Would you pick this player in your XI?

[micz]

Lets hypothetically say your country has the best fielder the game of cricket has ever seen. He is incredibly athletic with lighting fast reflexes, stopping boundaries with his Usain Bolt like pace while possessing the talent to catch any half chances within the infield or outfield. He is also deadly accurate in the field; hitting the stumps from anywhere of the ground 9 times out of 10 - including from the boundaries!

However, there is a catch (no pun intended).

Despite being able to field anywhere, he cannot wicket-keep.
And with a high score of 1, his batting makes Chris Martin look superior. His bowling, isn't great either. For some reason, he simply cannot land the ball on the pitch.

In consideration of all the three formats, would he make your XI in place of a genuine batsman, bowler or all-rounder?

 

[Heboric]

Only if the other 10 players are ridiculously good at what they do.
At intenational level cant have team carrying a player. One less of either a bowler or batsmen is huge

 

[cnerd123]

I'd pick him for T20s if I have sufficient all-rounders to cover the batting and bowling duties.

Plus simply being around the national team framework will mean be improved in his batting rapidly (forget bowling because it's too difficult a skill to learn late in life)

Maybe even actually just get him into domestic limited overs teams and A Team cricket to work with the coaches before he debuts for the national side. Make sure he's competent to not get killed by a fast bowler before picking him in the side.

 

[vcs]

Nah, fielding simply isn't that valuable as a discipline for a guy to justify his place in the team for that alone, especially with bigger bats, smaller boundaries etc. Much rather have a completely unathletic bloke like Herath if he is skilled enough with bat or ball.

If he is that freakishly good in the field, he won't be completely useless with both bat and ball anyway. He'd have amazing reflexes and hand eye coordination.

 

[Gob]

Would sent him to field when Rick Ponting is batting.

 

[Red]

No, because there's players who can already do those things for the most part, as well as bat.

 

[Burgey]

Would be perpetual 12th man

 

[Gnske]

Of course not. Captains wouldn't know what the **** to do with a player like that. Throw him in gully? Have him follow the strokeplay? Set traps going just to that player alone?

No one would hit it near him. Then you have a guy who catches like everyone else but does it more regularly but doesn't contribute anything else.

 

[fredfertang]

Would be perpetual 12th man

Sounds like Gary Pratt

 

[Bijed]

Don't select him, just find reasons to have him perpetually subbed on for someone

 

[Prince EWS]

I'd think about it in T20, depending on the balance of the rest of the team. Sometimes T20 teams can end up with players who kind of do nothing if they have a good allrounder batting in the top five and bowling a full quota, and/or a wicket keeper who'd make the side on batting alone.

Pretty much no chance in the other formats though. Good sub fielder as others have said, but no chance of being selected in the eleven.

 

[NUFAN]

I would pick him in all 3 formats if we take the point about the guy taking any half chance literally.

Being more realistic I would play them in T20 for a batsman. You can get away with 10 batsman far easier.