World wicket keepers, your rankings.

[tooextracool]

Surely you mean from '94 (or maybe '93 at best, if you count domestic form); Lara only played his first Test in December 1990 and didn't play another Test until April 1992 then played his third Test against the Aussies in November 1992. He scored the 277 (his first Test hundred) in that series in January 1993 and then didn't really start to dominate until early 1994 when he scored a hundred before his 375 against England. The rest is obviously history.

Check it out:

http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

ok ok, so from the end of 92(which was part of the same series) to early 96. you happy?
as far as his not starting to dominate till the series in england in 94 is concerned, he played 4 tests(6 innings) from the aussie series, averaged 43.5 in one series and 18 in the final inning. so AFAIC he was still the same player, just that people took more notice of him after he scored the 375

 

[Top_Cat]

ok ok, so from the end of 92(which was part of the same series) to early 96. you happy?
as far as his not starting to dominate till the series in england in 94 is concerned, he played 4 tests(6 innings) from the aussie series, averaged 43.5 in one series and 18 in the final inning. so AFAIC he was still the same player, just that people took more notice of him after he scored the 375

Yes but clearly the 'best player in the world' before that 375? I would reckon that Sachin might have had something to say about that.

Don't get me wrong, from the home series against England in 1994, Lara was indisputably the best batsman on the planet but before that time, well I remember every raving about his 'potential' but Sachin had already been performing for several seasons before. Lara didn't play much Test cricket in that time (1992-early 1994), yes, but as far as ratings go, there were a few higher in the pecking order before the England series.

Also, I would have thought that Lara was 'clearly the best player in the world' beyond 1996; probably closer to late 1997 was when I remember the decline starting to take place.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes but clearly the 'best player in the world' before that 375? I would reckon that Sachin might have had something to say about that.

Don't get me wrong, from the home series against England in 1994, Lara was indisputably the best batsman on the planet but before that time, well I remember every raving about his 'potential' but Sachin had already been performing for several seasons before. Lara didn't play much Test cricket in that time (1992-early 1994), yes, but as far as ratings go, there were a few higher in the pecking order before the England series.

yes they were, but my point was that he became the best batsman during that period, the 375 pretty much did it. but that was all part of his prime period, he began to rise up the ratings slowly and then the 375 put him up top. as far as tendulkar being a better batsman before the 375 is concerned, the only time tendulkar was considered to be the best player in the world was post 96, which had to do with lara's decline and tendulkar's rise.

Also, I would have thought that Lara was 'clearly the best player in the world' beyond 1996; probably closer to late 1997 was when I remember the decline starting to take place.

depends on what way you look at it. i was considering that he was never the same player after the series against NZ in early 96. you were probably considering that he wasnt the same player from the australian series in late 96.

 

[honestbharani]

What about Dhoni?

You have to wait in line!

Oh yeah..... Gilchrist is crap, I can replace him easily. But how can I ever replace the Great Dhoni!

 

[sledger]

my list.
1) Gilchrist (australia)
2) Sangakarra (sri lanka)
3) Taibu (zimbabwe)
4) Mcullum (new zealand)
5) Boucher (south africa)
6) Jones (england)
7) Akmal (pakistan)
8) Karthik (india)
9) Browne (west indies)
10) (bangladesh dont know who their keeper is, apologies)

well i think its time that in light of recent events i revise this list, several changes and new additions to be made since the last time round.

1)Sangakarra (sri lanka)
2)Gilchrist (australia)
3)Akmal (pakistan)
4)Boucher (south africa)
5)Mcullum (NZ)
6)Jones (england)
7)Ramdin (WI)
8) Mashud (BD)/Dhoni (india)
(apologies i dont know who has replaced taibu in zimbabwes side)
well, firstly G jones has been placed at 6 for a reason, to be honest he isnt deserving of such a high spot, but there quite simply is nobody else. Gilchrists slip to 2nd is down to his poor form in tests since the ashes, where akmal has risen with some very impressive displays. Boucher similarly has re-established himself since his ridiculous sacking from the side before england toured. I feel putting mashud joint bottom is a bit harsh on him...but there was very little else to do i am afraid to say.

