-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Better Keeper - Brendon McCullum or BJ Watling
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
Johan
State Vice-Captain
ya don't really need Joss Buttler keeping to Shane Bond , 100 runs from four byes alone.
TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah but if you have more spinners you'd need a better keeper even more
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
McCullum was the more athletic keeper - could dive a long way to snare a brilliant one, while Watling was the more consistent one - could keep as smoothly at the end of the day as at the start. Re batting as keeper - Watling again was more consistent especially under pressure, while McCullum had more gears and was more destructive. McCullum's keeping is often forgotten compared to his explosive batting, agggressive captaincy, and enthusiastic fielding the latter part of his career, but he was a quality keeper.
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
His PR team will try and scrub this from the records but BMac cost us a World Cup when he dropped Dravid.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Not going to Kenya certainly cost us. That was one (rare) time when India beat us in an important ICC match.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
McCullum I’d say was a slightly better keeper. He was so athletic it allowed the slips to stand quite wide and cover more space. Also became pretty slick keeping to Dan. BJ had excellent footwork and was safe as houses against pace, but he didn’t quite have the quick hands and feet that McCullum did.
On the batting side it’s a no-contest. Watling made valuable runs in a variety of conditions. McCullum played a couple of thrilling knocks but overall underachieved until he gave up the gloves. The one exception is v Australia where McCullum’s agression and strength square of the wicket made him more dangerous than Watling’s more patient approach. But overall Watling comfortably the better keeper-bat.
Watling definitely wins on balance, the GOAT nz test keeper bat.
On the batting side it’s a no-contest. Watling made valuable runs in a variety of conditions. McCullum played a couple of thrilling knocks but overall underachieved until he gave up the gloves. The one exception is v Australia where McCullum’s agression and strength square of the wicket made him more dangerous than Watling’s more patient approach. But overall Watling comfortably the better keeper-bat.
Watling definitely wins on balance, the GOAT nz test keeper bat.
Parore 1999-01 was the best pure keeper we've ever had, comfortably. He was incredible. Ignore the fact he criminally underperformed with the bat, though.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
Watling was better as a bat when then they were keeping, but McCullum was a better bat overall.
Watling as bat:
8 tests, 320 runs @ 28, 1 100 & 1 50
Watling as keeper:
67 tests, 3398 runs @ 39.05, 7 100s & 18 50s
Overall:
75 tests, 3790 runs @ 37.52, 8 100s & 19 50s
McCullum as bat:
49 tests, 3650 runs @ 42.94, 7 100s & 16 50s
McCullum as keeper:
52 tests, 2803 runs @ 34.18, 5 100s & 15 50s
Overall:
101 tests, 6453 runs @ 38.64, 12 100s & 31 50s
Almost all of Watling's runs were hard earned, whereas quite a few of McCullum's keeper runs were downhill skiing when the hard work had been done/blasting weak attacks like Bangladesh. McCullum's later career batting (when not keeping) with the daddy 100s was better than Watling however.
Neil Young
State Vice-Captain
Yep. He made keeping look effortless at his best.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
ashley bach
Cricketer Of The Year
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
I feel this is really unfair on Watling considering his grand total of 8 matches as a specialist bat.
and, I dunno, I'm probably in the minority but I feel like he had two hundreds as a specialist bat that actually mattered, both in that home series vs India. His away record as a specialist bat is pretty bad too.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
McCullum had several other important 100s as a bat: 200 opening in India, 200 in the Phil Hughes' Sharjah test, and a lightning fast 190-odd to set up a win over Sri Lanka (was on track to beat Astle's record). The fastest ever 100 was pretty meaningless.
Most of Watling's tests as a specialist bat were opening when he was young. We should have won a test v Pakistan when he was batting well when it was ruined with rain. He also scored a fantastic 100 to help win a test in England in 2015 (too injured to keep, but okay to bat), when Ronchi was kweping.
Bahnz
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah, this is why comparisons of their batting is a bit difficult. McCullum was a keeper-bat during his development phase when you'd naturally expect lower returns. He gave up the gloves just as he was entering his prime as a batsmen, and his run output was significantly higher during that 2008-2010 period despite being lined up against some tough opposition. Watling on the other hand spent most of his early years out of the side, and was only brought in when he was 26/27. It's quite possible that if McCullum's back hadn't conked out and he'd decided he wanted to hang onto the gloves, that he would've been just as productive during the later stages of his career.
Still, woulda, coulda, shoulda. Watling's #1.
Still, woulda, coulda, shoulda. Watling's #1.