Adam Gilchrist - how good is he?

[Pedro Delgado]

Is this some sort of a joke? Jacobs is probably the worst wicketkeeper to have played for any test nation, ever.

A case of Occam's Razor if ever I saw one.

 

[greg]

A case of Occam's Razor if ever I saw one.

I'm sure you'll agree that this is a case of the exception proving the rule

 

[Richard]

prove it

OK - you seriously think it took 123 years for someone to take the attack to the bowlers?
I can tell you for certain that Victor Trumper and Gilbert Jessop were doing it in 1902 - before that I confess I know of no certain occurrances.

 

[Richard]

Yeah Stewart would have walked into Bangladesh and Zimbabwe on his batting skills, On his keeping skills, his best chance would have been playing for Ireland. On his keeping alone he wouldn't have made to England Z side.

And that is the English team of 90s I am talking about.

You clearly have absolutely no clue.
Alec Stewart from 1997 onwards was as good a wicketkeeper as you could wish to see - rarely missed a thing.

 

[Richard]

If he was so good a wicket-keeper batsman why did he play 55 tests purely as a batsman ?

some of you totally ignore the fact that when Stewart played as the designated wicket-keeper of England, he averaged 33 Now compare that with Gilchrist's average of 50.

How many times must this be gone through?
Stewart early on in his career was perceived as a batsman, who occasionally could keep wicket. Early on he only ever kept when England needed to claw back a losing series. Eventually, he was given the gloves for 2 near-full series (1993 and 1995), but even then he was far from convincing.
However, from the final Test of 1996 onwards, Stewart was clearly a batsman-wicketkeeper of the highest class. Not only was his wicketkeeping virtually faultless, he also combined it with run-scoring so well that no-one ever really seriously questioned his role in the side, so that of he played 66 Tests as a wicketkeeper and just 10 as a batsman.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

I'm sure you'll agree that this is a case of the exception proving the rule

Perhaps we should move this to the philosophy forum

Actually, maybe Cricketchat is the greatest philosophy forum around, per se??

It's certainly "mauve" at any rate.

 

[Richard]

Okay as Richard said that on his Batting/Keeping skills he would have walked into many side of his days. Now who were the wicket Keepers of his days

Australia - Healy/Gilchrist - NOWAY
Pakistan - Latif/Moin - NOWAY
India - Mongia/More - NO WAY
Zimbabwe - Flower - NO Way
SA - Boucher/Richardson - NO WAY
WI - Jacobs/ ?? - Jacobs was a better WK than Stewart, dont remember RJ's batting
NZ - Lee Germon/ ?? - Maybe
SL - Kaluwitharna/Sangakkara - NO WAY

I dont remember how good Germon was as a wicketkeeper and apart from Germon I dont see Stewart being able to replace any one else on his wicket keeping skills alone or even on his combined skills. He may be better batsman than some of those e.g. Kalu, Mongia, Latif etc but he is a much inferior wicketkeeper than them.

Do you still think Richard's statement "I can assure you Stewart would've walked into far more teams than not of his day" is justified ?

Would Stewart have replaced Healy or Gilchrist? No.
Would he have replaced Latif\Moin? Unless the Pakistan selectors were completely insane, yes.
Would he have replaced More\Mongia? Err, everso slightly.
Would he have replaced Flower? No (he'd obviously have been in the team anyway, though, and would have 'kept ahead of Flower).
Would he have replaced Boucher or Richardson? Jesus, yes.
Would he have replaced any of David Williams, Junior Murray or Ridley Jacobs? By a country mile.
Would he have replaced Lee Germon or Adam Parore? By a distance.
Would he have replaced Kaluwitharana? Yes, pretty easily.
Only Australia would have found no place for Stewart at any time in his career (and it's not like it didn't take Healy quite some time to balance his dual roles, too).

 

[Richard]

Is this some sort of a joke? Jacobs is probably the worst wicketkeeper to have played for any test nation, ever.

Even before Liam gets in - that's harsh. Jacobs was probably the most effective ungainly-looking wicketkeeper ever. Not as good as Stewart, of course not, but certainly far better than either Junior Murray or David Williams.

EDIT: and unquestionably far, far better than Courtney Browne!!!

 

[greg]

If he was so good a wicket-keeper batsman why did he play 55 tests purely as a batsman ?

Pretty obvious really.

