Are Specialist Wicketkeepers a Thing of the Past?

[DrWolverine]

It's constantly framed that Gilly replaced Heal's, but it's slightly more accurate to suggest that Healy kept Gilly out of the side.

True

Gilly made his one day debut at age of 25.

Gilly made his test debut at age of 28.





Despite such good numbers, it took the Australian selectors 3 years for them to replace Healy with Gilchrist in the test team

 

[Ali TT]

I agree. The chances are becoming costly again as well.

Watched two videos both sides of my nocturnal slumber where Flower was first choice all time as a keeper bat in one, and Pant was called an ATG in the other and all but anointed as the future GOAT.
Pant is comparatively abysmally bad at the supposedly primary and more heavily weighted part of his job, but it's the scores.that appear on score / spread sheets and not the drops. Flower was even worse.

What people consistently miss about Gilly is that while he wasn't Healy, he was pretty damn good. He wasn't elite / ATG, but he was good to Warne and the pacers. Without that base, the rest of it would have been irrelevant.

So I agree with you and Thala that once the statistal cost of these errors are quantified it would make a difference.

But it also shouldn't require that, because anyone with eyes can see how bad Pant is and would recall how poor Flower was.

Peer rating is seen as a bad word around here by some, but this is what happens when you spend more time looking at spread sheets and less time reading and understanding the context of the game..

There is no context where I would select Pant over Knott or even Healy, but we've become so wrapped up in numbers and there's no numbers to support how absolutely brilliant Healy was. It's constantly framed that Gilly replaced Heal's, but it's slightly more accurate to suggest that Healy kept Gilly out of the side.

Specialist keepers will return once teams get tired of dropping matches, that doesn't mean the batting part of the equation would be irrelevant either. Just raise the damn bar at this point.

I suspect this is more hope than prediction. My view is that at all levels of cricket, keepers are and will continue to be batters first, as long as they can meet a pretty low minimum bar with the gloves. This will be further entrenched by the dominance of T20 cricket.

 

[kyear2]

I suspect this is more hope than prediction. My view is that at all levels of cricket, keepers are and will continue to be batters first, as long as they can meet a pretty low minimum bar with the gloves. This will be further entrenched by the dominance of T20 cricket.

Yet another way the T20 is ruining the game

 

[slowfinger]

i think the only area where you really need a specialist would be in India, pakistan and Sri Lanka. over there i think it is silly not to have your best wicket keeper especially if you have good spinners in the team. i would not trust a Bairstow in this case no matter how many runs he brings

 

[Coronis]

i think the only area where you really need a specialist would be in India, pakistan and Sri Lanka. over there i think it is silly not to have your best wicket keeper especially if you have good spinners in the team. i would not trust a Bairstow in this case no matter how many runs he brings

What if he was Bradmanesque (or say Sehwagesque in Asia to be semi realistic) with the bat in Asia?

 

[capt_Luffy]

What if he was Bradmanesque (or say Sehwagesque in Asia to be semi realistic) with the bat in Asia?

So...... Flower but slightly better in SL and Pakistan?

 

[slowfinger]

What if he was Bradmanesque (or say Sehwagesque in Asia to be semi realistic) with the bat in Asia?

you'd have to be putting up pretty good numbers to save for the keeping errors, and considering there will be likely quite a few cruicial chances to spin, i think it's better to take the safer pair of hands