CW All-Time XI Wicket Keepers

[Valer]

But playing against Mars with their genius batsmen could mean that chances are extremely rare, therefore you can't risk letting them go down due to less able keeping.

As I mentioned before the step up in terms of glovework is less than the step up of batsmanship, due to the more standardised nature of the keepers role as evidenced in practice (see 1st class to test keeping, even (1sts) grade to 1st class.)

Furthermore expecting chances to be "rarer" implies that exceptional batsman are further from the norm than exceptional bowlers -- that is on similar pitches bat will dominate ball significantly more as the standard increases...

 

[ankitj]

If keepers can be chosen for their batting ability in international test matches, same can be done in selection of ATG sides as well. While the quality of cricket will be higher, the teams will be as even at ATG level as they are at test level. I don't think prescribing different approaches for team selection at these two different levels makes sense.

Same argument can be extended to the question of all-rounders. Sure, Imaran will probably average 22 in an ATG side instead of 37. But that is still as valuable as his batting at test level. Don't forget that Tendulkar will average 35 at ATG level.

 

[TNT]

Healy is one of the best glovemen over the last 60 years, prior to that the keepers were pretty much rank amatuers that lacked the skills of modern keepers.

 

[uvelocity]

I think if you are playing away to mars you need to pick the tallest keeper due to lack of gravity.

 

[JBMAC]

Healy is one of the best glovemen over the last 60 years, prior to that the keepers were pretty much rank amatuers that lacked the skills of modern keepers.

What a load of codswallop

 

[JBMAC]

Healy is one of the best glovemen over the last 60 years, prior to that the keepers were pretty much rank amatuers that lacked the skills of modern keepers.

What a load of codswallop

 

[Dan]

Gilchrist was one of the best wicketkeepers of his time, even with his batting out of the equation. Only Boucher, of wicketkeepers with a decent amount of tests behind him, could really lay claim to being a better gloveman.

Australia: Gilchrist
India: Patel, Dhoni, Karthik
Pakistan: Akmal, Moin Khan, Latif
England: Jones, Read, Prior
South Africa: Tsolekile, Boucher
Sri Lanka: Sangakkara, Prassana Jayawardene
New Zealand: McCullum, Hart, Parore
West Indies: Jacobs, Baugh
Zimbabwe: Taibu, Flower
et al.

How many of those guys had glovework far superior to Gilchrist's? At his time, he was one of the best wicketkeepers , and he just so happened to be a fantastic batsman at the same time.

Historically speaking, Tallon, Grout, Knott and co. were obviously all very, very good glovemen, but Gilchrist wasn't as far behind as some like to think. He may be slightly inferior with the gloves, but he was by no means a terrible 'keeper playing based on his batting.

I think our tendency to look back with rose-tinted glasses, mixed with the preconceived notion that 'keepers who can bat can't good with the gloves, means Gilchrist's glovework ends up highly underrated.

 

[kyear2]

Actually think that Gilly was better with the gloves than Boucher, but that may just be me.

 

[andyc]

Certainly more proven against spinners.

 

[smash84]

^Latif was definitely a better gloveman than Gilchrist

 

[smash84]

Interestingly enough, S Rajesh posted an article on wicketkeeper-batsmen today.
The Numbers Game: Age of the batsman-wicketkeeper | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

as usual Rajest follows CW closely

But playing against Mars with their genius batsmen could mean that chances are extremely rare, therefore you can't risk letting them go down due to less able keeping.

Interesting points by both you and Ankit

I think if you are playing away to mars you need to pick the tallest keeper due to lack of gravity.

 

[Jager]

I also think Prassana Jawawardene is excellent behind the stumps, especially to spin.

 

[marc71178]

What a load of codswallop

I'm sure I''ve asked you in the past JB, but did you see enough of Jack Russell and if so, where would you rank him alongside the great names of yesteryear?

 

[zaremba]

Disappointed, I thought we had individuality :'(

Spot the problem

Yes! We're all individuals!

 

[kyear2]

Was never really a contest, the man who permanently changed the position Adam Gilchrist.