Next Wicket-keeper?

[herbert henry1908]

f**k...I didn't realise (or check) that Carey was that old. I'm surprised actually.

He pursued an AFL career before coming back to cricket.

 

[herbert henry1908]

I’m adamant that you need to pick on keeping ability firstly and foremostly... pick the best keeper not the second best keeper with a better batting average..

To stand in the field for days, focusing on each and every ball, take every chance, keep the chat up, and stop byes/wides to the boundary etc... you need the best person to do all of that. Pick the second best keeper and you risk dropping chances, leaking runs.. it’s the most crucial fielding position..

No keeper at first class level is a mug with the bat. But just like the mythical all-rounder people have been chasing for years, the Adam Gilchrist keeper/batsman is possibly a once in a lifetime player..

Sure if there are a number of keepers pretty even in ability then their batting average may come into it but I’d always choose the best keeper with an average of 25 over the second best keeper with an average of 50.

Isn’t there an argument Gilchrist was the second best keeper for much of his tenure? I mean he wasn’t a bad keeper, but I reckon there were better in shield at the time.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

Isn’t there an argument Gilchrist was the second best keeper for much of his tenure? I mean he wasn’t a bad keeper, but I reckon there were better in shield at the time.

Who?

Darren Berry?

 

[Timbo]

Think about where Haddin was at 29 - he was barging down the door and commanding a place in the NSW side as a batsman alone.

We aren’t going to get that obviously, but I don’t think Carey is an even intermediate solution. I’d skip him completely in the whites and go to Pierson or Gotch. They’re as good behind the stumps and a big improvement with the bat.

 

[Twizzle]

Isn’t there an argument Gilchrist was the second best keeper for much of his tenure? I mean he wasn’t a bad keeper, but I reckon there were better in shield at the time.

agree, but f**k me he could bat,

he was a once in a generation batsman and keeping was secondary but no one really complained

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Gilchrist handled Warne's bowling ok so he was doing something right.

 

[herbert henry1908]

agree, but f**k me he could bat,

he was a once in a generation batsman and keeping was secondary but no one really complained

Totally. Not complaining about his selection at all.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Who?

Darren Berry?

I’m going off memory here, but in the second half of his career I remember talk that Haddin was the best keeper around.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

I’m going off memory here, but in the second half of his career I remember talk that Haddin was the best keeper around.

Haddin was the original scissorhands, dropped some absolute sitters.

 

[simmo1]

Gilly was a fine keeper. He would have made the side even if he averaged 40.

 

[Timbo]

Haddin was the original scissorhands, dropped some absolute sitters.

After his debut spelling Gilly in an ODI in about 2001 (vs Zimbabwe if I recall correctly) he was soon jumped by a few other keepers due to his suspect glovework - notably Wade Seccombe a few months later on an Ashes tour, and then Ryan Campbell in the ODI side as he was felt to be safer with the gloves and only a marginal compromise with the bat.

Haddin went back to the shield and worked like crazy on his keeping and eventually got the reserve gig back.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Haddin was the original scissorhands, dropped some absolute sitters.

In his Aussie career or for NSW? He did debut in tests past his best.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Gilly was a fine keeper. He would have made the side even if he averaged 40.

I definitely wasn’t saying otherwise, just reponding to the idea he was clearly no.1. Not sure about that.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Gilchrist was as good if not better than Haddin.

Haddin had a great series against a pretty poor pom side and everyone forgets how horrid Mr 'expressing myself by lobbing the ball to mid off' was with the bat and the sitters he dropped. He caught some screamers, I'll admit but they were negated by his howlers.


He was so poor that prior to that ashes series people were calling for Wade to replace him!!

 

[TheParraboy]

I thought Pant was terrible behind the stumps for India

Winning the series, scoring some runs himself, aussie not making him pay, and more importantly his batsman and bowlers doing their jobs, there is far less spotlight on his keeping

 

[Twizzle]

Totally. Not complaining about his selection at all.

I never thought you were complaining, all good

 

[Bazal]

Gilchrist was as good if not better than Haddin.

Haddin had a great series against a pretty poor pom side and everyone forgets how horrid Mr 'expressing myself by lobbing the ball to mid off' was with the bat and the sitters he dropped. He caught some screamers, I'll admit but they were negated by his howlers.


He was so poor that prior to that ashes series people were calling for Wade to replace him!!

Haddin in his twenties was an absolute gun keeper. He was on the slide when he got his shot (which is part of my concern re:Carey and his age too. Hadds was 31 in 2008.) Gilly was a good keeper but I also think people forget how hit and miss he was for the first half of his career, probably because of his batting.

Gilly also had the sense to retire when he started missing relatively easy chances. Haddin definitely did not. Hadds in 2008 was starting to miss those, and in 2013 he was a shadow of the player he was in, say, 2005/06.

 

[Meth]

It really seems to me that glove work is almost an afterthought in the selection of a wicket keeper these days. They need to be able to score runs and if they are capable with the gloves, all the better. It definitely used to be the other way around. I can remember when some wicket keepers batted at 11.

Rod Marsh was handy enough with the bat, but was selected squarely for his ability with the gloves. You could argue that his performance with the bat waned in the second half of his career, but his spot was just about a certainty for his glove work- in fact, he was so good with the gloves that they got his sons selected many times.

Nevill's problem is that he's 20 years too late.

When I survey the NZ scene, virtually all of the contenders for the gloves are fairly suspect with them.

 

[Meth]

btw, it'd probably be worthwhile doing some kind of statistical analysis (which I'm not prepared to do) as to whether the bump in runs (on average) is then not conceded in byes and such anyway. Obviously, there's an easy enough comparison to be made between Nevill and Wade (immediately succeeding him)

 

[herbert henry1908]

It really seems to me that glove work is almost an afterthought in the selection of a wicket keeper these days. They need to be able to score runs and if they are capable with the gloves, all the better. It definitely used to be the other way around. I can remember when some wicket keepers batted at 11.

Rod Marsh was handy enough with the bat, but was selected squarely for his ability with the gloves. You could argue that his performance with the bat waned in the second half of his career, but his spot was just about a certainty for his glove work- in fact, he was so good with the gloves that they got his sons selected many times.

Nevill's problem is that he's 20 years too late.

When I survey the NZ scene, virtually all of the contenders for the gloves are fairly suspect with them.

Are you confusing Rod & Geoff Marsh?

Both have cricketing sons, but only Geoff’s played for Australia.

Also Nevill was good enough to be a wicket keeper batsmen. Averages close to 40 in shield cricket.