Brook's side
International Regular
They already have but were split up in the batting order iirc.
-
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.
Does Ben Foakes have a legitimate case for Test selection?
- Thread starter slowfinger
- Start date
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Rootopia
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
I don't follow this - Foakes has played 20 Tests, not 8.
Brook's side
International Regular
My list was out of date. Change Foakes from 8 to 20 and you're good.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
As a language model, Brook's side was trained on a large dataset of text from the internet, books, and other sources up until 2021.
Brook's side
International Regular
Hey I only got like 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of history.
So call me Mr Imperfect, it's fine.
(joking, you're right, I am usually out of date!)
Last edited:
Socerer 01
International Captain
how is Ben Foakes a specialist keeper when he averages 2 less than Carey since 2022 and 2 more than Rizwan in the same time period? he’s no Pant or Blundell but he surely is not bad enough with the bad to be called specialist keeper?
Brook's side
International Regular
i mean he's primarily a keeper, rather than a batsman who learned to keep wicket. not saying he can't bat.
Fuller Pilch
Hall of Fame Member
He would be one of the 1st picked. McCullum always wants to take 20 wickets and was a world class keeper himself, so of course he'll pick Foakes.
Chin Music
State Vice-Captain
Harsh on Ambrose although I take your point that all the others were definitely batting first keepers.
I don't really know what your definition of "specialist keeper" is, but assume from your list that it's a judgment based upon perceptions of their batting rather than bowling. Of your list of non-specialists I'm pretty sure all except Pope have been keepers or keeper options throughout their professional career. I don't understand how neither Prior nor Ambrose are considered specialists given that Sussex spent several years trying to decide who they wanted to keep, eventually picking Prior and resulting in Ambrose moving to Warwickshire.
You can be a specialist and not necessarily very good.
Socerer 01
International Captain
yeah Dickwella would be a specialist keeper according to that idea but he is **** with the gloves
Brook's side
International Regular
I mean, I've literally already directly answered you and you're still piping up.
The point I've made is incredibly easy to understand, and is 100% correct.
Brook's side
International Regular
All of them were converted batsmen. If you don't know this, it's not my problem.
Brook's side
International Regular
What age does this conversation have to happen after which they are not specialists? Prior was keeping very early in his county career, sharing the duties with Ambrose at Hove. Buttler was a keeper early in his career in limited overs. Jones broke into the Kent side as a keeper-batsman. None of these guys were converted into the role by England, they'd donned the gloves years before. Bairstow might be your one good example of someone who wasn't a regular first choice keeper for Yorkshire
I'd actually refute the idea of there being a specialist keeper these days - in county cricket almost all keepers have been all-rounders for a long time, well into the early 00s if not before. I can remember one lad at Hampshire whose average was in the teens and batted at 9 about 10-15 years ago, but other than that keepers usually average in the high-20s as a minimum. It's just as with all-rounders who bowl, some are better at the one discipline over the other, and some very good in both.
Brook's side
International Regular
Nah. All of the ones I've described as not being "specialist" keepers, were converted batsmen (which was the point that I was making).
Line and Length
Cricketer Of The Year
So if a specialist 'keeper starts scoring runs on a regular basis does that disqualify them being a "specialist 'keeper"?
Adders
Cricketer Of The Year
A bit of semantics going on here, a "specialist" keeper doesn't mean they have to be crap with the bat, nor does it mean they don't keep wicket at lower levels.
I think it's more to do with who they're keeping out the side or being compared to. There is no doubt that Foakes is a far better gloveman than YJB........but the latter is by far the better batsmen. If it was a 1 on 1 choice here (it isn't cos Crawley can gtfo) then you're choosing between the specialist keeper or the specialist bat.
The fact that Bairstow keeps wicket for Yorkshire or has done since high school is irrelevant.
I think it's more to do with who they're keeping out the side or being compared to. There is no doubt that Foakes is a far better gloveman than YJB........but the latter is by far the better batsmen. If it was a 1 on 1 choice here (it isn't cos Crawley can gtfo) then you're choosing between the specialist keeper or the specialist bat.
The fact that Bairstow keeps wicket for Yorkshire or has done since high school is irrelevant.