Adam Gilchrist v Andy Flower

[Craig]

Who do you rate as better?

I'm leaning towards Flower for this one. Whilst I'm in no way knocking Gilchrist's career or how he plays, in fact I think he is a suberb player and a nightmare to bowl to when on song, really damaging. And certainly how he has been able to keep up a high average and s/r for nearly 100 Tests (he has 90) and for 228 ODIs.

That said I can't go past Flower's grit and determination and the amount of innings he played that really did save Zimbabwe's arse being handed to them a lot quicker, how many of his innings either avoided the follow-on or get a draw? His concentration was remarkable, to able to keep for so long and bat just as long, was quite impressive. Thought he was a right innovator with his reservse sweep, one of the best sweepers I've seen (Matt Hayden and Jonty Rhodes are two of them), especially in ODI cricket. And if performance in India is important then what about his double ton in 2000 then? I suppose playing for a weaker team (well that team >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this random lot) could count against him, but you've still got to put the runs on the board and perform.

Anyway I'm off to bed now, so fire away people!

 

[SJS]

Flower for test matches and Gilchrist for ODI's. If I had my way, and the side wasnt full of great batsmen, I would perhaps play both in the same side.

 

[Prince EWS]

Flower was a better test batsman for mine, no question, regardless of his average - for the reasons Craig outlined. Except his keeping was, for the most part, quite substandard, so I'd have to go with Gilchrist.

 

[SJS]

Flower was a better test batsman for mine, no question, regardless of his average - for the reasons Craig outlined. Except his keeping was, for the most part, quite substandard, so I'd have to go with Gilchrist.

I think thats fair. You could always play Andy as a batsman in the same side.

 

[NUFAN]

Flower was a better test batsman for mine, no question, regardless of his average - for the reasons Craig outlined. Except his keeping was, for the most part, quite substandard, so I'd have to go with Gilchrist.

How many of Andy Flower's 63 Tests did you see?

I'll go Gilchrist for both one dayers and tests, just because of the whole impact of Gilchrist. He could change a game in a session and did so on numerous occasions.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

I went for the case of beer. 2nd best backyard cricket keeper ever for mine, the wooden fence piping it for having a bigger reach.

And don't get me started on its batting. Covers his stumps well. A little prone to lbw's though.

 

[pasag]

Was thinking about this about an hour ago when deliberating on a certain sentence in one of the updates for the front page. Abit creepy tbh.

 

[NUFAN]

Here is a pretty interesting list of LG ICC Best-Ever Test Batting Ratings

http://www.lgiccrankings.com/test/batting/all-time-ranking.php

Flower equal 25th, Gilly currently equal 39th. Doesn't help with my voting of Gilly but still.

 

[Dasa]

Obvious choice.

 

[speirz]

Depends on the type of beer.

Flower was more talented the Gilchrist, and in the right envronment he would've been the better player IMO, but Gilchrist has one of (if not the) best team environments around him.

 

[silentstriker]

Gilly, fantastic explosive lower-middle order batsman and a very good keeper to both spin and pace. Pretty much the perfect wicketkeeper in the modern game.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I'll go Gilchrist for both one dayers and tests, just because of the whole impact of Gilchrist. He could change a game in a session and did so on numerous occasions.

Impact is overated. Flower could rebuild an innings, which is so much more important imo.

 

[silentstriker]

Impact is overated. Flower could rebuild an innings, which is so much more important imo.

Gilly has saved the Aussie collective ass many times, which is so important in Tests.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Utterly different players. It's like comparing a seven-seater with an F1 car: they've both got wheels, an engine, pedals and seatbelts... I know which I'd want for the school run and which for a Grand Prix.

It's debatable whether either would have had anything approaching the influence they did had they been in the other's shoes, and for that reason I'm going to have to refrain from making a considered call, and opt for Flower because he isn't Australian.

 

[Ikki]

Gilchrist. The better batter in both forms of the game. The fact that he averaged more than 50 for batting the way he has is amazing. Not just a senseless blaster, but a demolisher. By that I mean, he didn't go out there swinging. He could rescue a test match and do it in his own way.

Tests:

Gilchrist: 49 @ 82 SR
Flower: 52 @ 45 SR

I take the dominant SR over the minuscule average anyday. Especially when you consider for most of his career Gilchrist was above 50 and has more test matches above 50 than Flower did in his career.

And let's factor in the wicket-keeping: Gilchrist.

 

[Beleg]

I like both equally. I'll choose Flower just because I am loathe to choose an Australian.

 

[PhoenixFire]

I think Gilchrist was the better keeper and certainly the more destructive player, but Flower was the better player of spin by an absolute mile.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

If you're picking a variant of a World XI it's always going to be Gilchrist. Flower was a top order player, and despite being one of the best players of spin in years, there's better players than he for the 3/4/5 spots, and Gilchrist is a certainty for the best 7 in recent times.

 

[Matt79]

Gilly for me - this has been done before, and the arguments on both sides are sound, and ultimately impossible to resolve - ie would Flower have scored faster in a better team - probably yes, but by how much?

Gilly is easily a better keeper IMO, and he was the better batsman for the majority of his career, again IMO. At his peak, Gilly as a batsman occupies a level reached only by a handful of players before him.

 

[DCC_legend]

Hmmm Difficult as both are too very good batsmen. Flower just edges it for me.