Undoubtedly that will influence some people. It's often an interesting question - Knott vs Taylor, Evans vs Andrew, Russell vs Stewart, etc.Very tough. No stats to fall back on and the spectacular will often poll better than those that make few mistakes and are very solid.
That was a phenomenal piece of work and certainly the best dismissal I've ever seen, but I think the famous take by Knott off Underwood as purely a bit of keeping is at least worthy of rivalling it.As an individual piece of keeping you cant beat Russell stumping Jones off Small though I couldnt say who was the best keeper ever.
It wouldn't have done you much good even if you were. He was in his 70's by thenIan Healy without a doubt.
Never heard of Jack Blackham, probably because I wasnt alive during the 1920s...
Quite possible but I would say Oldfield, Tallon, Andrews, Taylor - take your pick.Keith Andrew
You saw him did you?Jack Blackham, without question, IMO.
Wicket-keeping, however, is one of the most subjective things. Unlike batting where you can at least get some semblance of Grace's superiority by his figures, you cannot do so with Blackham. Unless there is some amazing catches stat where the only reason possible is for great ability, I don't see how you can have consider him the best "without question" unless you were there to see him.No, just read about him. No-one alive (bar 1 person - who isn't a cricket fan) saw WG Grace bat either. Doesn't mean anyone who knows a thing doubts his skill.
I think you might be getting a little confused here, Richard.Australia's best seam-bowler of the 19th-century, Fred Spofforth, refused to play in an early Test match (I forget whether it was in the 1870s or 1880s) because Blackham had been omitted in favour of the superior batting and inferior glovework of Billy Murdoch.