Where Does Rishabh Pant Stand Among the Great Wicketkeeper-Batters in Test Cricket?

[kyear2]

I reckon it would. It would be like a batting allrounder who was a decent 5th bowler and averaged 45 with the bat and 33-35 with the ball. I'd call that ATG.

I don't think that player is an ATG, (more or less Tony Greig or Bobby Simpson) the reason Kallis and Sobers are ATGs with those bowling numbers is because they're ATG as batsmen.

The only players who I personally rate as ATG's who weren't ATG in any particular disciple are Miller and Gilchrist and that's because they came damn close in one, Gilly for two.

By your criteria Mark Taylor is an ATG, though he is a cricketer I rate higher than a Kapil Dev for example. Which I'm sure is not a popular opinion.

 

[sayon basak]

Great WK batsman.
Just like Gilly.

I don't think you have the same understanding of the words "WK" or "WK bat" as others.

 

[kyear2]

Great WK batsman.
Just like Gilly.

That only works if your keeping is up to snuff though.

Gilly was a great or at least a world class wicketkeeper though. Pant isn't close to that.

 

[DrWolverine]

I don't think you have the same understanding of the words "WK" or "WK bat" as others.

Bob Taylor = Great keeper
Adam Gilchrist = Great WK bat

 

[sayon basak]

Bob Taylor = Great keeper
Adam Gilchrist = Great WK bat

Are Pant and Gilly close as WK bats?

 

[DrWolverine]

As a batsman? Yes. Maybe even better. Not greater for now. Pant is not a good keeper though.

 

[Coronis]

dropped Stokes who proceeded to see off Bumrah's final spell literally right after

Not like Bumrah was threatening at all though

 

[Coronis]

If he continues this way, he will be seen as a arguably the best batsman among keepers but a poor keeper

So the next Andy Flower. Who is yes so often selected ahead of Gilchrist or considered a better player.

 

[Coronis]

Rishabh Pant holds greater importance to India this decade than Adam Gilchrist did to Australia in the 2000s as a batsman.

Shocking considering Gilchrist played in literally the best batting lineup of all time.

 

[sayon basak]

As a batsman?

No, as a wicket keeper batsman. When one asks whether player X is a better WK batter than player Y or not, he is asking who is better overall.

 

[DrWolverine]

No, as a wicket keeper batsman. When one asks whether player X is a better WK batter than player Y, he is asking who is better overall.

Gilly is better.

 

[sayon basak]

Gilly is better.

Is it close?

 

[DrWolverine]

Shocking considering Gilchrist played in literally the best batting lineup of all time.

When a batsman thrives in a weaker team, he does so with less support and greater pressure. That makes him a greater batsman imo

 

[DrWolverine]

Is it close?

Not really.

That is why in an ATG team I can understand if someone wants to pick Alan Knott over Gilchrist.

 

[Coronis]

When a batsman thrives in a weaker team, he does so with less support and greater pressure. That makes him a greater batsman imo

Ah the classic moving of the goalposts.

Does that make Hadlee the GOAT pacer to you then?

 

[DrWolverine]

Yeah. I rate him on par with Marshall.

 

[h_hurricane]

I don't think that player is an ATG, (more or less Tony Greig or Bobby Simpson) the reason Kallis and Sobers are ATGs with those bowling numbers is because they're ATG as batsmen.

The only players who I personally rate as ATG's who weren't ATG in any particular disciple are Miller and Gilchrist and that's because they came damn close in one, Gilly for two.

By your criteria Mark Taylor is an ATG, though he is a cricketer I rate higher than a Kapil Dev for example. Which I'm sure is not a popular opinion.

It is a stupid opinion as a matter of fact.

 

[ma1978]

Is there any statistical measure that judges Pant as a bad keeper? I'm not seeing a higher percentage of dropped catches or byes than Gilchrist.

 

[Johan]

Is there any statistical measure that judges Pant as a bad keeper? I'm not seeing a higher percentage of dropped catches or byes than Gilchrist.

...watch him keep, arguably, India wins the first test with a better keeper.

 

[ma1978]

...watch him keep, arguably, India wins the first test with a better keeper.

he wasn't the problem. India lost the first test because of catching and the lower order. They also lost because English batting was brilliant.