Your all-time Test XI

[luckyeddie]

I was tempted to put russell in the world XI... He is the greatest keeper of this era, and probably will not be surpassed...

Russell is undoubtedly the best wicket-keeper since Bob Taylor retired - and there was really so little to choose between Taylor and Knott (Knotty had the edge as a batsman, Bob as a pure keeper).

Bob frequently used to stand up to Mike Hendrick at Derbyshire (who opened the bowling for England). I never saw him stand up to Mike Holding, but I'm sure he was sorely tempted (Mikey had reduced his pace somewhat when he came to Derbyshire).

As to whether there has ever been a finer keeper than those two, I just don't know. Evans and Ames were legends in Kent, and the other half a dozen or so I named were all exceptional.

Gilchrist is 'all right' as a glass of blended Bell's whisky is 'all right' - but in comparison to a 25 year old Laphroaig, 'all right' is something you would pour down the sink.

 

[hourn]

I was tempted to put russell in the world XI... He is the greatest keeper of this era, and probably will not be surpassed...

Robert Russell was undoubtedly and great keeper and is a good call as a bolter for the team, although i don't think you'd get much support for him.

IMO, i wouldn't pick him because i'm not a fan of players of his ilk - I.e. very dour. At times it was painstaking to watch him bat, which didn't do him many favours IMO.

I also think people are being a bit harsh on Gilly here. He's batting in phenomal, and i don't think that people would simply "throw him down the sink" for other guys. If i had the choice between Healy and Gilly, I'd choose AG every day of the week.

As i said, he's keeping is vastly underrated - he doesn't make many mistakes but it seems the vast majority of mistakes he made came within the same series - Ashes 02/03.

And to say he couldn't do what he did if he batted higher, is drawing a long bow. He's often coming in around the time the second new ball is introduced, essentially not much different to an opener (although the bowlers are a bit more tired), and he also batted at 6 during the Windies series.

He's done exatly the same in tests as what he's done in One-Day cricket, when batting up the top of the order.

 

[juztinlanger]

Mine all-time test XI is:

Justin Langer
Michael Vaughan
Marcus Trescothick
Graeme Smith
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Robert Key
Darren Gough
Brett Lee
Stuart MacGill
Glenn McGrath

:O :O :O :O

 

[luckyeddie]

Mine all-time test XI is:

Justin Langer
Michael Vaughan
Marcus Trescothick
Graeme Smith
Adam Gilchrist
Ricky Ponting
Robert Key
Darren Gough
Brett Lee
Stuart MacGill
Glenn McGrath

:O :O :O :O

juztin :

ex-cellent. You'll fit in well here

 

[marc71178]

No he won't, no Clarke or AA.

 

[Bazza]

And to say he couldn't do what he did if he batted higher, is drawing a long bow. He's often coming in around the time the second new ball is introduced, essentially not much different to an opener (although the bowlers are a bit more tired), and he also batted at 6 during the Windies series.

He's done exatly the same in tests as what he's done in One-Day cricket, when batting up the top of the order.

So you think Gilchrist could average 58 opening in tests? He only averages 34 in ODIs, which is pretty ordinary, so I wouldn't suggest he has been successful there. What makes him stand out is his SR, but that is not important in tests.

He could never bat in the top 3 or 4 in tests playing the way he does.

 

[Craig]

Juztinlanger, I should tell you as a friendly warning, never rubbish Mr Argarker, it is a sin and might put health and safety in danger...

 

[Mr. P]

i can't add to what bazza said, but i can safely say i agree with him.

 

[marc71178]

Juztinlanger, I should tell you as a friendly warning, never rubbish Mr Argarker, it is a sin and might put health and safety in danger...

Are you joining the AAAs then?

 

[Craig]

Considering it greatly.

 

[Eclipse]

So you think Gilchrist could average 58 opening in tests? He only averages 34 in ODIs, which is pretty ordinary, so I wouldn't suggest he has been successful there. What makes him stand out is his SR, but that is not important in tests.

He could never bat in the top 3 or 4 in tests playing the way he does.

It's imposible to draw comparisons between Test and ODI cricket just look at Vaughan.

Any way Gilly plays a fair bit diffrently in test's than what he does in ODI's.

In Test cricket he just bats normaly at his natrualy scoring speed that would always be the same were ever he batted.

The Strike rate of the collective batsman in the Australian team has been responsible for winning Australia alot of games that may other wise have been drawn so dont tell me strike rate is not importaint in test cricket.

Not only that gilly can change a game in 30min and has done ever so many times other players cant do that were as Gilly can without having to take stupid risks all he does is bat normaly for him.

Not only that if he has to deffend in a dire situation he has a good deffense as well.

Gilchrist would do fine up the order deffinatly not 60 avrage type fine but technicaly he is a very good batsman better than say Trescothick who we all know is class.