• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

The Adam Gilchrist Tribute Thread

Precambrian

Banned
I also believe CA didnt do Adam the justice he deserved (going for Ponting instead as captain). Captaining such a Champion side would have been an honor. And he did superbly well by captaining them to a famous Series win in India. People might attack my point saying "Ok, but what wrong Punter has done". I think anyone could captain a team consisiting of Shane Warne, McG, Gilly etc.
 

Jnr.

First Class Debutant
I also believe CA didnt do Adam the justice he deserved (going for Ponting instead as captain). Captaining such a Champion side would have been an honor. And he did superbly well by captaining them to a famous Series win in India. People might attack my point saying "Ok, but what wrong Punter has done". I think anyone could captain a team consisiting of Shane Warne, McG, Gilly etc.
Disagree. As amazing as Gilly is, he's human. If he had been made captain, I think he would've been burnt out prematurely (I think you're underestimating a captain's job). I'm glad he didn't leave the game prematurely - more years to enjoy his batsmanship and spirit. Besides, he's Australia's Test captain #41, an honour no one can take away from him and he has also said several times that he has never really coveted the Australian captaincy.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I hate to stink up a tribute thread, and I do really love Gilly, but he has the luxury of being able to not be selfish; he has the luxury of being able to walk; he has the luxury of playing with complete freedom. You can do these very admirable things if you're a keeper/senior player whose place in the team is both secure and is not dependant on your batting. Did he walk from 1999-2003 (early on in his international career)? Or did it start at the WOrld Cup 2003?

I'd be more impressed if he was a newly-selected specialist batsman still making his way in the team - and he was doing the above selfless acts.
You're a hard man. Most people would wait until their position was safe.

Anyway, he didn't need to walk in the early days; was usually out bowled or caught on the fence. :D Seriously, wasn't much of a nicker early doors.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I also believe CA didnt do Adam the justice he deserved (going for Ponting instead as captain). Captaining such a Champion side would have been an honor. And he did superbly well by captaining them to a famous Series win in India. People might attack my point saying "Ok, but what wrong Punter has done". I think anyone could captain a team consisiting of Shane Warne, McG, Gilly etc.
A team of champions != a champion team. I see this point about the players being so great that the captain didn't matter and it's crap. Wanna know what a team full of stars but without a decent captain will do? Think Pakistan for the last 20 years. With Imran at the helm, Pakistan won a WC after a poor start and drew two series' against the WI when no-one even came close. The same team with virtually the same playing group (with even more great players like Waqar added because he missed the whole 1992 WC) were beaten regularly after Imran retired.

The point? Made captain, Gillie's form would have dropped off pretty fast because even with a star-studded team, the captain still has to work their backside off.
 

Precambrian

Banned
Disagree. As amazing as Gilly is, he's human. If he had been made captain, I think he would've been burnt out prematurely (I think you're underestimating a captain's job). I'm glad he didn't leave the game prematurely - more years to enjoy his batsmanship and spirit. Besides, he's Australia's Test captain #41, an honour no one can take away from him and he has also said several times that he has never really coveted the Australian captaincy.
It's a bit of injustice you do there pal to Gilly pal. Gilly captained Australia in 6 tests, winning 4 of those, losing one and drawing one. And he captained Australia when they won the series in India (final frontier for australian caps for a long time). (Dont forget Ponting came back to captain the dead rubber and Aus lost, but that's irrelevant). I think Gilly was more imaginative and proactive than any of the Australian captains. Given a chance he did well. But he wa not continued with sadly.
 

sportsnob

Cricket Spectator
It's a bit of injustice you do there pal to Gilly pal. Gilly captained Australia in 6 tests, winning 4 of those, losing one and drawing one. And he captained Australia when they won the series in India (final frontier for australian caps for a long time). (Dont forget Ponting came back to captain the dead rubber and Aus lost, but that's irrelevant). I think Gilly was more imaginative and proactive than any of the Australian captains. Given a chance he did well. But he wa not continued with sadly.
He would made a good captain but to be fair to Ponting, he hasn't so badly either ! And I really think the selectors didn't want to put more pressure on Gilly by burdening him with the captaincy as well.
 

Precambrian

Banned
A team of champions != a champion team. I see this point about the players being so great that the captain didn't matter and it's crap. Wanna know what a team full of stars but without a decent captain will do? Think Pakistan for the last 20 years. With Imran at the helm, Pakistan won a WC after a poor start and drew two series' against the WI when no-one even came close. The same team with virtually the same playing group (with even more great players like Waqar added because he missed the whole 1992 WC) were beaten regularly after Imran retired.

The point? Made captain, Gillie's form would have dropped off pretty fast because even with a star-studded team, the captain still has to work their backside off.
One cannot compare Australian team of the 2000 with Pakistan team of the 90s. Yes, Pakistan had world class players, but filled with bloated ego and lack of professionalism. (To be fair, the Indians too, except that they didnt have players of the same class, except the budding Tendulkar. The ego thing continued as recently as the Greg-Saurav spat). There were public rifts between Wasim and Waqar, Imran and Miandad. Even players refused to play under a particular captain. Can you imagine a situation where Hadyen and Symond refuse to play because Clarke is made captain? That was the difference.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
One cannot compare Australian team of the 2000 with Pakistan team of the 90s. Yes, Pakistan had world class players, but filled with bloated ego and lack of professionalism. (To be fair, the Indians too, except that they didnt have players of the same class, except the budding Tendulkar. The ego thing continued as recently as the Greg-Saurav spat). There were public rifts between Wasim and Waqar, Imran and Miandad. Even players refused to play under a particular captain. Can you imagine a situation where Hadyen and Symond refuse to play because Clarke is made captain? That was the difference.
So there were no bloated egos in the Aussies side of the 2000's? Surely you jest. Warne, Hayden, Martyn and the Waugh brothers to start with. What you're saying supports my point that a multi-talented team needs a decent captain to stitch it together for the team to do well.

