Adam Gilchrist

[Thelwell]

Having watched the great man hit a career best 172 (although i accept not against the toughest opponents), I feel it neccessary to pay tribute to the legend that is Gilchrist.

In test cricket as a batsman he blows hot and cold, but what can you expect batting at 7 and coming in when the team are 300-odd already. AS a wicketkeeper he's stunning, the one-handed catch he took down the leg side off brett lee to dismiss tendulkar in the one test match was brilliant.

In ODI there is no one better than him. Anwar was good but been quite last couple of years (he did retire at one point not sure if thats still the case?), Sachin is good as is Sehwag but just think Gilly is better.

The guy has a strike rate of 92 for god's sake, the ideal ODI player!

 

[Neil Pickup]

I think you're a little over-excitable.

 

[KishanTeli]

I agree with Neil your view is a little over-excitable, Gilchrist is given the licence to 'go out and smash' in both forms of the game, hence his S/R around 90.

No doubt about his talent and destructive ability but other players such as Lara and Sachin may have just as good S/R if they did not carry as much expectation and responsibility on their shoulders.

But credit where credit where is due, he is a major force in both forms of the game when he is in form.

 

[Andre]

In test cricket as a batsman he blows hot and cold, but what can you expect batting at 7 and coming in when the team are 300-odd already.

I think you are a little confused here - looking at his Test average of 55 and his ODI average of 34, I'd say he's a little more hot and cold in the ODI's!

 

[Thelwell]

Gilly's test average of 55 is alittle deceiving, as is Bevan's ODI average, alot of his innings in tests are not outs which are not included when calculating his avaerage.

Not confussed just aware of how averages are calculated.

 

[Neil Pickup]

It's not his fault he doesn't get out.

Even if you ignore all not outs, it's still 45.

 

[Andre]

6 Not Out's in his ODI career.

13 Not Out's in his Test career.

Most certainly not a big enough amount to make a 20 point differance in averages based soley on not outs.

 

[Thelwell]

Having considered your evidence i still feel he can be hot and cold in test, to me he never looks as confortable when batting in tests as he does in ODI.

 

[krkode]

I apologize if people see this differently, but I see Gilchrist as a sort of Shahid Afridi. A better version. He gets out there, gets the run rate pumping and sooner or later loses his wicket to an unnecessary shot. He has potential, no doubt about it, but he's hardly ideal, if you ask me.

Personally, I think Bevan is a the ideal ODI player...not to forget Tendulkar, Ganguly, and Lara...

It takes more than a strike rate of 92 to be a great ODI batsman. It takes skill, patience, and above all, determination, heart, mental fortitude - call it what you will.

I think I'd need more than 2 hands to count off, finger by finger, the number of times Bevan has made an invaluable contribution to the Aussie batting line-up. Same for the other players I mentioned.

 

[SquidAU]

We'll just see if Gilchrist can do it against India on sunday.......

 

[Jono]

I'm a huge Gilchrist fan, absolutely huge I love the way he plays. But in no way can I accept the fact that you just claimed Gilchrist was a better ODI batsman than Sachin Tendulkar. Ponting and Hayden I could grasp. Even Bevan I could see where you were coming from, but Gilchrist? Come on Gilchrist doesn't even come close in comparison to Sachin, and many other great batsman.

Don't take my comments out of context and make me look like I don't like Gilchrist, he's an awesome player and very exciting, but you definitely exaggerated what you just said.

Ganguly's innings in the 99 World Cup against Sri Lanka was much better than Gilchrist's.

 

[Richard]

Gilly's test average of 55 is alittle deceiving, as is Bevan's ODI average, alot of his innings in tests are not outs which are not included when calculating his avaerage.

Not confussed just aware of how averages are calculated.

I really am amazed people talk as if not-outs are some slight on the batsman.
I don't know about Neil's phraseology - it's not his fault he doesn't get out" - personally I'd say "doesn't he deserve some credit for not getting out?"
But I do think Gilchrist's Test average is a little deceiving, but because he's been very lucky at times, not because he gets a large number of not-outs.
As for Bevan's ODI average it shows quite clearly that he is the best ODI player ever - not-outs do say something about ability. Jeez.:rolleyes:

 

[Thelwell]

I'm sure Gilly will do the business against India.

Dont think Gilly gets out playing 'unneccessary' shots, he simply goes after everythin. He knows theres plenty of batting in the Aus line up so goes after everythin. Sometimes he gets out and looks a little silly,thats cricket.

