part of a 4-man attack.

 

[Jakester1288]

Was Prior one of the or the Australian keeper playing for England or was the someone else?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Was Prior one of the or the Australian keeper playing for England or was the someone else?

Does anyone else understand what this means?

 

[tooextracool]

Was Prior one of the or the Australian keeper playing for England or was the someone else?

I presume you are referring to Geraint Jones who was born in Papua New Guinea and grew up in Australia? Prior was born in South Africa

 

[Jakester1288]

I swear there was a couple of Australian keepers who played for England. I thought Prior was one.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I swear there was a couple of Australian keepers who played for England. I thought Prior was one.

Tim Ambrose was born in NSW and, as for Geraint, I'm not convinced any country wants to claim him.

 

[Jakester1288]

Tim Ambrose was born in NSW and, as for Geraint, I'm not convinced any country wants to claim him.

Ahh, Ambrose it was. Thanks for that.

 

[Richard]

Ambrose and Jones were both raised-ish in Australia; Prior was essentially raised in England. However, Jones is closer to being Australian than he is PNG'an.

Prior is effectively in the same boat as Strauss.

 

[King Pietersen]

On the back of that excellent take in the last Broad over thought it'd be nice to bump this to praise Priors keeping once more. He's been excellent in the series so far and appears to be showing genuine improvement. Encouraging signs for him, hope it continues.