That the rifts weren't public is not the point, in my view. They were there with the Aussie team, as with most highly talented teams, and that the team still did well surely indicates strong leaders.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
There was patently a rift between Warne and Stephen Waugh \ Gilchrist. Cannot believe anyone would think otherwise, especially with Warne's (many 8-)) post-retirement revelations.
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
The third name in my All-Time XI, after Bradman and Sobers. He's simply a clear choice ahead of everyone else who has ever played in his position, and you can't get a bigger compliment than that. At his peak he was one of the most dangerous batsmen in test history, and pretty consistent to go with that, and IMO he has been somewhat underrated as a keeper, mainly because of his batting. Essentially, people are more focused on finding faults with Gilchrist's keeping because he was such a good batsman, while in reality I think he was close to the best keeper in the world for most of his career. There were a couple of other contenders, but even leaving aside his batting he was very good, and generally deserved a spot, even if he might not make the list of the greatest keepers of all time without his batting. Throw in the fact that he would have made any test side in the world as a batsman through the peak of his career and you've got a truly remarkable player.

Also quite nice to watch for such an aggressive batsman. Could score very fast playing fairly orthodox shots, and a great guy as well. Very glad I saw him play.
I think I did this in another tribute thread as well but I'm just going to quote Faaip again and say "what he said." Couldn't agree more.

Well played Gilly, it's been a pleasure. :)
 

Precambrian

Banned
There could've been. But how many of them public? And those spats were just in the dressing room. On the field, Warne the controversy maker was replaced by Warne the Champion. And you name only 1 player, with a possibly bloated ego. Hayden? Martyn? (Martyn a legend?) :unsure:
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Amazing player. Totally revolutionized the role of the wicket keeper/batsman in a line up. Fantastic eye and good timing along with awesome hitting power. He was just a terror for the bowlers. At his best, he was, as Geoff Boycott once called him on air, "a left handed Richards". Add to that, his wicket keeping skill... He kept getting better and better as a keeper AFAIC, till the last 2 or 3 years and you have got a real all timer... The way he conducted himself was excellent too, for the most part and although there have been times when I thought he had been hypocritical in terms of his behaviour (and lets face it, everyone is at some point or the other), he has been an excellent role model for all young cricketers... Was a good captain as well, IMHO, FWIW.. I am not as sold about him "walking" as many others, mainly because he only seemed to start doing it from the 2003 WC but at least he stuck true to it afterwards...


The one thing I will always remember about him is the Chennai test in 2004. He had kept wickets through a long Indian innings and he knew that when Australia had to bat the second time, the game was well in the balance... What does he do, as captain? Promotes himself to no.3, takes the game by the scruff of the neck. Normally, if it had been the usual no.3 (think it was Katich in that game, not really sure), India would have been all over him but Gilchrist, simply by his presence, put a bit of fear and apprehension into the Indian bowlers (esp. the spinners). He only made 40 or so off 50 odd balls and didn't hit many boundaries either. But he came in, looked positive, kept pushing the ball around and running hard and in between mixed up some of his powerful strokes... I think, THAT little innings was as much a reason for India not being able to dominate that game as any either, including that partnership between Martyn and Gillespie that followed this innings... Nice guy to talk to, too, although I only got him for a couple of questions.... Bye, bye, Gilly.... You will be missed. :)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Think the missed stumping off Martyn made a bigger difference still TBH. :p Shame it was Parthiv Patel rather than Gilchrist behind the stumps then, really.

Anyway, interesting to hear that Boycott once called him a left-handed Viv Richards, because IMO (in the 1999\2000-2003 part of his career) that's pretty much exactly what he was, in substance if not in attitude. Good to know that the idea could be shared by someone who watched Richards bat live.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I hate to stink up a tribute thread, and I do really love Gilly, but he has the luxury of being able to not be selfish; he has the luxury of being able to walk; he has the luxury of playing with complete freedom. You can do these very admirable things if you're a keeper/senior player whose place in the team is both secure and is not dependant on your batting. Did he walk from 1999-2003 (early on in his international career)? Or did it start at the WOrld Cup 2003?

I'd be more impressed if he was a newly-selected specialist batsman still making his way in the team - and he was doing the above selfless acts.
How do you have the 'luxury of not being selfish'? You either are or you aren't. If you care about your average over the team then you're selfish, if you don't then you're not.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
Anyway, interesting to hear that Boycott once called him a left-handed Viv Richards, because IMO (in the 1999\2000-2003 part of his career) that's pretty much exactly what he was, in substance if not in attitude. Good to know that the idea could be shared by someone who watched Richards bat live.
I'm pretty sure that Gilchrist was not quite the same in substance during the aforementioned purple patch, as Viv was during his long period of dominance. He averaged more than 60 from over half his career iinm.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Gilchrist averaged 60 - consistently, without that much dip too far below - over his first 40-something (43 or 44 IIRR) Tests.

Richards' career was basically based around two periods of impossibly sensational scoring, both shorter than Gilchrist's one but notably more impressive. This and this being they. In the other 79 of his first 105 Tests, he averaged just 41.

Either way, the point is not productivity, but the fact that those two possessed a very, very rare "scary" trait, something matched by few if any who were batsmen of much note. And Richards had the attitude to go with it, too; Gilchrist did not.
 

Top