CW All-Time XI Wicket Keepers

[ankitj]

How was Walcott with gloves? He would be such a gun wicketkeeper-batsman if he is acceptable behind the wickets.

 

[smash84]

It's a real shame Gerry Alexander gave up first class cricket right when he started batting really well. Sounds like a real gentleman to me. Also, I think Gilchrist's keeping is overrated. I've seen him drop plenty recently while watching those Fox Sports classics.

Gilchrist was far from the best but definitely brought so much to the table with his batting

Not with the gloves he was.

Arachno meant as batsman

 

[Ikki]

Gilchrist's batting is very underrated, especially because it tailed off so bad. For much of his career he was a clear 50+ averaging batsman. Even his average now is incredible, considering his SR. What more, when you take a look at his averages home and away and against each opponent his record is very complete.

 

[kyear2]

Walcott was a very good keeper, especially to spin. Kept to hundreds of overs of Ramadin and Valentine with bary a bye.

 

[Biryani Pillow]

With the batting in this team you pick the best keeper.

So Knott by a country mile.

Also a pretty useful batsman who very often got good runs when others had struggled.

 

[smash84]

Walcott was a very good keeper, especially to spin. Kept to hundreds of overs of Ramadin and Valentine with bary a bye.

I am assuming you wanted to say "nary"

I hate this expression........

 

[smash84]

Gilchrist's batting is very underrated, especially because it tailed off so bad. For much of his career he was a clear 50+ averaging batsman. Even his average now is incredible, considering his SR. What more, when you take a look at his averages home and away and against each opponent his record is very complete.

There is no doubt in my mind that Gilchrist was a very good batsman but having seen both of them bat would you say that he was a better batsman than Sanga?

 

[Jager]

There is no doubt in my mind that Gilchrist was a very good batsman but having seen both of them bat would you say that he was a better batsman than Sanga?

I wouldn't... Sangakkara is damn classy and has never had the freedom that Gilchrist did. It's all fun and games when you come in after Hayden, Langer, Ponting etc. but when you're one half of a two man batting team (Jayawardene being his significant other), you're burdened with a huge responsibility- something that he has performed exceptionally with.

 

[smash84]

I wouldn't... Sangakkara is damn classy and has never had the freedom that Gilchrist did. It's all fun and games when you come in after Hayden, Langer, Ponting etc. but when you're one half of a two man batting team (Jayawardene being his significant other), you're burdened with a huge responsibility- something that he has performed exceptionally with.

yeah.....agree with a lot of what you have to say.......

Gilly was good but Sangers is better IMO

 

[Ikki]

There is no doubt in my mind that Gilchrist was a very good batsman but having seen both of them bat would you say that he was a better batsman than Sanga?

I don't know, it depends what you value. If you value a complete record or a batsman who is able to strike fast and score a lot of runs, it's Gilchrist. I don't think it's that clearcut as you stated it. Gilchrist in any other team would bat higher. I think he would have scored more aggregate runs and people would have given him more weight as one of the great bats of his era.

I disagree with Jager in the above too. There are many innings where Gilchrist changed the tide when all above him failed. It was just his style to strike so fast; it wasn't because he benefitted from those above him. And he did so against great bowlers.

 

[smash84]

for me Gilchrist would always be the hard hitting aggressive batsman that was his style

For a test match I would want a batsman who could get in and stay there and play a long innings

Can't recall from the top of my mind but did Gilchrist have a double hundred?

 

[Ikki]

Yeah, he does.

1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Also, do you remember this?

2nd Test: Australia v Pakistan at Hobart, Nov 18-22, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Against, Akram, Waqar, Akhtar and Saqlain. Came in 5-126 chasing 369 in the last innings.

 

[smash84]

Yeah, he does.

1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Also, do you remember this?

2nd Test: Australia v Pakistan at Hobart, Nov 18-22, 1999 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Against, Akram, Waqar, Akhtar and Saqlain. Came in 5-126 chasing 369 in the last innings.

How can I forget this match.....so so painful....

I will never forgive the umpire in this match

 

[ankitj]

Gilchrist's batting is very underrated, especially because it tailed off so bad. For much of his career he was a clear 50+ averaging batsman. Even his average now is incredible, considering his SR. What more, when you take a look at his averages home and away and against each opponent his record is very complete.

Gilly was in top 15 of the recent CW50. He didn't make it because of his bowling or wicket keeping.

 

[NUFAN]

Gilly was in top 15 of the recent CW50. He didn't make it because of his bowling or wicket keeping.

You can certainly argue that he did make it due to his keeping. It would be interesting to see where people would rate Gilchrist purely on his batting. If you compare him to other Australian cricketers from the past 15-20 years would he compare favourably to the likes of Martyn, Jones, Hayden, Langer, MWaugh, Slater, Taylor, Hussey, Clarke?

I think it's quite safe to say that SWaugh, Border, Ponting are ahead of him, but after that it gets a little difficult and it's impossible to know if Gilly would have felt under pressure more if he was picked as a batsman or if he would have strived.

 

[Jager]

Gilchrist's batting is very underrated, especially because it tailed off so bad. For much of his career he was a clear 50+ averaging batsman. Even his average now is incredible, considering his SR. What more, when you take a look at his averages home and away and against each opponent his record is very complete.

This is a good comment, I remember opening up his in depth statistics and trying to find holes in it, but it was extremely difficult to. It's a shame our ATG team has only a 'passable' grade wicketkeeper though.

 

[NUFAN]

This is a good comment, I remember opening up his in depth statistics and trying to find holes in it, but it was extremely difficult to. It's a shame our ATG team has only a 'passable' grade wicketkeeper though.

How about his record against India where he just averaged what most keepers did.

I loved Gilly and I'm a firm believer that he's one of those players that added more intangible things to the side that cant be judged from his career average. These include demoralising opponents, being flexible enough to bat up the order when quick runs were needed, making important runs in tough situations, starting the series with a big score etc, etc.

Playing devils advocate here, Gilly played almost all of his career when team scores were at its highest.

 

[kyear2]

He kept more than adequately to Warne all of those years, not to mention Lee, Gilespie and Mcgill. He was much more than a passable keeper.

 

[smash84]

How about his record against India where he just averaged what most keepers did.

I loved Gilly and I'm a firm believer that he's one of those players that added more intangible things to the side that cant be judged from his career average. These include demoralising opponents, being flexible enough to bat up the order when quick runs were needed, making important runs in tough situations, starting the series with a big score etc, etc.

Playing devils advocate here, Gilly played almost all of his career when team scores were at its highest.

Agree with the part in bold but would you rate him as a better batsman than Sanga?

Sangakkara is a very very good batsman

 

[Jager]

He kept more than adequately to Warne all of those years, not to mention Lee, Gilespie and Mcgill. He was much more than a passable keeper.

Healy was far superior to Gilchrist, of course. I'd take Healy over Gilly because of his skills behind the stumps. It just frustrates me that apparently wicketkeeping is no longer what we choose a wicketkeeper for.