• 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.

*Official* Australia tour of New Zealand Feb-Mar 2024

Spark

Global Moderator
He's be more valuable if he played for an Asian team tbh because of how many more difficult chances off the spinners come to the keeper in those conditions. Needs more runs to justify selection for a SENA team.
Definitely agree but tbh even that shows how completely anachronistic "all that matters from the keeper is the keeping, runs are just a bonus" mindset is. Swap Carey in for Jurel in the most recent game and the England-India series is 2-2 with England having comfortably won the last game.

This is top level elite sport and small margins matter enormously. Only cold-blooded cost-benefit analysis weighing up all factors should be the selection policy, not old narratives and tropes.
 

Dick Rockett

International Vice-Captain
What Kuggeleijn did was so heinous by his own admission that it kind of obviates the point of comparisons tbh. Yeah pretty much anything else is going to look bad in comparison because there's no way to make "we're running a protection racket for a guy who admitted to having *** with a woman without her consent, and he isn't even that good" look good. So it doesn't really have any bearing either way on whether Ryder was treated properly or not.
Well yeah, that's the whole point - why does this guy get a shot when what he did is so much worse than what these other guys did?

I mean it's been done to death in this thread and on this forum and out in the real world and I've said my piece, so I'll leave it at that.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Definitely agree but tbh even that shows how completely anachronistic "all that matters from the keeper is the keeping, runs are just a bonus" mindset is. Swap Carey in for Jurel in the most recent game and the England-India series is 2-2 with England having comfortably won the last game.

This is top level elite sport and small margins matter enormously. Only cold-blooded cost-benefit analysis weighing up all factors should be the selection policy, not old narratives and tropes.
Keeping ability should still be first and foremost. A single missed chance can cost 100+ runs. If you're sacrificing 5 runs in average for a significantly better keeper then you're still coming out on top.

That's all theoretical. In reality Carey's batting is a big issue
 

Kenneth Viljoen

International Regular
New Zealand should be a bit embarrassed by that performance, it looked like they were learning from Australia on how to use the conditions halfway through the match but by that time it was too late.

This pitch had turn and bounce, so where was the main spinner ? No Ajaz Patel in the squad, and Mitchell Santner ignored again despite being in great form, he's taken 12 wickets in his last 2 tests @17.42. Scott Kuggelijn playing ahead of him made absolutely zero sense.

17 wickets fell to spin in the match with Glenn Phillips only getting a bowl in the second innings no doubt after seeing the purchase Lyon was getting in NZ's first innings.
Way too many extras , below par fielding ..
Expected better honestly.
 
Last edited:

The_CricketUmpire

State 12th Man
Also Carey isn't that good with the gloves. He's good, and excellent against spin - though still not in Foakes's class, for example - but not flawless. To even have a prayer of justifying his place with his current batting contributions he has to be completely impeccable and he just isn't - he still has that issue where he doesn't transfer his weight properly onto his right foot when Starc especially is bowling over the wicket and it causes him to miss catches or even ignore catches to his right. It's a somewhat of a nitpick criticism but you know what, when "I'm the best keeper" is literally all you have going for you, even nitpicks can become serious problems.
Healy averaged 27.39 in Test cricket. Carey averages more than Healy (29.92). But Healy was super with the gloves...one of the best keepers I've seen. I guess it was a different era back then in terms of mindset....Healy's Test average....then along came Gilchrist and averaged 47-odd. Maybe we expect too much from our keeprs in terms of batting but I still think Carey needs to be a bit more consistent with the bat.

Interesting stat on Healy - he scored 4 First-Class centuries in his career, all of them coming at Test level.
 

East Bay Ray

Cricket Spectator
The idea that any amount of good glove work justifies non-existent contributions with the bat, especially in a side with a brittle lower-middle order that needs all the batting it can get, should have died years ago.
Lets hope you never become a selector for test matches.
You go ahead and pick the Bairstow or second or third best w/keeper with a slightly better batting average. See if those extra 5-10 runs on average makes up for a missed stumping of a top order bat, or not quite getting to one down leg side.

Just one mistake with the gloves can and very often does cost the entire test match....and my guess is you dont even realise when a top class w/keeper has just won you a test match with his gloves....coz you dont expect any mistakes....thats because you picked the best gloveman rather than a guy with a slightly better batting average, or flavour of the month on form.
 

Immenso

International Vice-Captain
New Zealand should be a bit embarrassed by that performance, it looked like they were learning from Australia on how to use the conditions halfway in the match but by that time it was too late.

This pitch had turn and bounce, so where was the main spinner ? No Ajaz Patel in the squad, and Mitchell Santner ignored again despite being in great form, he's taken 12 wickets in his last 2 tests @17.42. Scott Kuggelijn playing ahead of him made absolutely zero sense.

