Adam Gilchrist - how good is he?

[Richard]

Now THAT is just plain stupid.

So... name 10 who were better?
Even now, there are few genuine World-class batsmen who can also keep wicket. At the current time, Sangakkara and Gilchrist are the only ones. Down the ages, there have been precious few. Even Lindsay and Dujon wouldn't have got into the sides as batsmen alone.

 

[Richard]

As far as keeping is concerned, Lateef was a far better keeper than Stewart.

Yes, but not by much, and Stewart was clearly a far superior batsman.

 

[Richard]

Who was also far far less effective with the bat then when he wasn't keeping, thus negating the "advantage" of being a batsman.

Except he wasn't - only early in his career, when he was being tossed from one role to the other, did it actually cause problems.
Once Stewart was given the gloves full-time, his average remained that of a top-order batsman.

 

[marc71178]

He was close enough to being the best for 76 of his 118 Tests.

He was only close when Russell retired.

 

[marc71178]

Which would of course explain why he was selected ahead of Russell in all bar 6 Tests post-1996?

Just because he was selected doesn't make him a better option.

If he'd stuck as a specialist opener and Russell kept that England team would've had a far better keeper and a far better opening partnership.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

They should've kept Stewie up top and carried on with Jack for longer. Stewie was good, but as an opener he was excellent, and I think Jack did a decent enough job averaging 27 odd.

What we gained for balance didn't outweigh what we lost up top IMO.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Just because he was selected doesn't make him a better option.

If he'd stuck as a specialist opener and Russell kept that England team would've had a far better keeper and a far better opening partnership.

Fair point, for me. Stewie never let anyone down as a wicketkeeper/bat, but IIRC his average whilst undertaking the dual roles was only about 6 runs more than Jack's.

It's a tribute to Stewie's professionalism that he was able to maintain a career average v close to 40 & keep wicket effectively into his 5th decade tho.

 

[Richard]

He was only close when Russell retired.

Which didn't happen until 1998\99 - a full 2 years after Stewart had become secure in the wicketkeeping position...

 

[Richard]

Just because he was selected doesn't make him a better option.

If he'd stuck as a specialist opener and Russell kept that England team would've had a far better keeper and a far better opening partnership.

And if he'd stuck as a specialist 'keeper in 1992 the England team would have been much better balanced than it often was before 1996\97.

 

[Richard]

Fair point, for me. Stewie never let anyone down as a wicketkeeper/bat, but IIRC his average whilst undertaking the dual roles was only about 6 runs more than Jack's.

Stewart's average once he was keeping wicket full-time was 11 higher than Russell's.

 

[oz_fan]

A revolutionary who is the best keeper/bat of all time and in the top 5 ODI batters of all time. Not sure where he would be in an all time list but certainly in the top 50 - 40.

 

[howardj]

I always hoped that Gilchrist, to let future generations know how good he was, would retire with a Test average in the mid-50's. Sadly, given his struggles of late, I wouldn't be surprised if it dips to 45 by the time the gloves are hung up. Im now convinced he will retire from all forms after WC 2007.

 

[parttimer]

Greentops have sorted Gilly out in this series. He really needs to show he's still capable batting on these sort of wickets by making a few useful contributions (when others do not) THIS SERIES, otherwise he should be dropped. This is beginning to be a serious concern

 

[Jono]

A revolutionary who is the best keeper/bat of all time and in the top 5 ODI batters of all time. Not sure where he would be in an all time list but certainly in the top 50 - 40.

Is he really one of the top 5 batters of all time in ODIs? One of the top 5 most destructive, yeah definitely. But it'd be a tough squeeze for top 5. Viv, Sachin and Bevan have the top 3 nailed down immediately, so he has to squeeze in the last 2, and with players like Deano, Inzy, Ponting, Miandad etc. its tough.

 

[Dasa]

Is he really one of the top 5 batters of all time in ODIs? One of the top 5 most destructive, yeah definitely. But it'd be a tough squeeze for top 5. Viv, Sachin and Bevan have the top 3 nailed down immediately, so he has to squeeze in the last 2, and with players like Deano, Inzy, Ponting, Miandad etc. its tough.

Definitely not one of the top 5 ODI batsmen of all time. His influence has been more in Tests than ODIs...his ODI record, while good, is not great or good enough to be in the top 5.

 

[Sanz]

That's a silly comparison. There's obviously a difference between taking ALL tests from a certain key moment in a player's career and selectively picking out individual matches where they did well. Stewart only really started keeping seriously after he was already in the England team so his learning years were in full view of everyone. We don't judge other keepers from their performances at 13 or whenever they started doing it seriously.

No you are the one who is doing a Silly comparison. You can't equate a batsman with Sir Don who spends 10 years of his international Cricket learning the crafts of batting, no matter how good he becomes.Adam glichrist is the best wicketkeeper batsman ever. It is not my fault that Stewart learnt to keep wickets at the age of 34 and that he averages 32 as a wicket-keeper batsman. Please dont tell me that he learnt his batting also at the age of 39, and that's why two years of his cricket can be compared to close to 10 years of Cricket Adam Gilchrist has played.

I am not denying his value to the English team, but please dont make claims like he would have made it easily to most International sides of his time, that's pure rubbish.

And Stewart was as good a keeper as Boucher on the evidence available. I don't really understand on what grounds they could be separated - both dropped virtually nothing. If they could be separated on the basis of their keeping to spinners we wouldn't know because they had to do little of it.

Here is why, For majority of his career Alec Stewart wasn't as good a keeper as Boucher has been.

 

[Sanz]

How many times do you have to be told you're wrong about this?

19538 - That is the no. of times you have posted rubbish on this forum. Hell post 19538 times more, and it will still be rubbish.

 

[Anil]

Is he really one of the top 5 batters of all time in ODIs? One of the top 5 most destructive, yeah definitely. But it'd be a tough squeeze for top 5. Viv, Sachin and Bevan have the top 3 nailed down immediately, so he has to squeeze in the last 2, and with players like Deano, Inzy, Ponting, Miandad etc. its tough.

gilchrist is not in the list of top 5 one day batsmen of all time man....no way!!! he is certainly one of the most destructive players on his day, but he just hasn't delivered on a consistent enough basis to be rated like that....there are so many other players, past and present who can be rated above him in one dayers.....add anwar, mark waugh, des haynes, martin crowe etc etc to that list....

 

[Jono]

Yeah, so you're agreeing with me Or did you quote the wrong person?

 

[33/3from3.3]

Shaun Udal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Richard