Did anybody here Colin Bland play?

[Richard]

Yes batter-keeper for Gilchrist.

Thats not an extreme statement at all. No one comes close to the 4 I mentioned, according to me atleast.

According to you, fine, you didn't mention that in your post and it comes across as that this can be fact.
It can't.

 

[luckyeddie]

I dont know about Adam Gilchrist being the best batsman-keeper ever, Alan Knott remains a favourite of mine.

I remember seeing footage of Knott coming in with Boycott at 80-5 in the Test at Trent Bridge in 1977 and both put on centuries.

LE, where did Randell field?

More frequently known as a cover or midwicket fielder - as was David Gower.

 

[gratefulcardina]

Fielding finally recognised!

Some interesting comments, thanks to all of you for providing interest and argument...

Jonty obviously an outstanding fielder, and his enthusiasm seems to be contagious. But put some limitations on the poor guy. He didn't field in the slips, and was never an accurate thrower in close (Ponting ahead on both counts).

Good to see Randall and (young) Gower getting recognition, both were fun to watch as well. What about Gus Logie or Roger Harper? Viv Richards won the 1975 WC Final with his fielding, he was unbelievable!

Be interesting to see comments on entire teams - for eg, the great WI teams of 76 to about 81, SA too, but Mark Taylor's Oz team might be the best overall that I witnessed - Slater was the only weakness, and Bob Simpson improved him. The fastbowlers were great catchers and their throwing was Bland-like. Healy, and a slips cordon of Taylor, M Waugh and Warne - with Steve in the gully! Any other teams worthy of note?

 

[Craig]

I remember a nickname for the West Indies slip cordon in the 80s, known as "Death row".

 

[Pratters]

According to you, fine, you didn't mention that in your post and it comes across as that this can be fact.
It can't.

mm Why? tell me a better all rounder than Sobers, a better batsman than Bradman, a batsman-keeper than Gilly and a better fielder than Gilly to have played the game. Its obviously a sibjective personal choice of an individual but like Bradman is generally accepted as the best batsman to have played the game, the other 3 too hold their own. A lot of people say Gilchrist isnt that good but when you have a keeper coming in at number 7 and scoring the way Gilchrist does, whatever his average is (and Gilchrist's is still pretty high though its dropping), no one an be chosen over him. Knott didnt have a great batting average, some thing in the 30s. Certainly not in the category of a Gilchrist. Andy Flower or Stewart may come in but at number 7 the fade when compared to a Gilchrist.

 

[Neil Pickup]

More than a few would take into Andy Flower (8 consecutive Test 50s) over Gilchrist.

And I would take Imran at his peak over any other all-rounder.

Except maybe Flintoff

 

[marc71178]

More than a few would take into Andy Flower (8 consecutive Test 50s) over Gilchrist.

And Alec Stewart amongst other recent players...

 

[Craig]

Except maybe Flintoff

Pickup - please tell me you are kidding?

 

[Richard]

mm Why? tell me a better all rounder than Sobers, a better batsman than Bradman, a batsman-keeper than Gilly and a better fielder than Gilly to have played the game. Its obviously a sibjective personal choice of an individual but like Bradman is generally accepted as the best batsman to have played the game, the other 3 too hold their own. A lot of people say Gilchrist isnt that good but when you have a keeper coming in at number 7 and scoring the way Gilchrist does, whatever his average is (and Gilchrist's is still pretty high though its dropping), no one an be chosen over him. Knott didnt have a great batting average, some thing in the 30s. Certainly not in the category of a Gilchrist. Andy Flower or Stewart may come in but at number 7 the fade when compared to a Gilchrist.

My objection wasn't specifically to your selections, my objection was to your branding of them.
However, I rate Stewart and Andy Flower as better batsmen than Gilchrist, yes.
Anyway, as I say, I reckon Billy Murdoch seriously was a better batsman than most modern players, and he was good enough with the gloves to keep Jack Blackham (by consensus the best practitioner of the wicketkeeping art ever) out of the Australian side sometimes.

 

[Pratters]

Anyway, as I say, I reckon Billy Murdoch seriously was a better batsman than most modern players, and he was good enough with the gloves to keep Jack Blackham (by consensus the best practitioner of the wicketkeeping art ever) out of the Australian side sometimes.

When I think of chosing a batsman-keeper for an All Time XI, I think of some one who can bat at number 7 the way Gilchrist can. I do not know much about Murdoch and Blackham. If an all time XI was formed, would a Murdoch, or even a Flower or Stewart stand a better chance of making it into the team at number 7?

I know you may not think of the batting at number 7 when you think of keeper-batsman and purely as the best keeper-batsman. But I always think of how the btsman would bat in at number 7. So was Murdoch that good?

 

[Langeveldt]

I think a South African team with

Jonty
Kirsten
Gibbs
Kallis
McMillan

Would have been the strongest fielding side of the modern era.. I dont think they all played together though..

I think Zimbabwe or Australia come very high up in the fielding stakes.. Zim have historically been outstanding in the field..

 

[Neil Pickup]

If I'm choosing an all time XI, I have the greatest top 6 in the world, so I then pick the best keeper ever as I really don't care about his batting.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I think Zimbabwe or Australia come very high up in the fielding stakes.. Zim have historically been outstanding in the field..

If only there had the hand eye co-ordination of the West Indies team.

Then they'd be legends.

 

[Craig]

Stephen Fleming has an outside of chance of breaking Mark Waugh'a all time slip catch record.

 

[Richard]

I'd personally be very surprised if he didn't.
I reckon he'll play about 50 or 60 more Tests at the least.

 

[Richard]

When I think of chosing a batsman-keeper for an All Time XI, I think of some one who can bat at number 7 the way Gilchrist can. I do not know much about Murdoch and Blackham. If an all time XI was formed, would a Murdoch, or even a Flower or Stewart stand a better chance of making it into the team at number 7?

I know you may not think of the batting at number 7 when you think of keeper-batsman and purely as the best keeper-batsman. But I always think of how the btsman would bat in at number 7. So was Murdoch that good?

Murdoch, like Trumper and all those around his time, must have been good, very good, because they had averages which would be impressive nowadays on wickets that were quite terrible.
Personally I bat batsmen in their best positions, regardless of whether they're 'keeping, captaining or anything else. If Andy Flower is 'keeping, I would still bat him in his best position relative to the other players.
I don't know that much about Murdoch and Blackham, either - no-one does. But we can surmise from their records and reputations that they were both damn good, if really incomparable to something 130 years after them.

 

[Richard]

I think a South African team with

Jonty
Kirsten
Gibbs
Kallis
McMillan

Would have been the strongest fielding side of the modern era.. I dont think they all played together though..

I'm almost positive they didn't.
McMillan's last Test was at Headingley in 1998 (shame - he played an innings that almost played a huge part in winning the game) and Gibbs only became a regular after Liebenberg's terrible series then.
IIRR Gibbs played a few Tests before that, and certainly Kirsten, Gibbs, Kallis and Rhodes all played in the same team a fair few times. Anyway, Liebenberg was almost as good as Gibbs in the field.