mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Will try to limit this one to 32, but said that about the AR thread.
This is gonna be challenge. Mainly because I don't know how voters and nommers are meant to weight keeping skills with batting skills.
Perhaps it should be soley based on keeping ability? Something hard to do with only anecdotal evidence to go by for the pre-war players.. as it's not like stats tell the whole story with keeping. Still, I feel this would be really interesting and we'd see a lot of players advance far who are rarely talked about as ATGs
Or should it just be overall value to their team with the qualification that the player simply kept wicket? Taking their batting contributions fully into account alongside their keeping ability.
One scenario would mean Jack Russell would beat someone like Andy Flower in the votes, the other scenario would obviously mean the opposite.
This is gonna be challenge. Mainly because I don't know how voters and nommers are meant to weight keeping skills with batting skills.
Perhaps it should be soley based on keeping ability? Something hard to do with only anecdotal evidence to go by for the pre-war players.. as it's not like stats tell the whole story with keeping. Still, I feel this would be really interesting and we'd see a lot of players advance far who are rarely talked about as ATGs
Or should it just be overall value to their team with the qualification that the player simply kept wicket? Taking their batting contributions fully into account alongside their keeping ability.
One scenario would mean Jack Russell would beat someone like Andy Flower in the votes, the other scenario would obviously mean the opposite.