1) He didn't like doing it himself, and only did it for the good of the team. (I think as his keeping improved he became less hostile to the concept)
2) He was an opening batsman of the highest class (averaging close to 50 when the bowlers of the day were in a different league to those in the late 90s/early 00s)
3) Following on from 2) it was felt, with much justification in the figures, that his batting suffered when he kept wicket (not least because he had to bat in a place less suited to him as a poor player of spin bowling). At a time when England had no world class batsman, to sacrifice one for the sake of the team balance created by him playing as an allrounder was no easy choice. And the selectors never held a settled view until the final few years.

 

[greg]

Even before Liam gets in - that's harsh. Jacobs was probably the most effective ungainly-looking wicketkeeper ever. Not as good as Stewart, of course not, but certainly far better than either Junior Murray or David Williams.

I'll be charitable and call it a tie. Ridley benefitted because he looked like he shouldn't even be in a club team so one got a shock when he wasn't quite that bad.

Fully worth his place in the team though. At least he had the mental attitude of a test cricketer unlike most of the shower he had to play with.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Bring back Clayton Lambert and Philo Wallace that's what I say.

 

[marc71178]

Has Andyc just said only Flower could seriously rival since Flower was definately a better batsman

I think he has done, yes.

 

[marc71178]

For most of his career, Gilchrist could walk into most teams on his batting alone, same couldn't be said about any other wicketkeeper or allrounder.

Sobers?
Imran?

 

[Sanz]

Is this some sort of a joke? Jacobs is probably the worst wicketkeeper to have played for any test nation, ever. Stewart at his peak was probably one of the top 3 wicketkeepers in England.

Okay I accept I have no idea about Jacobs's wicket keeping, I must have confused him with someone else.

But Why bring PEAK into it ? how long did his peak last 1 day ?? Stewart was pretty useless as a wicket keeper and I dont see how he could keep to Murali, Kumble, Kaneria, Saqlain etc.

 

[Sanz]

Sobers?
Imran?

Did Sobers/Imran play during 1996-2006 ?? what I meant was during 1996-2005 gilly could have walked into any XI that consisted of players of 1996-2005/6 era.

 

[Sanz]

Would he have replaced Latif\Moin? Unless the Pakistan selectors were completely insane, yes.

They would have to be insane to include Stewart as a wicketkeeper, Latif was MILES ahead of Stewart as a wicketkeeper.

Would he have replaced More\Mongia? Err, everso slightly.

How about NEVER ? Once again both were miles ahead as WK and in India you need a wicketkeeper first than a batsman, Mongia was a pretty decent bat as well.

Would he have replaced Flower? No (he'd obviously have been in the team anyway, though, and would have 'kept ahead of Flower).

Not as a wicket-keeper batsman though. Andy played only 8 tests as a pure batsman, Stewart played 50+

Would he have replaced Boucher or Richardson? Jesus, yes.

Richardson/Boucher both were/are better Wk than Alec and a pretty decent bat.

Would he have replaced any of David Williams, Junior Murray or Ridley Jacobs? By a country mile.

May be, I dont know enough about them.

Would he have replaced Lee Germon or Adam Parore? By a distance.

May be, I dont remember Germon/Pareore's wicket Keeping, I know they were okay batsmen but not in Stewart's class

Would he have replaced Kaluwitharana? Yes, pretty easily.

NEVER, NEVER. I dont think Stewart had the skills to keep Murali.

Only Australia would have found no place for Stewart at any time in his career (and it's not like it didn't take Healy quite some time to balance his dual roles, too).

Why Spare australia, why not claim that he could have replaced Bradman as a batsman as well, you know you can do that. all you have to do is repeat 19000 times.

 

[marc71178]

Stewart? I can assure you Stewart would've walked into far more teams than not of his day.

Even though he wasn't even the best wicketkeeper in England for a lot of his career?

 

[marc71178]

TBF Leslie Ames isn't quite as good as he's made-out to be - average (40) goes down to 38 if you remove the substandard New Zealand side.

A whole 2 runs.

No doubt you'll assure us that he was over-rated because he was dropped every time he got past 3.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

There's no way Stewart was a better keeper than Boucher.

 

[marc71178]

Okay as Richard said that on his Batting/Keeping skills he would have walked into many side of his days. Now who were the wicket Keepers of his days

Australia - Healy/Gilchrist - NOWAY
Pakistan - Latif/Moin - NOWAY
India - Mongia/More - NO WAY
Zimbabwe - Flower - NO Way
SA - Boucher/Richardson - NO WAY
WI - Jacobs/ ?? - Jacobs was a better WK than Stewart, dont remember RJ's batting
NZ - Lee Germon/ ?? - Maybe
SL - Kaluwitharna/Sangakkara - NO WAY

More importantly - England - Russell - NO WAY.