Wicketkeeper for 1946-65 World Test XI

[aussie tragic]

This is now a 4-day poll to select the Wicketkeeper for the 1946-65 World Test XI

Imtiaz Ahmed (Pak): 38 tests, 90 dismissals (74/16) --- 2.4 per match --- 2010 runs @ 30.45 (3/11) HS 209
Gerry Alexander (WI): 25 tests, 90 dismissals (85/5) --- 3.6 per match --- 961 runs @ 30.03 (1/7) HS 108
Wally Grout (Aus): 47 tests, 172 dismissals (148/24) --- 3.7 per match --- 865 runs @ 15.85 (0/3) HS 74
Don Tallon (Aus): 21 tests, 58 dismissals (50/8) --- 2.8 per match --- 394 runs @ 17.13 (0/2) HS 92
Godfrey Evans (Eng): 91 tests, 219 dismissals (173/46) --- 2.4 per match --- 2439 runs @ 20.49 (2/8) HS 104
Jim Parks (Eng): 30 tests, 70 dismissals (62/8) --- 2.3 per match --- 1292 runs @ 33.12 (2/6) HS 108*
John Waite (SA): 49 tests, 141 dismissals (124/17) --- 2.9 per match --- 2336 runs @ 30.33 (4/16) HS 134


The 1946-65 World Test XI so far:

1. Len Hutton (Eng)
2. Arthur Morris (Aus)
3. Clyde Walcott (WI)
4. Everton Weekes (WI)

 

[Matt79]

Waite for me. Tallon in the time frame specified was still spectacular by all accounts, but was only a shadow of the player he was before the war. Evans would be my second choice, but Waite's batting got him over the line IMO.

 

[aussie tragic]

From what I've heard, I think Wally Grout or Don Tallon are the best keepers, however as I think a keeper should also have a decent batting average, I've shortlisted Waite, Parks & Ahmed for now.

Edit: Waite it is.

 

[Poker Boy]

Godfery Evans.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Waite ahead of Grout on the grounds of his superor batting. I think he's generally considered to be South Africa's best keeper anyway, so it's a fair choice.

 

[Perm]

John Waite for me.

 

[Goughy]

Waite ahead of Grout on the grounds of his superor batting. I think he's generally considered to be South Africa's best keeper anyway, so it's a fair choice.

Not really. He is well respected, but most South Africans i've met would rate Denis Lindsay as SA's alltime keeper.

 

[dass]

too old to remember for me

 

[oz_fan]

I'll go with Waite for his batting. Bradman rated Tallon very highly ( he had him in his all-time team) but his batting at test level by the time he was selected was not up to the high standard he had already set in his earlier FC career.

 

[cameeel]

Tallon

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Not really. He is well respected, but most South Africans i've met would rate Denis Lindsay as SA's alltime keeper.

That's based on his batting though, yes? No denying Lindsay was a vastly superior batsman, and Boucher probably is too. I was talking about glovework.

 

[C_C]

This is just ridiculous.
Catches/matches ?
I dont think people know cricket if they are gonna use catches/match as a benchmark for wicketkeeping.

 

[aussie tragic]

^ I've tried to put as many stats as possible on all of the polls so far, however I don't think people would actually pick a keeper based on dismissals/match (e.g. Knott was chosen for 1966-85 XI with a very low ratio).

 

[bagapath]

This is just ridiculous.
Catches/matches ?
I dont think people know cricket if they are gonna use catches/match as a benchmark for wicketkeeping.

If you know cricket and if you have a better yardstick, please go ahead and apply that before making your choice. you can ignore any stat that you dont need.

and if you let us know why you made your choice it will help in a healthy discussion.

 

[bagapath]

I went for Waite. This was something I had made up my mind weeks ago knowing runs from lower order would mean a lot to this team.

 

[C_C]

If you know cricket and if you have a better yardstick, please go ahead and apply that before making your choice. you can ignore any stat that you dont need.

and if you let us know why you made your choice it will help in a healthy discussion.

No, there isnt a better yardstick to wicketkeeping- its all about opinions and reputation, since wicket keeping skills cannot be quantified. The reason i dont think catches/match have any significance whatsoever is because it is highly dependent on the bowling attack the wicketkeeper played with. A mediocre wicketkeeper, who has regular clangers would have a better catch/match ratio playing for say Australia than an alltime hall of fame wicketkeeper playing for Zimbabwe- simply because the bowling attack will generate far far more chances for him to latch on to. Its a statistic that has absolutely no relevance.

 

[bagapath]

No, there isnt a better yardstick to wicketkeeping- its all about opinions and reputation, since wicket keeping skills cannot be quantified. The reason i dont think catches/match have any significance whatsoever is because it is highly dependent on the bowling attack the wicketkeeper played with. A mediocre wicketkeeper, who has regular clangers would have a better catch/match ratio playing for say Australia than an alltime hall of fame wicketkeeper playing for Zimbabwe- simply because the bowling attack will generate far far more chances for him to latch on to. Its a statistic that has absolutely no relevance.

what you say sounds right. but it also means you have to rely on your understanding of "technique" and "style" of keepers based on what you see and, in terms of players from the past, what others have written about them. by this definition godfrey evans must be the most celebrated keeper of the era we are discussing right now. healy is considered the best keeper of the modern era followed by (not in order) knott, taylor and marsh. with more runs expected from the late middle order, gilchrist and, even, flower frequently get selected these days in most imaginary all-time XIs. but in terms of pure wicket keeping talent they must be lagging behind the other giants.