Wicketkeeper for 1986-2006 World XI

[Anil]

We're selecting an XI, which means you need a set of players who best compliment each other. Its a different question to "who's the best wicket-keeper of all time", and as such what Gilchrist brings to the team besides his v. good (admittedly not phenomenal) keeping justifies his selection.

when we select an all-time xi, we need a set of great batsman, one or more great all-rounders, a great wicket-keeper(not batsman-keeper) and some great bowlers, that will complement each other and lend balance to the team....

 

[Perm]

Definately Gilchrist

 

[Matt79]

Who is going to win, or significantly contribute to win in, more games - an Adam Gilchrist or Andy Flower, or a Rashid Latif or Ian Healy?

The number of times they significantly enhance the position of the team with their bat is more than compensation for the small margin of difference in their keeping.

For me, history and evolution have spoken on this topic and Gilchrist has changed the norm - the pure wicketkeeper is redundant (sadly for purists and fans of the art) and the keeper-batsman has been demonstrated to be the better option. They still need to be a v. good keeper, as Gilchrist is - Geraint Jones shows that its foolish to select a test keeper who can't really keep that well, otherwise Dravid would be the best keeping option!

keepers who aren't test quality batsmen are going the way of side-arm bowling, 8 ball overs, and specialist medium pacers...

 

[BoyBrumby]

Geraint Jones shows that its foolish to select a test keeper who can't really keep that well, otherwise Dravid would be the best keeping option!

TBF to Geraint his keeping was pretty flawless in our summer before he was dropped; it was is batting that got him the elbow. It's like he has a very finite amount of talent, so as his keeping got better his batting regressed at the same pace.

 

[bagapath]

this poll looks as clear as you can hope one to be. we will not need a second poll if gilly wins by the huge lead he has been maintaining so far. he is the right choice in my opinion too.

 

[luffy]

Surprised Boucher hasnt had any votes...

 

[bagapath]

Surprised Boucher hasnt had any votes...

then why didn't you vote for him, mate?

when it comes to gilly the only serious competion he would have from any era has to be from les ames. there might have been better keepers like evans or knott or healy. but gilly's phenomenal batting more than makes up for any flaws he might have as a keeper.

well, with 4 dismissals per test he is not dropping too many coming from mcwarne and lee and gillespie. he deserves to be the keeper of even an all-time XI

 

[howardj]

Gilchrist by the length of the Adelaide Oval.

 

[Beleg]

How is Gilchrist better then Andy Flower?

 

[andyc]

Cause he's not Australian

 

[howardj]

Gilly can win you a game in one session.

 

[Matt79]

Gilly can win you a game in one session.

Because he has won several games in a session. and he's a better keeper.

 

[Beleg]

Andy Flower is a better batsman then Gilchrist, as much as it pains me to say. Gilchrist might win you a game in a session but the opposition will have greater difficulty trying to get Flower out during a match.

and there's no real difference in the WKeeping abilities.

 

[howardj]

Gilchrist averages 50, and is one of the most explosive players of all time.

I think that makes him a better batting package than Flower.

 

[Matt79]

I'd say on proven performance as a keeper, you'd have to give the points to Gilchrist, particularly as a keeper to quality spin. He's kept to Warne, McGill and Hogg for the best part of a decade and while, like anyone who's played so many games he has his share of clangers, he's generally the perfect keeper to them, as in you don't even notice his work... I'm not aware of Flower having had a similar opportunity, which whilst not his fault means he doesn't have a similar record to point at.

 

[Beleg]

gilchrist doesn't average over 50. flower does average over 50.

 

[Matt79]

1) Flower's career was unfortunately cut short, before he could suffer the kind of decline Gilchrist now seems to be.

2) Gilchrist for so much of his career averaged so far above 50.

3) Flower also had the luxury of some games as a specialist batsman, once Taibu came into the team, didn't he? Gilchrist has never enjoyed such a break.

 

[Beleg]

1) Flower's career was unfortunately cut short, before he could suffer the kind of decline Gilchrist now seems to be.

you are assuming he would suffer one automatically. He was at the peak of his career - who is too say it wouldn't have gone further up? you can only judge players on their actual performances, not the potentials or lackthereof.

2) Gilchrist for so much of his career averaged so far above 50.

irrelevent. overall his average is lower then flowers.

3) Flower also had the luxury of some games as a specialist batsman, once Taibu came into the team, didn't he? Gilchrist has never enjoyed such a break.

eh. flower was the coach, captain, wicketkeeper, mentor and premier batsman of his team. he had to shoulder the whole responsibility of zimbabwean batting, not to mention keep for long intervals of time, mentor young players, coach them, shephard them and plan all the stuff. overall he had much more responsibility on and off the field then gilchrist ever had, due to the nature of his position. I don't ever remember any flaw in Flower's keeping, he did have to keep to Paul Strang who could turn it a fair bit.

 

[age_master]

3) Flower also had the luxury of some games as a specialist batsman, once Taibu came into the team, didn't he? Gilchrist has never enjoyed such a break.

probably mainly because hes rubbish without the gloves

 

[Matt79]

This is getting difficult for me to continue to argue, mainly because I think so very highly of Flower. I do think he was an amazing player in what were often extremely difficult circumstances. I think he's head and shoulders above other wicket-keeper/batsmen in the game. Except Gilchrist. I'd always pick Gilchrist in my eleven ahead of Flower - in the end I just have to say my opinion is that while Flower is an all-time great, with the added dimension of the circumstances he played under, I think Gilchrist is a better player.