McCullum Gives Up Keeping in Tests

[SJS]

Hang on, if we're going to claim a batsman that has a poor technique but may be mentally tough and score runs is a better batsman than one with a good technique but is mentally weak and scores no runs, than the same should be done with keeping.

If Gayle is a better batsman than Ganga, than Prior is a better keeper than Akmal.

With or without **** in his pants, Akmal is a better keeper (BY FAR) than Prior. Saying that does not mean that Akmal will never drop catches or have bad days and that Prior wont ever hold any etc etc :-)

 

[Jarquis]

Would be surprised if you're not in the minority on that matter nowadays.

 

[pskov]

Prior has been a very consistent test match keeper for around 18 months or so now. Certainly he was below standard when he first came into the team, but since he regained his place after being dropped he has been perfectly decent behind the stumps.

Akmal on the other hand has been dire for the majority of his test career.

 

[GIMH]

So I just opened this thread and it appears I got transported to 2007

seriously, wtf

Saying Akmal is a better keeper than Prior is ridiculous. I can't even begin to get my head around the concept.

 

[Prince EWS]

Hang on, if we're going to claim a batsman that has a poor technique but may be mentally tough and score runs is a better batsman than one with a good technique but is mentally weak and scores no runs, than the same should be done with keeping.

If Gayle is a better batsman than Ganga, than Prior is a better keeper than Akmal.

Ergo, Akmal > Prior.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Hang on, if we're going to claim a batsman that has a poor technique but may be mentally tough and score runs is a better batsman than one with a good technique but is mentally weak and scores no runs, than the same should be done with keeping.

If Gayle is a better batsman than Ganga, than Prior is a better keeper than Akmal.

With or without **** in his pants, Akmal is a better keeper (BY FAR) than Prior. Saying that does not mean that Akmal will never drop catches or have bad days and that Prior wont ever hold any etc etc :-)

Completely with Jono on this one. Completely.

Prior's technique has never been one for the purists - he only started keeping wicket comparatively later in life with Sussex Age Group sides when there was nobody else around. Yes, he dropped a shedload of catches in 2007/08 against India and Sri Lanka, but when's the last time he had a shocker? Compared to some of the other keepers we have seen in the Three Lions over the last few years, Prior has been positiviely Evans-like. I don't worry when I'm watching TV and there's a nick travelling in his direction any more. I'm not going to rate Mark Ramprakash over Paul Collingwood because it looks like Colly honed his technique from a copy of the MCC coaching manual that had been chewed up by a pack of whippets. I'm going to rate Colly because he does the job.

When I am trying to build a wicketkeeper out of a small boy (which typically happens on an annual basis with the number of youth teams I run), the first thing we talk about, before setup, hands or footwork, is the primary job of the wicketkeeper - and the answer I am always looking for is "catch the ball". If you are doing that consistently, then you're good at your job. Simple as that. Before he was left out for Haider at Edgbaston, Akmal had dropped 34 chances in his last 28 Tests. Put it this way - ask Mohammad Amir if he'd like to swap.

 

[Jono]

With or without **** in his pants, Akmal is a better keeper (BY FAR) than Prior. Saying that does not mean that Akmal will never drop catches or have bad days and that Prior wont ever hold any etc etc :-)

The better keeper is the one with the better results.

Akmal drops more catches and misses more stumpings than Prior. No aesthetics will change that.

 

[SJS]

The better keeper is the one with the better results.

Akmal drops more catches and misses more stumpings than Prior. No aesthetics will change that.

Thats okay. We know where we stand on that. Lets leave it at that.

 

[Jono]

SJS you do this quite often. CW is a place to debate, I'm happy to ask why you think a keeper who doesn't perform is better than one who does perform (at least performs better), simply because the one who doesn't perform has a more textbook technique.

And I'm also curious why you don't have this same rule for batsman.

I respect your opinion on cricket, so I'm genuinely curious. There's no need to end the debate simply because we don't agree, that'd make CW fairly pointless.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I respect your opinion on cricket, so I'm genuinely curious. There's no need to end the debate simply because we don't agree, that'd make CW fairly pointless.

In a lot of instances, it would also make CW a better place. *shrugs*

 

[SJS]

SJS you do this quite often. CW is a place to debate, I'm happy to ask why you think a keeper who doesn't perform is better than one who does perform (at least performs better), simply because the one who doesn't perform has a more textbook technique.

And I'm also curious why you don't have this same rule for batsman.

I respect your opinion on cricket, so I'm genuinely curious. There's no need to end the debate simply because we don't agree, that'd make CW fairly pointless.

Yes Jono. I do have an opinion and I can explain it in detail but trust me I have learnt it the hard way that the more detail one goes into in matters cricketing, the more likely someone is to pick up words or sentences and with or without reference to statistics start a debate which soon veers away from what one was trying to say.

I have come back to CW after a long time with a clear target for myself. I am NOT going to get into any arguments. Its not worth it. Its sad for I love discussing cricket but there is a tendency, unavoidable I suppose with so many members with so many ways of looking at the same issue, but it does tend to wear away and one gets sucked into it (the sidetracking of the main point) which, sadly, is now even worth the genuine pleasure that comes from discussing the game with people who, so obviously, love the game as much as i do.

So lets just leave it at that.

I do not go away from an argument because I cant answer something, Invariably I can. I just do it because I can see it is taking me away from the point I started to make in the first place.

Regards

 

[Jono]

In a lot of instances, it would also make CW a better place. *shrugs*

Heh, depends on the issue though.

 

[Jono]

And no, I do not go away from an argument because I cant answer something

Haha I never stated anything of the sort.

 

[SJS]

Haha I never stated anything of the sort.

Corrected

 

[Flem274*]

SJS, that statement looks suspiciously like "I don't think my opinion will stand up to criticism so I'll keep my mouth shut."

 

[Athlai]

Kind of like Phlegm vs. McClenenehen

 

[Flem274*]

Difference being SJS isn't talking to Mathew Prior.

I haven't retracted my opinion that McClenaghan is in no way ready for international cricket and struggled in FC cricket, but I have stopped calling him **** and leaving it at that, which some people could keep in mind themselves when talking about players.

But anyway, I took your bait, so

 

[SJS]

SJS, that statement looks suspiciously like "I don't think my opinion will stand up to criticism so I'll keep my mouth shut."

No, not at all.

No further comments.