Greatest wicket keeper ever?

[Richard]

You would really consider Stewart and Gilchrist not to be excellent wicketkeepers?

I'd never rank them from the very top drawer, but both of them were damn good IMO. They rarely fumbled a thing, be it something they had to put in a big dive to (a ball that had been deflected), a ball that went straight through with no or negligable deviation, a throw from the outfield which came in perfectly or a throw from the outfield which was of poor quality.

 

[SJS]

You would really consider Stewart and Gilchrist not to be excellent wicketkeepers?

I'd never rank them from the very top drawer, but both of them were damn good IMO..

No. They were both weak standing up. And the technique and footwork (which really separates the great keepers from the good ones) was poor.

You have to just see Healy and Gilchrist keeping side by side to realise the difference.

 

[Richard]

I'm certainly very surprised you'd describe them as weak standing-up. Less good than they were standing back? Sure. But I never saw either of them make many errors in either position.

Similarly, poor footwork? Again, I can't agree. Less good than a Healy or a Russell? Sure. But I'd say it's a case of good instead of excellent, rather than poor instead of excellent. I saw Stewart make many acrobatic takes standing back, something which would not have been possible had his footwork been downright poor (as is, for example, Matthew Prior's).

(And as an aside, Stewart's hands by the end of his career were probably better than Russell's - he dropped less once he got his gloves on the ball)

 

[Lillian Thomson]

You would really consider Stewart and Gilchrist not to be excellent wicketkeepers?

I'd never rank them from the very top drawer, but both of them were damn good IMO. They rarely fumbled a thing, be it something they had to put in a big dive to (a ball that had been deflected), a ball that went straight through with no or negligable deviation, a throw from the outfield which came in perfectly or a throw from the outfield which was of poor quality.

The other day the very average Alec Stewart was as good as Alan Knott, now he's not ranked top drawer. Unless you're saying Alan Knott isn't top drawer either. Though I do think Gilchrist is a better keeper than SJS (meaning of course I rate Gilchrist higher than SJS does - I wouldn't dare to suggest that Gilchrist is a better keeper than SJS.)

 

[SJS]

The other day the very average Alec Stewart was as good as Alan Knott, now he's not ranked top drawer. Unless you're saying Alan Knott isn't top drawer either. Though I do think Gilchrist is a better keeper than SJS (meaning of course I rate Gilchrist higher than SJS does - I wouldn't dare to suggest that Gilchrist is a better keeper than SJS.)

I would have felt very insulted if you had :

I wish you would put in a word with the CW Red's skipper though

 

[SJS]

I'm certainly very surprised you'd describe them as weak standing-up. Less good than they were standing back? Sure. But I never saw either of them make many errors in either position.

Similarly, poor footwork? Again, I can't agree. Less good than a Healy or a Russell? Sure. But I'd say it's a case of good instead of excellent, rather than poor instead of excellent. I saw Stewart make many acrobatic takes standing back, something which would not have been possible had his footwork been downright poor (as is, for example, Matthew Prior's).

(And as an aside, Stewart's hands by the end of his career were probably better than Russell's - he dropped less once he got his gloves on the ball)

I never said they are poor keepers. But then these are all very relative Richard. The debate has been ongoing for at least eighty years now, we cant settle it I suppose

 

[Richard]

The other day the very average Alec Stewart was as good as Alan Knott, now he's not ranked top drawer. Unless you're saying Alan Knott isn't top drawer either.

The other day - hmm, looks like a year ago to me.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The other day - hmm, looks like a year ago to me.

It was a year ago. A year in which neither have done anything to enhance or otherwise their wicketkeeping skills or reputation.

 

[Richard]

They don't have to be playing for knowledge of them (or, rather, one of them) to be enhanced.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

They don't have to be playing for knowledge of them (or, rather, one of them) to be enhanced.

So you admit your assessment was wrong. Hopefully there'll soon be a nice big catalogue of similar admissions of similarly flawed judgement of other players.

 

[Richard]

Judgements are wrong and wrong judgements are amended and updated every day by every person on any infinite number of matters. Really isn't a big deal.

 

[Top_Cat]

You have to just see Healy and Gilchrist keeping side by side to realise the difference.

Yeah, about 3 inches. Big reason for why Gilchrist isn't as good.

 

[archie mac]

Yeah, about 3 inches. Big reason for why Gilchrist isn't as good.

Are they keeping naked?

 

[Indipper]

TC's got some of these.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Here's a little clip of Alan Knott from 1975. Nothing to do with wicketkeeping but shows how he used to treat whipper-snapper young bowlers who thought they could bowl fast.

How Knott to play Jeff Thomson

 

[GIMH]

Now that is a shot