Wicketkeeper for 1946-2006 World XI

[aussie tragic]

The selected Wicketkeepers from the 1946-65, 1966-85 and 1986-05 teams are now up for selection in the 1946-2006 World Test XI:

Adam Gilchrist (Aus): 87 tests, 5188 runs @ 48.48, (16/23), HS 204*, 364 dismissals (328/36)

Alan Knott (Eng): 95 tests, 4389 runs @ 32.75, (5/30), HS 135, 269 dismissals (250/19)

John Waite (SA):49 tests, 2336 runs @ 30.33, (4/16), HS 134, 141 dismissals (124/17)


The likely 1946-2006 World Test XI so far (Polls still running):

1. Sunil Gavaskar (51.12)
2. Len Hutton (54.62)
3. Viv Richards (50.23)

 

[oz_fan]

Gilchrist comfortably. Incredible batting average and more than capable with the gloves.

 

[bagapath]

gilly without a second thought

 

[cameeel]

Yeah, Gilchrist no contest. Shows how good he is given the caliber of the other two.

 

[adharcric]

Definitely Gilchrist.

 

[silentstriker]

Not even close. Gilly it is.

 

[dinu23]

i guess sangakkara is second rate?
he's better than those three IMO.

 

[silentstriker]

i guess sangakkara is second rate?
he's better than those three IMO.

No he isn't, but these are the winners from the other polls, not just any three.

 

[The Sean]

i guess sangakkara is second rate?
he's better than those three IMO.

Or to put it another way, he's not.

Gilly

 

[aussie tragic]

i guess sangakkara is second rate?
he's better than those three IMO.

Here's the link to the 1986-05 WK poll which was a landslide to Gilly (Flower 2nd)

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=19544

 

[silentstriker]

Here's the link to the 1986-05 WK poll which was a landslide to Gilly (Flower 2nd)

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=19544

Just as it should have been IMO.

 

[Poker Boy]

Alan Knott

 

[Matt79]

Gilly easily.

 

[nightprowler10]

Gilly for me. A bit unfair to the other two in my opinion. Back then batting was not important for a wicket keeper. But then again, Gilly was the one who changed all that.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Alan Knott is the greatest wicket-keeper of all time and based purely on that he would be the only choice. But the difference Gilchrist can make with bat outweighs his inferior (but still world class) wicket-keeping.

 

[Perm]

Adam Gilchrist fairly easily.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Alan Knott, who needs a good batsman like Gilchrist, when you have all the amazing strength of the batting lineup there is?

 

[silentstriker]

Alan Knott, who needs a good batsman like Gilchrist, when you have all the amazing strength of the batting lineup there is?

If we face pre-WWII bowling lineup, meaning Barnes and company, with Bradman in their batting lineup, you don't think we'll need to bat to seven?

 

[PhoenixFire]

Could you remind what the exact XI is, I seem to be getting muddled up between the All Time XI, and the one were talking about, thanks.

 

[silentstriker]

Could you remind what the exact XI is, I seem to be getting muddled up between the All Time XI, and the one were talking about, thanks.

This is 1946-2006 XI. After that we'll be picking a Pre-War XI which will presumebly have players like Hobbs & Bradman and not too shabby bowlers either. Given that, I think there is every need to bat down to 7 IMO.