Bevan is ideal when chasing a game but not when setting a target. When you are chasing a game bevan is good as he will simply score a run a ball to keep things ticking over, but gilly can set a huge total for a team by hitting boundaries consistently, somethin bevan is not known for doing but i understand what you mean.

Tendulkar, quality at both forms of the game and his average proves it. Does he contribute in any other way apart from the bat? Gilly is the worlds best wicket keeper so in a sense he is two players in one; great batsman and wicketkeeper. Sachin's bowling aint nothin special.

Said Gilly is ideal as he performs to vital roles in the field and with the bat. Sachin only with the bat, agree comparing them as batsman sachin is better ODI player. But an ideal player contributes in more than one form, which is why i think Gilly's the best.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I don't know about Neil's phraseology - it's not his fault he doesn't get out" - personally I'd say "doesn't he deserve some credit for not getting out?"

OK..."It's not his fault that he doesn't get out much!

 

[Richard]

OK..."It's not his fault that he doesn't get out much!

Not having any qualms about the grammer, just the phrasing.
"Not fault" is used too much. "Is\isn't to credit" isn't used nearly often enough.
Study of cricket is IMO concerned with who deserves credit and not whose fault was what.

 

[Richard]

I'm sure Gilly will do the business against India.

Dont think Gilly gets out playing 'unneccessary' shots, he simply goes after everythin. He knows theres plenty of batting in the Aus line up so goes after everythin. Sometimes he gets out and looks a little silly,thats cricket.

Bevan is ideal when chasing a game but not when setting a target. When you are chasing a game bevan is good as he will simply score a run a ball to keep things ticking over, but gilly can set a huge total for a team by hitting boundaries consistently, somethin bevan is not known for doing but i understand what you mean.

Tendulkar, quality at both forms of the game and his average proves it. Does he contribute in any other way apart from the bat? Gilly is the worlds best wicket keeper so in a sense he is two players in one; great batsman and wicketkeeper. Sachin's bowling aint nothin special.

Said Gilly is ideal as he performs to vital roles in the field and with the bat. Sachin only with the bat, agree comparing them as batsman sachin is better ODI player. But an ideal player contributes in more than one form, which is why i think Gilly's the best.

Gilchrist can in no way be construed as The World's best wicketkepeer. Much better than most can accept to be the case (in plenty's minds, the best batsmen can't be the best wicketkeeper) but definately not the best in The World.

 

[mavric41]

Gilchrist can in no way be construed as The World's best wicketkepeer. Much better than most can accept to be the case (in plenty's minds, the best batsmen can't be the best wicketkeeper) but definately not the best in The World.

He's not even the best keeper in Australia (Wade Secombe) but as a package he is irressitable.

 

[Salamuddin]

Gilchrist is a fine player -- but a better ODI player than Tendulkar ?

I don't think so -- Gilly may have a higher strike rate but look at the difference in averages.

 

[krkode]

Not having any qualms about the grammer, just the phrasing.
"Not fault" is used too much. "Is\isn't to credit" isn't used nearly often enough.
Study of cricket is IMO concerned with who deserves credit and not whose fault was what.

I don't think you're getting it. He's agreeing with you. His comment was to the person who claimed that Bevan isn't great because he has many not outs. In respect to that topic, it's appropriate to say that it's "not Bevan's fault" meaning, "you can't take credit away from Bevan for bowlers who can't get him out!" It's a different way of saying the exact same thing! :rolleyes:

As for Bevan's ODI average it shows quite clearly that he is the best ODI player ever - not-outs do say something about ability. Jeez.

Not necessarily when you're batting at 6 or 7. Ask him to open and we'll see how many not-outs he has.
Bevan's good. Maybe even great. But not the best.

 

[thierry henry]

I despise Gilchrist but still watched the highlights, because I was expecting big things. Of course, it being Gilchrist and all, I was left feeling very disappointed.

I must commend him however for scoring so few boundaries in his innings. It was amazing that he scored 100 off 89 but only 30 of them were in boundaries, it just wasn't good for my highlights viewing:P Must have been excellent collecting the ones and twos but unfortunately I didn't see it.

In general this innings summed Gilchrist up perfectly. He started off with a nick over slips, got dropped 3 times, had a few slogs and tin-arsed his way to 172 while being ugly as arse all the way through. Really wish he'd hold the bat lower down.