Should Haddin Be Dropped

[Richard]

Well I agree with the bulk of that post, you are forgetting the period when poor Alec Stewart was played as an opener just so that Jack Russell could be fitted into the team as a specialist keeper and we all know he was hopeless with the bat but an exceptional keeper.

Dunno about that. Stewart much preferred opening and not keeping wicket to batting four\five and keeping wicket. While I much preferred him as the latter and wholesomely wish that he'd done the job from 1993 to 2003 (and think his record '93-'96 as well as his value to the side would've been much better had he done that), I think it's far more likely that Russell (and, much more unforgivingly, Richard Blakey and Stephen Rhodes) played when they did because people thought Stewart was best used opening, rather than forcing Stewart to open in order to get Russell in.

Let's also remember that Stewart's wicketkeeping didn't convince plenty of people until '96. It was only from '96 onwards that he became a truly excellent wicketkeeper. He'd never been such a thing before that - and what's more his batting had, even if only to a relatively small extent, suffered when he kept wicket. From the '96/97 season onwards, neither happened and Stewart was one of the finest wicketkeeper-batsmen of all-time, averaging 39 with the bat and barely missing a thing.

And as the ignorist has stated above, it's not like Jack Russell's batting was completely hopeless. Turned-out at Test level better than both Blakey and Rhodes, who were for the most part superior batsmen to him at county level.

And of course turned-out far better than Hegg and Read, who were somewhat unfathomly preferred to him in '98/99, '99 and '99/00.

 

[analyst]

Dunno about that. Stewart much preferred opening and not keeping wicket to batting four\five and keeping wicket. While I much preferred him as the latter and wholesomely wish that he'd done the job from 1993 to 2003 (and think his record '93-'96 as well as his value to the side would've been much better had he done that), I think it's far more likely that Russell (and, much more unforgivingly, Richard Blakey and Stephen Rhodes) played when they did because people thought Stewart was best used opening, rather than forcing Stewart to open in order to get Russell in.

Let's also remember that Stewart's wicketkeeping didn't convince plenty of people until '96. It was only from '96 onwards that he became a truly excellent wicketkeeper. He'd never been such a thing before that - and what's more his batting had, even if only to a relatively small extent, suffered when he kept wicket. From the '96/97 season onwards, neither happened and Stewart was one of the finest wicketkeeper-batsmen of all-time, averaging 39 with the bat and barely missing a thing.

And as the ignorist has stated above, it's not like Jack Russell's batting was completely hopeless. Turned-out at Test level better than both Blakey and Rhodes, who were for the most part superior batsmen to him at county level.

And of course turned-out far better than Hegg and Read, who were somewhat unfathomly preferred to him in '98/99, '99 and '99/00.

If I am not mistaken not only did he have to open, there were a few tests he had to open and play along with Russell but because the selectors viewed Russell the better player and thought Stewart not good enough with the bat, they infact kept him out of the side for a little while. Geoff Boycott right through his stint as commentator has always known to have a great admiration for Stewart and said if he was coach there was no way Stewart would have been sitting out for anyone, his ability to keep ultimately deprived him of a higher test record and his recognition as a quality test batsman.

 

[Richard]

Boycs has always believed that had Stewart opened from first Test to last and never kept wicket once, he'd have gone down as one of England's best openers.

Me, I don't agree, but I can't totally explain why. Perhaps it's simply because I feel that even if it was true, I think the value garnered from him between 1996/97 and 2002/03 (which I feel could easily have also been achieved between 1993 and 1996 if he'd been managed properly) far exceeds this.

Stewart was indeed left-out in 1996 and only got back in the team thanks to an injury to Nick Knight. However, this was at the time thought to be a dropping, rather than a leaving-out to find his role or whatever. Stewart was 33 at the time, and being dropped at that age for a normal player would be a sure sign that there was a chance you'd not be seen again. Stewart of course managed another 7 years, but most wouldn't have.

Until 1993, the idea of Stewart being a full-time wicketkeeper had never been countenanced. The only role anyone had in mind was that of opening batsman.

Up to 1993 he'd played 7 games out of 26 as wicketkeeper, and had scored virtually no runs either as wicketkeeper-opener or wicketkeeper-middle-order-batsman. However, as non-wicketkeeper he'd had success both as opener, number-three and middle-order batsman.

Between 1993 and 1996 he played as wicketkeeper: 1 full series, half of another and the final game. He did better, averaging 41 as wicketkeeper-opener and 27 as wicketkeeper-middle-order-batsman. I, as I say, feel he should've played every game in this time as wicketkeeper-middle-order batsman.

However, he played another 22 games in this time (between '93 and '96) as non-wicketkeeper, and excelled both as an opener (averaging 44) and non-opener (averaging 81).

No-one ever doubted that Stewart was a player essential to the Test team (except Ray Illingworth very briefly in 1996, by which time he was aged the sort of age most players start to decline at). The trouble was that between 1990 and 1996, confusion reigned eternal over which role he should play: wicketkeeper-middle-order batsman; wicketkeeper-opener; non-wicketkeeper-middle-order-batsman; or non-wicketkeeper-opener.

In my view, events of 1996/97 onwards suggest that had Stewart been given the gloves full-time in 1993, and had they stuck with this for more than 1 series, he'd have become settled as wicketkeeper-middle-order-batsman much sooner than he ended-up being. From 1996/97 to 2002/03, Stewart played 68 Tests, only 10 of which came as non-wicketkeeper-opener. He opened with the gloves once, in a makeshift arrangement, and in the 57 games he played as middle-order batsman (all bar 1 as wicketkeeper) he averaged 39. This is a performance precious few have managed to equal in Test history.