Alan Knott VS Adam Gilchrist

[Cricket Bliss]

Who the better as a Cricketer

 

[capt_Luffy]

Gilchrist every day of the week and twice on Sundays

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

K(not)t Alan

 

[kyear2]

Think this one has been basically settled

 

[Cricket Bliss]

Gilchrist every day of the week and twice on Sundays

In case of just wicket keeping skills? who is better

 

[capt_Luffy]

In case of just wicket keeping skills? who is better

Definitely Alan Knott. As a pure glovesman, Knott is miles ahead.

 

[kyear2]

Definitely Alan Knott. As a pure glovesman, Knott is miles ahead.

Or kilometers

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Or kilometers

Bananas as we use here in the US

 

[Line and Length]

I agree Knott is miles/kilometers/bananas ahead as a gloveman but is he that far behind Gilchrist as a batsman? Looking at pure batting averages Gillie is well in front. However, in 137 knocks he scored 50 or more 43 times (31.38% of his innings) while Knott reached 50 in 55 of 149 knocks (36.91%).
The big difference in batting averages occur because Gilchrist converted 17 of his 43 50s into 'tons' while Knott did so just 5 times in his 55 half centuries. In addition, Gilchrist had more red ink (20) than Knott (15) despite having fewer innings.
Having said all that, Gilchrist set new standards as a 'keeper/batsman and is understandably selected in most ATG sides. However, I think time has dimmed some memories (not mine) of Knott and he is often overlooked.

 

[Coronis]

I agree Knott is miles/kilometers/bananas ahead as a gloveman but is he that far behind Gilchrist as a batsman? Looking at pure batting averages Gillie is well in front. However, in 137 knocks he scored 50 or more 43 times (31.38% of his innings) while Knott reached 50 in 55 of 149 knocks (36.91%).
The big difference in batting averages occur because Gilchrist converted 17 of his 43 50s into 'tons' while Knott did so just 5 times in his 55 half centuries. In addition, Gilchrist had more red ink (20) than Knott (15) despite having fewer innings.
Having said all that, Gilchrist set new standards as a 'keeper/batsman and is understandably selected in most ATG sides. However, I think time has dimmed some memories (not mine) of Knott and he is often overlooked.

Yes

 

[trundler]

This one's almost as clear cut as Imran being better than Kallis.

 

[Cricket Bliss]

I agree Knott is miles/kilometers/bananas ahead as a gloveman but is he that far behind Gilchrist as a batsman? Looking at pure batting averages Gillie is well in front. However, in 137 knocks he scored 50 or more 43 times (31.38% of his innings) while Knott reached 50 in 55 of 149 knocks (36.91%).
The big difference in batting averages occur because Gilchrist converted 17 of his 43 50s into 'tons' while Knott did so just 5 times in his 55 half centuries. In addition, Gilchrist had more red ink (20) than Knott (15) despite having fewer innings.
Having said all that, Gilchrist set new standards as a 'keeper/batsman and is understandably selected in most ATG sides. However, I think time has dimmed some memories (not mine) of Knott and he is often overlooked.

Absolutely correct , I guess in an era when wicket keepers were expected to keep only, Knott proved to be the first wicket keeper batmen since Les Ames which was long back. Averaging 32 in the 70s with the bat is definitely worth mentioning.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Absolutely correct , I guess in an era when wicket keepers were expected to keep only, Knott proved to be the first wicket keeper batmen since Les Ames which was long back. Averaging 32 in the 70s with the bat is definitely worth mentioning.

I think first is a stretch; Farokh Engineer and Imtiaz Ahmed were also very fine keeper batsmen; not to mention they were openers as well. As pure batsmen, I would definitely say they were in Knott's class.

 

[Cricket Bliss]

I agree Knott is miles/kilometers/bananas ahead as a gloveman but is he that far behind Gilchrist as a batsman? Looking at pure batting averages Gillie is well in front. However, in 137 knocks he scored 50 or more 43 times (31.38% of his innings) while Knott reached 50 in 55 of 149 knocks (36.91%).
The big difference in batting averages occur because Gilchrist converted 17 of his 43 50s into 'tons' while Knott did so just 5 times in his 55 half centuries. In addition, Gilchrist had more red ink (20) than Knott (15) despite having fewer innings.
Having said all that, Gilchrist set new standards as a 'keeper/batsman and is understandably selected in most ATG sides. However, I think time has dimmed some memories (not mine) of Knott and he is often overlooked.

What if Bob Taylor was put into comparison with Knott based on pure wicket keeper skills. One was technically the best, other one was acrobatically the best… but who was actually better?

 

[Line and Length]

What if Bob Taylor was put into comparison with Knott based on pure wicket keeper skills. One was technically the best, other one was acrobatically the best… but who was actually better?

Bob Taylor was all class with the gloves but, imo, Knott wasn't far behind him. Some of his 'keeping to Derek 'Deadly' Underwood on turning wickets was worth watching.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Absolutely correct , I guess in an era when wicket keepers were expected to keep only, Knott proved to be the first wicket keeper batmen since Les Ames which was long back. Averaging 32 in the 70s with the bat is definitely worth mentioning.

What did those plonkers think the big **** off flat wooden instrument was for then?

 

[subshakerz]

I agree Knott is miles/kilometers/bananas ahead as a gloveman but is he that far behind Gilchrist as a batsman? Looking at pure batting averages Gillie is well in front. However, in 137 knocks he scored 50 or more 43 times (31.38% of his innings) while Knott reached 50 in 55 of 149 knocks (36.91%).
The big difference in batting averages occur because Gilchrist converted 17 of his 43 50s into 'tons' while Knott did so just 5 times in his 55 half centuries. In addition, Gilchrist had more red ink (20) than Knott (15) despite having fewer innings.
Having said all that, Gilchrist set new standards as a 'keeper/batsman and is understandably selected in most ATG sides. However, I think time has dimmed some memories (not mine) of Knott and he is often overlooked.

Yeah I could see a case where a super strong batting team may prefer Knott to Gilly. An awesome keeper just relaxes the bowlers so much and let's them perform at optimum levels.

 

[Cricket Bliss]

This one's almost as clear cut as Imran being better than Kallis.

Pretty much when you have Imran’s advantages VS Kallis limitations thread

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Gilchrist but Knott deserving of few votes. So, went with Knott.

 

[Coronis]

Yeah I could see a case where a super strong batting team may prefer Knott to Gilly. An awesome keeper just relaxes the bowlers so much and let's them perform at optimum levels.

Its not like Gilly wasn’t a great keeper though. Not at Knott’s level, but the gap between their batting is far larger than the gap between their keeping.