 

[steds]

well, firstly G jones has been placed at 6 for a reason, to be honest he isnt deserving of such a high spot

Did you not see England in the field whilst they were in India?

 

[Pothas]

well i think its time that in light of recent events i revise this list, several changes and new additions to be made since the last time round.

1)Sangakarra (sri lanka)
2)Gilchrist (australia)
3)Akmal (pakistan)
4)Boucher (south africa)
5)Mcullum (NZ)
6)Jones (england)
7)Ramdin (WI)
8) Mashud (BD)/Dhoni (india)
(apologies i dont know who has replaced taibu in zimbabwes side)
well, firstly G jones has been placed at 6 for a reason, to be honest he isnt deserving of such a high spot, but there quite simply is nobody else. Gilchrists slip to 2nd is down to his poor form in tests since the ashes, where akmal has risen with some very impressive displays. Boucher similarly has re-established himself since his ridiculous sacking from the side before england toured. I feel putting mashud joint bottom is a bit harsh on him...but there was very little else to do i am afraid to say.

The top 5 are spot on i would say. Neither Jones or Dhoni are worthy of being in such good sides as England and India. Both are on the whole poor keepers and both are brainless batsmen although Dhoni admitedly has more talent.

 

[steds]

Boucher
Gilchrist
Sangakarra
Jones
McCullum
Akmal
Ramdin
Dhoni
Mashud

for mine.

 

[cricketboy29]

I dont think i would have Jones that high steds, and Dhoni before ramdin anyday.

 

[James90]

1) Gilchrist
2) Sangakkara
3) Boucher
4) McCullum
5) Kamran
6) Dhoni
7) Ramdin
8) G Jones
9) Mashud

 

[steds]

I dont think i would have Jones that high steds, and Dhoni before ramdin anyday.

Before this winter I wouldn't have Jones anywhere near that high, but his keeping has impressed me over the two tours, especially in India.

And Dhoni behind Ramdin was a mistake. Sorry.

 

[adharcric]

Isn't Taibu going to England to play county cricket? They should seriously consider him for Geraint's job, the guy is a gutsy performer.

 

[Top_Cat]

Isn't Taibu going to England to play county cricket? They should seriously consider him for Geraint's job, the guy is a gutsy performer.

We'll see how he is when he qualifies in 5 years' time.

 

[steds]

We'll see how he is when he qualifies in 5 years' time.

Might be more than that. I'm no expert on British citizenship laws, mind.

 

[vic_orthdox]

A family friend bought me back the official program from the Lords' Test, where there was an article on Geraint Jones.

It quoted ex-Kent and Middlesex wicket-keeper Paul Farbrace - who has done a lot of work with Jones - as saying, "I think Geraint's already a better keeper than Gilchrist..."

Straight from the handbook titled, "How to Shoot Your Own Credibility in 5 Measly Seconds".

 

[vic_orthdox]

Don't see how Boucher can ever be rated at 1 when he's never had to keep to a quality spinner.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Don't see how Boucher can ever be rated at 1 when he's never had to keep to a quality spinner.

He kept pretty damn well to Murali in the Super test.

 

[RolledOver]

1Gilli
2Dhoni
3Sang
4Boucher
5Mcullam


Those are the top 5.

 

[Fusion]

1Gilli
2Dhoni
3Sang
4Boucher
5Mcullam


Those are the top 5.

Dhoni is number 2 and Akmal is not in the top 5. But ofcourse.

 

[HowsThat]

Dhoni is number 2 and Akmal is not in the top 5. But ofcourse.

Akmal is not yet of Dhoni's class. Dhoni is among the top 5 batsmen in OD cricket already!!