Wicketkeepers as openers

[Magrat Garlick]

Why does there seem to be somewhat of an established thing that wicketkeepers can not open the innings? Okay, I understand some of the logic behind it - you've had a long day in the field behind the stumps at top concentration, and then have to regroup during a 20-minute break. But the interesting thing is that this regrouping really doesn't seem to matter - according to statistics, anyway.

Very few keepers have in fact opened in Test cricket history, and I have made a small survey consisting of wicketkeepers who have scored a century in Test cricket (indication of batting quality) and who have scored more than 100 runs as openers and wicketkeepers (indicating that they have been given an extended run at opening).

In total, I found 14 players who fit these criteria, and of these 10 players averaged more than their career average as a keeper. Two averaged the same, having played all their matches as keeper also as opener, and only two (JHB Waite of South Africa and WB Phillips of Australia).

Most of them only average more by a couple of points (the largest discrepancy being BK Kunderan of India, who averaged 43.46 as an opener/keeper and 33.24 as a keeper in total, and WB Phillips of Australia, who averaged 17.7 as an opener/keeper and 29.12 as a keeper in total), but it's interesting that so few average less - suggesting that if you're an opener, you'll probably do well there regardless, or, of course, it could all be a random fluke.

 

[steds]

LOL!

I know what this is about, Håkon.

 

[Swervy]

Why does there seem to be somewhat of an established thing that wicketkeepers can not open the innings? Okay, I understand some of the logic behind it - you've had a long day in the field behind the stumps at top concentration, and then have to regroup during a 20-minute break. But the interesting thing is that this regrouping really doesn't seem to matter - according to statistics, anyway.

Very few keepers have in fact opened in Test cricket history, and I have made a small survey consisting of wicketkeepers who have scored a century in Test cricket (indication of batting quality) and who have scored more than 100 runs as openers and wicketkeepers (indicating that they have been given an extended run at opening).

In total, I found 14 players who fit these criteria, and of these 10 players averaged more than their career average as a keeper. Two averaged the same, having played all their matches as keeper also as opener, and only two (JHB Waite of South Africa and WB Phillips of Australia).

Most of them only average more by a couple of points (the largest discrepancy being BK Kunderan of India, who averaged 43.46 as an opener/keeper and 33.24 as a keeper in total, and WB Phillips of Australia, who averaged 17.7 as an opener/keeper and 29.12 as a keeper in total), but it's interesting that so few average less - suggesting that if you're an opener, you'll probably do well there regardless, or, of course, it could all be a random fluke.

maybe have a look at how those figures alter when a keeper opens in the second innings of a match and third and fourth innings of a match for that matter.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Did that - and then somewhat of a pattern emerged, at least. The wicketkeepers averaged 30.43 overall, and 30.27 as openers excluding first innings. Eight averaged more, five less. When you then consider deteriorating batting conditions...not much in it, is there?

 

[Swervy]

Did that - and then somewhat of a pattern emerged, at least. The wicketkeepers averaged 30.43 overall, and 30.27 as openers excluding first innings. Eight averaged more, five less. When you then consider deteriorating batting conditions...not much in it, is there?

well there you go..pretty interesting.

what about for keepers who played for a long time i.e.Stewart...maybe the effect is greater for those who have to do it for a longer period of time

 

[Magrat Garlick]

well there you go..pretty interesting.

what about for keepers who played for a long time i.e.Stewart...maybe the effect is greater for those who have to do it for a longer period of time

Taking those with more than 1000 runs as keepers:

Stewart - 250 @ 35.74 as opener/keeper not in first innings, 4540 @ 34.92 overall as a keeper (though, it has to be said, he lost a lot through keeping - his career average was 39)
Farokh Engineer - 677 @ 27.08 as opener/keeper compared to 2611 @ 31.08 as keeper
Imtiaz Ahmed - 330 @ 55 as opener/keeper compared to 2010 @ 30.45
Nayan Mongia - 498 @ 31.12 as opener/keeper compared to 1442 @ 24.03
JHB Waite - 334 @ 22.27 as opener/keeper compared to 2336 @ 30.33

Again, three more, two less, not a lot of difference overall...

 

[Swervy]

Taking those with more than 1000 runs as keepers:

Stewart - 250 @ 35.74 as opener/keeper not in first innings, 4540 @ 34.92 overall as a keeper (though, it has to be said, he lost a lot through keeping - his career average was 39)
Farokh Engineer - 677 @ 27.08 as opener/keeper compared to 2611 @ 31.08 as keeper
Imtiaz Ahmed - 330 @ 55 as opener/keeper compared to 2010 @ 30.45
Nayan Mongia - 498 @ 31.12 as opener/keeper compared to 1442 @ 24.03

Again, three more, one less, not a lot of difference overall...

maybe the effect on the players keeping is more telling than the effect on a players batting(I wouldnt know how to prove this either way though)

Anyway...what is it that has inspired such Frindallness from you??

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Håkon wants to play Tests.

I don't see a problem with it if the bowling attack is good enough not to have you in the field for 3 or more of the 5 days every game.

 

[chaminda_00]

Håkon wants to play Tests.

I don't see a problem with it if the bowling attack is good enough not to have you in the field for 3 or more of the 5 days every game.

