Precambrian
Banned
Only wks? Jack Russel then.
-
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.
Who is your Wicket Keeper for the Post Packer Dream XI?
- Thread starter bagapath
- Start date
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Not sure. Have the general impression that Sehwag has done it more while it's been easy (I remember a stat on how many centuries he scored and others in his team also did) whereas Gilchrist bailed out Australia numerous times.
Sehwag looks impressive though and I've been a fan of his for ages - defending him against the flat track bully criticisms.
Richards was certainly imposing, and a better batsmen than both, but he didn't score at their rate.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Sorry about the digression but I think this thread is pretty much done and dusted.
Slifer
International Captain
Yeah Gilchrist really reolutionised th role of a wicket keeper batsman (particularly at the No7 spot). Australia have been really lucky to have had three cricketers who are arguably the best at their trade come along at just the right time. Mcgrath arguably the greatest pace bowler, Warne arguably the best spinner and Gilchrist arguably the best wicketkeeper-batsman.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
201* vs Sri Lanka ring any bells?
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
If you had a look at Gilchrist's centuries, most of them were made when someone else made a hundred. However, that's the nature of batting at 7; you need someone else to make runs for him to have enough time to make runs.
Precambrian
Banned
Might be pedantic, but Sehwag has contributed 16% of the total runs scored by India in test matches featuring him, while for Gilly it is less than 10%.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Not a surprising stat. Opening vs No. 7, plus the fact that he has also been the team's best batsman at times. I'm not sure whether you'd ever classify Gilchrist as his team's best batsman?
Just wondering, what was the point that you were trying to make, and how did it relate to my post?
Precambrian
Banned
Related in the sense that the teams' dependence on Sehwag > Gilly.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Yeah, but how did it relate to my post?
Precambrian
Banned
It is an addendum to your claim that Sehwag was relatively more important to the team for making runs as compared to Gilly, atleast that is what I understand from your post.
Now, please stop being a pedant.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
I never talked about relative importance to the team. Ikky brought up a point about the number of centuries made when Sehwag made a hundred, and I made a point that Gilchrist wasn't that much different.
EDIT: I understand that it is probably somewhat frustrating. However, it's something that I've seen you post relatively often; when a point is being made you quote a post and write something that has at best a tenuous link to the post that you've quoted.
Last edited:
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
I am not sure I follow? Gilchrist needed others to make runs for him to have enough time to make runs? Wouldn't he have more time to make runs if the others faltered earlier?
I'd add though when Gilchrist's runs happen to save his team, it was pretty much him carrying the team to a draw or a victory as he was the last line of hope at #7. If Sehwag faltered he had a fab-4 to come after him.
Precambrian
Banned
On the other hand, Gilly could sit back and relax that he's got 6 of the best Aussie batsmen and perhaps 3 or 4 of the Top 10 were going in ahead of him. Sehwag had no comfort whatsoever.
vic_orthdox
Global Moderator
Not in Test matches, the whole unlimited time thing...
Often enough, Gilchrist would come in at 5 down, and whomever from the top 6 was in with him would end up making a 100 with him. He needed that to have enough time, and not have to rely on the tail for too many of his runs. This obviously is somewhat countered by the fact that he scored so quickly.
However, here's a list of Gilly's 17 Test centuries, and other batsmen who made a century in the same innings:
99 vs Pak: Langer 127.
01 vs Ind: Hayden 119.
01 vs Eng: S Waugh 105; Martyn 105.
01 vs NZ: Langer 104; Hayden 136.
02 vs SA: Hayden 122; Martyn 133.
02 vs SA: nil
03 vs ENG: S Waugh 102.
03 vs WI: Ponting 206; Lehmann 160.
03 vs ZIM: Hayden 380.
04 vs SL: Martyn 161 (Gilchrist batting @ 3).
04 vs IND: Clarke 151.
04 vs NZ: Clarke 141.
05 vs PAK: Ponting 207.
05 vs NZ: Katich 118.
05 vs NZ: Martyn 165.
06 vs BAN: nil
06 vs ENG: Hussey 103; Clarke 135.
Now, I personally don't hold this against Gilchrist too much at all, because that's the nature of batting at number 7 for most of your career. But people bring up how when Sehwag makes a hundred that other batsmen tend to make hundreds in the same game (insinuating that it is a flat pitch). Well, fairly often other batsmen make hundreds in the same innings as Gilchrist, in the same conditions.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Yes, but that's why I said "when Gilchrist's runs happen to save his team". Which means in the comparison including when either one's runs has a big influence on his team's win and is precisely the opposite situation of the above.
It also brings me to the point that if Gilchrist's teammates were much better than Sehwag's, then Sehwag should have had ample opportunity to score a lot of more important innings, especially because he was the opener.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Vic, those are nice stats. Do you have them for Sehwag too?
My point was when Gilchrist scores his runs, he has less partners than Sehwag to score his runs with. If when Gilchrist is batting with Martyn - for example - and Martyn gets out...how many more batsmen are to come of that same caliber? Whereas Sehwag has the benefit of the rest of the pile. That's all I meant.
My point was when Gilchrist scores his runs, he has less partners than Sehwag to score his runs with. If when Gilchrist is batting with Martyn - for example - and Martyn gets out...how many more batsmen are to come of that same caliber? Whereas Sehwag has the benefit of the rest of the pile. That's all I meant.