Is Luke Ronchi potentially the next Adam Gilchrist?

[Richard]

To watch attempted pompous Englishmen?

Or watch Ronchi attempting to out-Gilchrist McCullum?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

CW needs an emoticon which involves grabbing Richard by the shoulders, shaking him violently and screaming "SHUUUTT UUUUPPPPPPPP!" in his face. I'd use it in like every single thread.

 

[Flem274*]

CW needs an emoticon which involves grabbing Richard by the shoulders, shaking him violently and screaming "SHUUUTT UUUUPPPPPPPP!" in his face. I'd use it in like every single thread.

This one should do fine:

Or this:

Possibly this:

Take your pick.

 

[Athlai]

Reckon the second one should suffice.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

While we're wildly OT and going further away, how many English people do you actually know who are pompous?

Mark Nicolas. (face)

 

[Burgey]

While we're wildly OT and going further away, how many English people do you actually know who are pompous?

Not enough bandwidth......

Gets hat, takes coat, leaves

 

[Richard]

CW needs an emoticon which involves grabbing Richard by the shoulders, shaking him violently and screaming "SHUUUTT UUUUPPPPPPPP!" in his face. I'd use it in like every single thread.

 

[Perm]

I'm still not willing to take the results of the Knight-Gilchrist poll seriously, in any way. How do we know there wasn't a bunch of n00bz or idiots that voted for Knight? The poll needs re-done and should be a public one, so we can actually see what people think. Otherwise Richard's insistence of "half the forum think Knight is better" will continue to reign, despite the possibility of most/all of those voters being unknown and unproven CC posters.

 

[Flem274*]

Nick Knight and Adam Gilchrist were completely different players. Comparisons between them don't have much use. If you want to compare Gilchrist to an England ODI player Trescothick or Stewart, for a start, would make much more sense.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Mark Nicolas. (face)

Dear oh dear.

 

[sanga1337]

At best I think he could be the kind of batsman that averages mid to high thirties with a strike rate of around 60-65. So no he won't be as good as Gilchrist. Mind you it would be great if he could turn out to be that kind of player.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

If he does have a decent run in the Australian sides, there's very little doubt in my mind his strike rate won't be below 80 in tests and 95 in ODI's.

 

[sanga1337]

If he does have a decent run in the Australian sides, there's very little doubt in my mind his strike rate will be below 80 in tests and 95 in ODI's.

Yeah a bit low maybe around 70. 80 a bit too high IMO

 

[Jakester1288]

Luke Ronchi has quickly confirmed his place as the next in line for Australia's wicketkeeping position after Adam Gilchrist and Brad Haddin. An accomplished gloveman, Ronchi has also demanded the selectors' attention with the type of clean hitting that has become a trademark of Western Australia keepers. He took over the role from another rapid-scoring right-hander, Ryan Campbell, during 2005-06 and two games after Campbell's retirement Ronchi blasted a run-a-ball century against New South Wales. Last summer he hammered the fastest hundred in Australian domestic one-day history. His 56-ball century against New South Wales featured a series of powerful pulls off Stuart Clark, and the effort eclipsed the 62-ball record set by Ronchi's team-mate Adam Voges two seasons earlier. Another highlight was his 89 from 49 balls against an England XI in the Lilac Hill match in December. Ronchi finished 2006-07 with 40 first-class dismissals and 378 Pura Cup runs at 31.50, and 339 Ford Ranger Cup runs at 37.66. His rewards were a third winter at the Academy and selection for the Australia A tour to Pakistan. Ronchi celebrated a first-class double of 90 and 33 against Tasmania on debut in 2002-03 and then outlined his method. "I just tried to have fun and it went from there," he said. He struck a wild 67 from 24 balls in the first Twenty20 game in Australia, cannoned 51 off 43 against the Pakistanis and smacked 40 off 13 for the Prime Minister's XI in 2004-05. Born in New Zealand, he has no intention of playing for the Black Caps.
Cricinfo staff July 2007

Back to the is Ronchi the next Gilchrist discussion. It is much to early in Ronchi's career to compare, considering Gilchrist has played so many more matches. He was one of the most consistent 'keeper batsmen in Australia's history. Gilchrist also has a much better average in all catorgories.

Comparing Ronchi to Haddin in FC cricket is acceptable, as they both have good FC records. Ronchi averages more catches a match than Haddin in FC cricket, which I found interesting. There is only four runs the difference in batting averages, Haddin on top.

However, when it comes to experience, Haddin reins supreme. Haddin has scored 4157 more runs then Ronchi at FC level, with 23 more 50's and 7 more 100's. He has 179 more catches to add to that impressive record.

In ODI cricket Ronchi has a better record with the bat, averaging 38 compared to Haddin's 30.20, but if you take away Ronchi's recent 64, he only averages 6. You can't compare catches in ODI cricket as Haddin has often played as a batsmen only whilst Gilchrist has played as the 'keeper.

In ODI cricket Haddin has been a much more cautious batsmen compared to Ronchi. Ronchi has a strike rate of 205, whilst Haddin only scores at 80 runs per 100 balls. Adam Gilchrist, his predecessor, scored at a rate of 96 runs per 100 balls. Even Gilchrist's test strike rate beats Haddin's ODI strike rate. However, the test for Ronchi will be to keep up his rapid run rate, where he currently scores over 2 runs a ball. I am sure he will fail to score at this rate consistently, but I do believe occasionally he will have little flourishes where he will score big in quick time.

 

[Jakester1288]

Yeah a bit low maybe around 70. 80 a bit too high IMO

It doesn't matter how quick you score your runs, it's more about consistence. Adam Gilchrist and Andrew Symonds are prime examples of this.

 

[sanga1337]

It doesn't matter how quick you score your runs, it's more about consistence. Adam Gilchrist and Andrew Symonds are prime examples of this.

yes I know... Im just estimating how fast I think Luke Ronchi will score at test level if he fulfills his potential.

 

[Jakester1288]

yes I know... Im just estimating how fast I think Luke Ronchi will score at test level if he fulfills his potential.

Tbph I can't see Ronchi playing Test match cricket whilst Haddin is playing, fit and in form, despite how good Ronchi's form is.

 

[GIMH]

I'm still not willing to take the results of the Knight-Gilchrist poll seriously, in any way. How do we know there wasn't a bunch of n00bz or idiots that voted for Knight? The poll needs re-done and should be a public one, so we can actually see what people think. Otherwise Richard's insistence of "half the forum think Knight is better" will continue to reign, despite the possibility of most/all of those voters being unknown and unproven CC posters.

Haha, seriously? So let's get this straight:

-"N00bz" votes don't count in polls
-Anonymous votes don't count (even though I reckon people are more likely to vote accurately on a private poll, rather than going for irrelevant options etc)
-Unproven CC posters' opinions don't count - so what, like how do you qualify as proven? Maybe you have to prove yourself before mods let you vote in polls at all.

Seriously Perm, been enjoying your posting lately but this is just silly!

 

[PhoenixFire]

There's no point starting up a new poll as there will no doubt be many people voting Gilchrist to spite Richard, IMO.

 

[GIMH]

There's no point starting up a new poll as there will no doubt be many people voting Gilchrist to spite Richard, IMO.

Gilchrist, surely?