It kind of like the Sangakkara debate, when Sri Lanka play an average batting line which the Sri Lankan bowlers get out quite cheaply then it is ok for him to bat at three, but when they play a team like Australia or India who have a strong batting line, then it is too hard for him to back up. In Sangakkara case his foot work when batting after keeping for more then a day and half is shocking, or below par compared to when he doesn't keep or only keeps for a day and a bit.

All in all for Sangakkara keeping and batting effects his footwork and therefore makes him not as good batsmen when he doesn't keep. Personally i think if Sri Lanka want to play him as a keeper then they should bat him at 6 or 7. I don't think that any keeper should really keep and then bat in the top 3, maybe 4 at the highest (andy flower did really well there). Sorry Hakon but my option is that if u want to play test it has to be down the order, just my opinion though.

 

[Richard]

LOL!

I know what this is about, Håkon.

It was presumably at my instigation.
The basic thing of the matter is, Hakon - why do you think there have been so few who've kept and opened?

 

[Richard]

Håkon wants to play Tests.

I don't see a problem with it if the bowling attack is good enough not to have you in the field for 3 or more of the 5 days every game.

And that's currently the problem...
I wonder if Hakon wouldn't do better to post this in CW XI... (apologies if he's done so, haven't checked the thread yet today)

 

[Magrat Garlick]

It was presumably at my instigation.
The basic thing of the matter is, Hakon - why do you think there have been so few who've kept and opened?

Many selectors have regarded wicketkeeping similar to bowling - selected the best wicketkeeper instead of batting all-rounders. Okay, they couldn't exactly be rabbits to deserve their job, but nor do they have to be the best batsmen. If you go into the history of Test wicketkeepers, you'll find that most of them had a batting average around 30. That in itself doesn't suggest that they had the batting quality required to open. Add to that the presumed belief that they wouldn't do well there - and you've got a self-feeding loop.

And that's currently the problem...
I wonder if Hakon wouldn't do better to post this in CW XI... (apologies if he's done so, haven't checked the thread yet today)

I didn't post this in the CW XI because I wanted to avoid that argument (which has turned up anyway, of course...grunt). The reason why I posted it here was cos I started the research, then found out it really wasn't worth bothering to argue too much about it, but didn't what to ditch the research.

 

[Richard]

Many selectors have regarded wicketkeeping similar to bowling - selected the best wicketkeeper instead of batting all-rounders. Okay, they couldn't exactly be rabbits to deserve their job, but nor do they have to be the best batsmen. If you go into the history of Test wicketkeepers, you'll find that most of them had a batting average around 30. That in itself doesn't suggest that they had the batting quality required to open. Add to that the presumed belief that they wouldn't do well there - and you've got a self-feeding loop.

Hmm, I know what you mean.
How many have had long careers doing both roles, again (sorry, you might have said that somewhere).

I didn't post this in the CW XI because I wanted to avoid that argument (which has turned up anyway, of course...grunt). The reason why I posted it here was cos I started the research, then found out it really wasn't worth bothering to argue too much about it, but didn't what to ditch the research.

You surely must have known that us with our fingers on the CW XI button would instantly spot the link?

 

[username1234]

But did you take into account that anyone who open's average's better then what they do batting down the order at number 7-8.

 

[chaminda_00]

Many selectors have regarded wicketkeeping similar to bowling - selected the best wicketkeeper instead of batting all-rounders. Okay, they couldn't exactly be rabbits to deserve their job, but nor do they have to be the best batsmen. If you go into the history of Test wicketkeepers, you'll find that most of them had a batting average around 30. That in itself doesn't suggest that they had the batting quality required to open. Add to that the presumed belief that they wouldn't do well there - and you've got a self-feeding loop.

To be an opening batsmen u need to average more then just 30, 35 at least IMO, unless of course their is no other guys. Also keepers are like all rounders but where go most all rounders bat. If u look at rescent all rounders in Test Cricket Flintoff, Oram, Carins, Klusener, Dev, Hadlee and Imran they all batted or bat at 6-7 generally. Jaques Kallis is the only all rounder in recent times that i can think about that has batted higher consistenly. But even Jaques was asked to move down to 4 so he had more of a break in between innnings. i can't think of too many guys apart from M Prabhakar and Mudassar Nazar , that were all rounders and also opened the batting, i think that has to tell u something doesn't it.

 

[age_master]

concentrating for such a long period than going out to bat is too much, especially if its a long stint. trust me ive tried opening the batting after keeping, keeping up the concentration is very difficalt, much better to have a rest

 

[Richard]

And that's presumably just in a limited-overs game.

 

[supereddi08]

Just in regard to your thread about keepers opening it's not just the batting side that gets affected. As a keeper myself I know that being expected to do a job with the bat has an effect on your keeping, you can tend to be thinking too much about batting and not the job at hand. Plus it's bloody tiring to do both, kinda like being the goalkeeper and striker in a game of soccer, two very important roles and needs a special player to really pull off both of them.
Someone like Gilchrist could open the batting for Australia in tests but he doesn't because not only is he preserving himself, having a batting keeper come in at number 7 is very demoralising to the opposition. You think you've done your job with the ball and a guy comes out who makes a ton in a session and a half... boom, game over.