• 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.

Interesting stat about James Foster

Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
In Australia's first innings of the Test completed today, James Foster didn't let through a bye. That puts him 21st (equal 19th really. There are a few who kept for the same score but before he did so they come higher) on the all time list of the highest score for a keeper without letting through a bye, the highest being Hashan Tillakaratne and 4/671 without letting through a bye against NZ.

So for those who reckon he can't keep to save himself, you've got to admit that's a pretty good effort, not withstanding the wraps he's gotten from Ian healy.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
I guess Harmison wasn't as fired up in the 1st Innings!

How many 4 byes did he give away today?
 
H

hourn

U19 Cricketer
I reckon he's a top keeper - hes just not upto it with the bat yet and this day a keeper really has to be at last a half decent batsmen.
 
Rik

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Well he did well but to say he's a great keeper...you would have to forget all the easy catches he's dropped in the last year :rolleyes:
 
Rik

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
The Argonaut said:
He probably didn't have to take too many in that innings.:lol: :D :lol:
Click to expand...
He did have quite a few, and had to cope with some wild ones and some balls which really bounced. Nice to see he's learnt to catch now!
 
Langeveldt

Langeveldt

Soutie
Im more a fan of chris read but as long as Foster doesnt make any more howlers with the gloves, he should be a good one for the future.

About his batting, well i don't know, he doesnt look a natural batsman. I think he should look to dominate a bit more, the bowlers always know they are on top the moment he walks out, and that compounds the pressure for him.
 
Rik

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
Langeveldt said:
Im more a fan of chris read but as long as Foster doesnt make any more howlers with the gloves, he should be a good one for the future.

About his batting, well i don't know, he doesnt look a natural batsman. I think he should look to dominate a bit more, the bowlers always know they are on top the moment he walks out, and that compounds the pressure for him.
Click to expand...
Well I'm a Read fan too and if Stewart decides to retire from ODIs to concentrate on Tests (which would be quite a good move really as he is still very much a Test Class batsman and now seems to have decided to play attacking cameos which help the team) then I would pick Read as the new ODI Keeper, good Keeper, hard hitting batsman.
 
Bazza

Bazza

International 12th Man
I'm a big Read fan. I think the opposite of the Stewart situation though. His keeping is in decline and if anything that will be more costly in tests. I think he could even warrant a place as a specialist bat in the short term until a couple of guys put their hands up, but of course this will never happen. He's only useful because he can keep - other than that the selectors will (rightly I guess) turn to youth.
 
Anna

Anna

International Vice-Captain
Odd that. The thought of an England team without Alec Stewart.....:O :( :wow:
Anyway, Read is by far the better batsman out of him and Foster. Their's will be an interesting contest.

Just a thought: was Rob Turner, Somerset keeper, worthy of an England call up when he was younger and in his prime?
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
No, he had a couple of good seasons and was never as good a bat as Stewart or Keeper as the unluckiest player in England, Robert Charles Russell.
 
Langeveldt

Langeveldt

Soutie
Why was Jack Russell So unlucky? Did the English go with Stewart because of his superior batting? I still remember Joburg with him and Atherton though :!( :!( :!(
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
He was as good as any keeper in the world in the last 20 years, but his supposed batting weakness meant Stewart took the gloves.

Certainly for a long time he actually averaged more in Test Cricket than Stewart did as a keeper!
 
Bazza

Bazza

International 12th Man
As I have repeatedly stated Marc, England have tended to need 5 bowlers to dismiss the opposition. If we had an Ian Botham figure at the time, this would be no problem (5 bats, AR, Russell, 4 bowlers), but we didn't, so 4 bowlers left us in a position where we were conceding huge scores, and Russell at 6 made us look very weak (although in fairness he's better than Robert Key now, and the fat boy has managed to open and bat at 4 in 6 tests...:rolleyes: )
 
Rik

Rik

Cricketer Of The Year
marc71178 said:
Need pictorial evidence (unless it's too scary)
Click to expand...
Here you go Marc I think he bears a passing reseblence to this Snooker Player Lee...

There was this guy who played for Surry who was horrendus...David Ward or sommit, I'll find him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top