Adam Gilchrist - how good is he?

[FaaipDeOiad]

Would you need is batting in an alltime XI? He certainly isn't the best keeper ever.

He would provide more value to the team all-round, which is the point. You wouldn't need Bradman in an all-time XI either, it would still beat everyone else without him, but you wouldn't leave him out.

 

[wpdavid]

He would provide more value to the team all-round, which is the point. You wouldn't need Bradman in an all-time XI either, it would still beat everyone else without him, but you wouldn't leave him out.

But being one of the 5 best batsmen of all time is the only criteria for Bradman's position in an all time XI. Or, being specific, being one of the 3 best non-openers of all time. So the fact that they'd still win without him isn't really the point.

Gilchrist's position is different in that it refers to two skills, and it's just a question of how importantly we rate each of them.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

He's a Test class batsman and a Test class wicketkeeper. You could probably count players from history with both attributes on the figures of one hand, so that makes him an all time great. I'm surprised to see Sangakkara and Flower even mentioned in the same breath as Gilchrist, but I would bow to the superior knowledge of people who have seen more of those two in action than I have.

 

[Sanz]

Gilchrist by a Long Shot. He may not be an all time great Batsman, may not be an all time Wicket Keeper, but He is an all time great as a wicket keeper batsman and that's why he is rated so highly.

 

[tooextracool]

He's a Test class batsman and a Test class wicketkeeper. You could probably count players from history with both attributes on the figures of one hand, so that makes him an all time great. I'm surprised to see Sangakkara and Flower even mentioned in the same breath as Gilchrist, but I would bow to the superior knowledge of people who have seen more of those two in action than I have.

are you serious? Flower beats gilchrist in his sleep as a batsman, while gilchrist is probably the better keeper. theres definetly an argument for flower over Gilchrist while i think Gilchrist is a better player than sangakkara and stewart, but neither are too far behind.

 

[open365]

Gilchrist is by far the greatest and most infulencial keeper batsman in the world.

I don't see how anyone could say differently.

 

[Arjun]

Let's look at Gilchrist in comparison with some other contenders:

v/s SANGAKKARA

• Obviously, Gilchrist is the better keeper– he's faster, more consistent and lasts long.
• Gilchrist has scored even when the Aussies have lost most of the top six cheaply, and even builds rapid partnerships with the tailenders.
• Gilchrist may bat below six top-notch batsmen, but Sangakkara bats with six other batsmen, including two at least as good as him, in a non-minnow side.
• Look at which team wins more matches.

That last line suggests who's better, and by how much.

v/s FLOWER:

• He's been the frontline batsman for a nminnow team and starred in their best performances.
• He's done little wrong behind the stumps, without being as flashy as Gilchrist.
• His impact on a match is different, without being as remarkable.

If only he played for a top team....

v/s STEWART:

• Gilchrist has been more consistent with the bat
• Gilchrist's daredevilry has been more effective than Stewart's steady innings
• Gilchrist has been a lot faster behind the stumps, and more consistent.

Just too obvious. Two Ashes wins and two World Cup victories tell you.

v/s Akmal/Dhoni:
Wait and watch.

THE REST: No contest at all.

 

[RolledOver]

Gilli will remain the top keeper bats untill Dhoni emerges as a succesful keeper bats in the longer format of the game.I will give Gilly a year time to remain the top Keeper bat, after that Dhoni will be the king!

 

[Sanz]

For most of his career, Gilchrist could walk into most teams on his batting alone, same couldn't be said about any other wicketkeeper or allrounder.

 

[Sanz]

Gilli will remain the top keeper bats untill Dhoni emerges as a succesful keeper bats in the longer format of the game.I will give Gilly a year time to remain the top Keeper bat, after that Dhoni will be the king!

Thanks for the much needed

 

[RolledOver]

Thanks for the much needed

u r wc!

 

[wpdavid]

OK, just for the heck of it ..

Gilchrist vs Walcott vs Ames ?