17 wickets fell to spin in the match with Glenn Phillips only getting a bowl in the second innings no doubt after seeing the purchase Lyon was getting in NZ's first innings.
Way too many extras , below par fielding ..
Expected better honestly.
The team is cooked tbh. On the precipice of a huge fall that will become more apparent in hindsight. A terribly coached, selected, and captained team that have aged in unison and will be spending the next 2 years playing whack-a-mole trying to patch the holes that keep springing up when your almost entire team are on a slide.

Australia are starting to reach the same stage of their team cycles but with a competent coach and captain (and more depth) and will navigate this phase way better.

Australia are there for the taking (or the ambush) for teams on the rise. But that is not this NZ team.
 

Immenso

International Vice-Captain
Well yeah, that's the whole point - why does this guy get a shot when what he did is so much worse than what these other guys did?

I mean it's been done to death in this thread and on this forum and out in the real world and I've said my piece, so I'll leave it at that.
Putting on an amateur psyhologists coat. But I think Jesse was always going to self-sabotage, not matter what NZC or the team did. Destruct before you are rejected, etc.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Lets hope you never become a selector for test matches.
You go ahead and pick the Bairstow or second or third best w/keeper with a slightly better batting average. See if those extra 5-10 runs on average makes up for a missed stumping of a top order bat, or not quite getting to one down leg side.

Just one mistake with the gloves can and very often does cost the entire test match....and my guess is you dont even realise when a top class w/keeper has just won you a test match with his gloves....coz you dont expect any mistakes....thats because you picked the best gloveman rather than a guy with a slightly better batting average, or flavour of the month on form.
You know what also costs us matches? Batting collapses when manageable situations where 2 or 3 wickets falling for 20 runs suddenly turns into 5 or 6 wickets falling for 50 runs. Given the last year of cricket I certainly know which one of those problems is more of a concern for the team right now.

How do you even know Inglis is that bad behind the stumps anyway? I certainly haven't seen anything to suggest Matthew Wade or Bairstow levels of ineptitude there. We're not splitting hairs between a guy averaging 32 or 35, the guy is batting like a #8 or #9 right now - and one of the mindless slogger types at that - and it's causing huge problems for the team. We have absolutely no stability in the lower middle order and it's one of the biggest reasons we're starting to be collapse-happy again.

Healy averaged 27.39 in Test cricket. Carey averages more than Healy (29.92). But Healy was super with the gloves...one of the best keepers I've seen. I guess it was a different era back then in terms of mindset....Healy's Test average....then along came Gilchrist and averaged 47-odd. Maybe we expect too much from our keeprs in terms of batting but I still think Carey needs to be a bit more consistent with the bat.

Interesting stat on Healy - he scored 4 First-Class centuries in his career, all of them coming at Test level.
Like I said I don't think Carey is in Healy's class as a keeper anyway. He's good but not that good and it doesn't excuse - even more than his results - his total lack of application and game sense at the crease. The two shots he played in this game to get out are totally unacceptable. Better players have lost their spots for less.
 

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Well yeah, that's the whole point - why does this guy get a shot when what he did is so much worse than what these other guys did?

I mean it's been done to death in this thread and on this forum and out in the real world and I've said my piece, so I'll leave it at that.
I just don't see the relevance in 'whataboutisms' or whatever the new crowd call them. He shouldn't get a shot, no matter who came before him. He did a disgusting thing, which NZC and ND knew was disgusting because they all of a sudden started pushing diversity and equality harder, but they still kept picking him, when they had pretty ample opportunity not to.

Again, I abhor Stead for not showing strong leadership, which then I'd also have to level at David White and Mike Hesson, because they picked him in 2017, as well. I know it's been done to death but it's junk, and they deserve to cop **** again after he performed so poorly.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Most keepers at test level are a 7/10 with the gloves or higher. I'd take the 7 who can average 35 over the 8 who averages under 25. If the keeper is a 9 or 10 I'm interested. Glovework first for me though. Conway dropped a t20 wc iirc.

A keeper who is a 6 won't get near his fc team if he can't bat, and I wouldn't consider him for test keeper anyway because he will drop games and unless he's Gilchrist/Sanga/Flower level with the bat, won't score those runs back.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Most keepers at test level are a 7/10 with the gloves or higher. I'd take the 7 who can average 35 over the 8 who averages under 25. If the keeper is a 9 or 10 I'm interested. Glovework first for me though. Conway dropped a t20 wc iirc.

A keeper who is a 6 won't get near his fc team if he can't bat, and I wouldn't consider him for test keeper anyway because he will drop games and unless he's Gilchrist/Sanga/Flower level with the bat, won't score those runs back.
Conway is a batsman first and foremost though who bats top order and is a part time keeper though. That's not the comparison that's been made. It's with other specialist keepers competing for Carey's spot who we're arbitrarily decided are all Bairstow level bad based on... what, exactly?

I'm certainly not suggesting picking a bad keeper because he's a slightly better batsman. All I'm saying is that Carey's current lack of application with the bat should be enough to have a look at one of the other keepers around the country. That's all.
 

