Jones vs Nixon --- England WKs

[Cameron-Moss]

Ok, I was wondering who people thought who'd be better for the test games, either Nixon Or Jones.

Personally I think Nixon.

 

[Richard]

I very much hope Jones never plays again, and Nixon never plays.

 

[Burgey]

Jones for tests. Nixon was like 112 years old when he debuted in ODIs wasn't he?
Need an irrelevant third option - might I suggest Matt Prior?

 

[Richard]

James Pipe FTW.

 

[BoyBrumby]

God, it's like choosing the method of your own execution, isn't it? One might be marginally less painful, but you know the end result anyway.

Probably go with Geraint, actually. His keeping had improved quite a lot by the end of his tenure but his batting was more-or-less totally gash after the 2005 Ashes. I'm not convinced Nixon has the technique to score runs at test level with any degree of reliability and his keeping was no more than serviceable, really.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Why is the poll between these two? They're nothing more than a couple of spare parts at a wedding. The current crop of wicketkeepers make you long for the days of Bruce French and Jack Richards when we had keepers who were only mildly inadequate. Alec Stewart and Jack Russell are both 44 but you could guarantee 100% they would still do a better job than this pair of nimrods.

 

[Cameron-Moss]

I very much hope Jones never plays again, and Nixon never plays.

Lol, who would you suggest prior?

 

[Richard]

TBH I'd pick Prior as a batsman ahead of both of them any day of the week, but I'd never, ever have him keeping wicket ahead of either of them.

I'm happy enough with Ambrose, even if I'd prefer Foster had been picked. Now Ambrose has, I very much hope and believe he can score runs and keep very well, though I'd not have picked him - yet - myself.

 

[stumpski]

Thought someone had bumped a 15-month old thread here.

Chris Read for me, though I quite enjoy watching Jones bat. Saw him play a couple of good innings for Kent last season.

 

[Cameron-Moss]

Thought someone had bumped a 15-month old thread here.

Chris Read for me, though I quite enjoy watching Jones bat. Saw him play a couple of good innings for Kent last season.

I dont like bumping threads.

 

[Burgey]

TBH I'd pick Prior as a batsman ahead of both of them any day of the week, but I'd never, ever have him keeping wicket ahead of either of them.

I'm happy enough with Ambrose, even if I'd prefer Foster had been picked. Now Ambrose has, I very much hope and believe he can score runs and keep very well, though I'd not have picked him - yet - myself.

Well, he was one of the great bowlers....

 

[Son Of Coco]

I went for Jones...Nixon's a tool.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Well, he was one of the great bowlers....

Colin Croft has kept wicket at club level a bit recently, the way they're working their way through the keepers he'll be in the side soon now he's qualified for England.

 

[Cameron-Moss]

I went for Jones...Nixon's a tool.

Lol. I like... I Like..

 

[Richard]

I went for Jones...Nixon's a tool.

And Jones is an Aussie.

 

[Cameron-Moss]

And Jones is an Aussie.

Are you being serial?

 

[Richard]

Serially clever? Yes, obviously.

 

[Son Of Coco]

And Jones is an Aussie.

Which is where the difference in behaviour becomes apparent...it also explains Nixon's lack of talent

 

[Richard]

Nixon's more talented than Jones TBH. At least he doesn't try to play an attacking stroke every ball from his 1st ball.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Nixon's more talented than Jones TBH. At least he doesn't try to play an attacking stroke every ball from his 1st ball.

Yes, his reverse sweeps are to die for. His selection basically highlights England's lack of keeping options...and their ultra-conservative, no-hope-for-the-future, selection policies. I'm always astounded when Nixon gets off the mark.