 

[Armadillo]

Threre's only three Australian cricketers I enjoy watching - Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath and Adam Gilchrist. So I was interested to read here yesterday that some of you rate him as one of the greats. Some of you ranked him as one of Australia's five best players ever (ludacris but interesting), and some of you made one excellent point. That point was that Gilchrist is so far ahead of his wicket-keeping peers in impacting games that it makes him a great. And I have to agree. His average below 50 runs is worth 55-60 for me because he changes games so quickly when he gets going. To be honest I expected more people to put Ponting ahead of him since Ponting, in terms of numerics, will be most likely equivelant to say... Lara and Tendulkar. One person, I think it was C_C, ranked Gilchrist the best batsman of the last 15 years. That covers a lot of ground (Lara, Tendulkar, Waugh etc.).

I think someone's been listening to a bit too much Ludacris.

 

[Richard]

i dont get you on this idea of `luck` at all. You say McGrath has been a lucky bowler over a certain period which doesn't make sense at all. Why has Gilchrist been a luck batsman tell us?

Dropped catches, Einstein...

Plus i cant see how Sangakkara is far better at all, Gilly is a better bat plus his glovework is better. Has Andyc just said only Flower could seriously rival since Flower was definately a better batsman, while who is the better glovesman is debatable since i haven't seen enough of Flower's glovework to be sure.

Gilchrist categorically is not a better batsman than Sangakkara. A better wicketkeeper maybe, but not by a massive amount.

 

[Richard]

Alec Stewart close behind Adam Gilchrist? Oh really Richard, sometimes...

Not a million miles. Alec Stewart was far less fortunate and played in an era of infinately higher bowling standards than Gilchrist.
Clearly Gilchrist is better, but not by the distance the averages suggest (Gilchrist 50, Stewart 38 - which was Stewart's average as a 'keeper once he got the job long-term).

Rescuing your team at 5-120 shouldn't not be rated highly simply because Gilly has 'nothing to lose'. That's such a stupid statement.

Rarely has Gilchrist played in a different way - just thrown the bat, as he almost always does. Not carelessly, that's not what I'm saying - just that he hasn't changed his style. Which suggests his thoughts were along the lines of "if I get out I'm only doing what others have done. I might as well gamble."
Gilchrist rescuing Australia on the several occasions he has is indeed noteworthy.

 

[Richard]

Flower > Gilchrist >>>>>> every other keeper-batsman in history, as far as I'm concerned.

How can you seriously say they were massively better than Sangakkara?
As I say - I find Sangakkara a better batsman than Gilchrist.

 

[Richard]

Maybe if you watch him, you'll see how many times he's saved our asses.

Let's see...
I'd say 5
Bellerive 1999\2000 (even then he was secondary to Langer)
Mumbai 2000\01
Trent Bridge 2001
The WACA 2001\02
Kandy 2003\04
Not really the quite remarkable number some suggest.

 

[Richard]

Gilchrist is by far the greatest and most infulencial keeper batsman in the world.

I don't see how anyone could say differently.

Err - because there are better batsmen in his own team?
Most influential I wouldn't argue with, but greatest? No way.

 

[Richard]

He's a Test class batsman and a Test class wicketkeeper. You could probably count players from history with both attributes on the figures of one hand, so that makes him an all time great. I'm surprised to see Sangakkara and Flower even mentioned in the same breath as Gilchrist, but I would bow to the superior knowledge of people who have seen more of those two in action than I have.

How do Sangakkara and Flower not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath?
Both are top-order batsmen, not people who come in after 6 other top players.

 

[Richard]

v/s STEWART:

• Gilchrist has been more consistent with the bat
• Gilchrist's daredevilry has been more effective than Stewart's steady innings
• Gilchrist has been a lot faster behind the stumps, and more consistent.

Just too obvious. Two Ashes wins and two World Cup victories tell you.

Let me assure you, Stewart would have had plenty of Ashes wins if he'd been in the team Gilchrist has.
Stewart has also had plenty his share of daredevil innings - none more so than his twin-centuries to storm Fortress Bridgetown.