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
The team is cooked tbh. On the precipice of a huge fall that will become more apparent in hindsight. A terribly coached, selected, and captained team that have aged in unison and will be spending the next 2 years playing whack-a-mole trying to patch the holes that keep springing up when your almost entire team are on a slide.

Australia are starting to reach the same stage of their team cycles but with a competent coach and captain (and more depth) and will navigate this phase way better.

Australia are there for the taking (or the ambush) for teams on the rise. But that is not this NZ team.
Yep, for sure. Wack a mole is a perfect analogy for what they're going to have to do to repair this team, and the biggest issue is they're not going to do it now. They're going to keep picking Southee, retain Nicholls as batting cover, keep wheeling out Latham, until they absolutely can't anymore, then pray the people below can step up straight away.

A proper leader would position this side for a succession plan - to bring through the Smiths, the Fishers, the Foulkes, the next wave of opening bats etc. In the side today, only Rachin, Phillips and O'Rourke are under 31, then your squad guys are 32 (Nicholls, Santner) Wagner is retiring, Boult is gone, etc. There's a major issue coming and we already feel as if the walls are closing in, even with those guys around.

And hey as I posted this, Gary Troup just wandered past my window. Maybe he can get a game at Hagley.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Conway is a batsman first and foremost though who bats top order and is a part time keeper though. That's not the comparison that's been made. It's with other specialist keepers competing for Carey's spot who we're arbitrarily decided are all Bairstow level bad based on... what, exactly?

I'm certainly not suggesting picking a bad keeper because he's a slightly better batsman. All I'm saying is that Carey's current lack of application with the bat should be enough to have a look at one of the other keepers around the country. That's all.
Maybe Bancroft should open and keep.

It's a horribly taxing double role but no one wants to be fair to Bancroft.
 
Last edited:

East Bay Ray

Cricket Spectator
Also Carey isn't that good with the gloves. He's good, and excellent against spin - though still not in Foakes's class, for example - but not flawless. To even have a prayer of justifying his place with his current batting contributions he has to be completely impeccable and he just isn't - he still has that issue where he doesn't transfer his weight properly onto his right foot when Starc especially is bowling over the wicket and it causes him to miss catches or even ignore catches to his right. It's a somewhat of a nitpick criticism but you know what, when "I'm the best keeper" is literally all you have going for you, even nitpicks can become serious problems.
I know what you are getting at, but there's no such thing as a flawless wicketkeeper...its all about who will make the least mistakes over 5 long days, who is the best at taking a ground ball fired in from the fence for a runout, who keeps best to Lyon, who sets the slips best, etc etc etc. Carey has already proven terrific picking when to go to DRS...an underrated talent these days. When he says go upstairs they do it. It all adds up.
The English team is NOW much better with Foakes in it. They should have woken up to their stupidity of a shoddy keeper very early during the Ashes. It cost them dearly.
Batting form is fleeting. If you pick the 3rd best keeper that is in decent batting form, what are you left with when that new guys form inevitably drops off ? Now you are playing your 3rd best gloveman costing matches giving you nothing with the bat....a roundabout of guys getting dropped.

Carey has played 30 tests and proven so far a very good gloveman. No, i dont see him as "great" but that type of term usually comes with time and a win/loss ratio. To me he's definitely worth persisting with in tests. I watched Ian Healy miss chances but some people forget he was human too. Healy was top class. His 25-32 (???) avge was enough at 7 for me. Lucky for Aust a freak then came along.
Carey is excellent to Lyon, as Healy was to Warne. It takes time to make a name for yourself though.
I'd rate Foakes the #1 with Carey a close #2 in the world right now based purely on gloves. I would not drop either after a recent run of outs with the bat. The poms need to replace Bairstow to take advantage of Foakes with a better middle order bat.... but Bairstow is mates with coach and captain. They are dumber than hammered **** and we like it that way.

As if 150 years of evidence wasnt enough for some, 2023 once again showed why you must always pick your best glove man, not a lesser guy with a slightly better batting average. 10 runs is NEVER worth a drop catch or missed runout/stumping. A good glove man makes you those 10 runs in saved sundries alone.
A stable number 7 is a vital ingredient to why Australia wins so many test matches. I dont want to fk with that.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Conway is a batsman first and foremost though who bats top order and is a part time keeper though. That's not the comparison that's been made. It's with other specialist keepers competing for Carey's spot who we're arbitrarily decided are all Bairstow level bad based on... what, exactly?

I'm certainly not suggesting picking a bad keeper because he's a slightly better batsman. All I'm saying is that Carey's current lack of application with the bat should be enough to have a look at one of the other keepers around the country. That's all.
Oh for sure, I was weighing in on the ideological chat it moved to.

No idea how good Inglis is, but if he's competent with the gloves then he's worth a run.
 

Top