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

[Johan]

Name an average wicket keeper.

Pant imo is an average keeper purely gloves wise, or atleast has regressed to one lately. Rizwan is a good one or at least was when I last saw him. Gilly/Foakes/Saha types were very good-great keepers. Healy was the greatest I saw and an exceptional keeper.

 

[DrWolverine]

Walcott’s record as a WK ain’t that great.
Walcott played a total of 44 Tests.
Walcott as WK : 15 Tests. 888 runs @ 40.

ABD played only 20% of matches as a keeper.
ABD played at total of 114 Tests.
ABD as WK : 24 Tests. 2067 runs @ 57.

I honestly see only Andy Flower and Adam Gilchrist as better batsmen than Rishabh Pant for now.

 

[Johan]

Walcott’s record as a WK ain’t that great.
Walcott played a total of 44 Tests.
Walcott as WK : 15 Tests. 888 runs @ 40.

ABD played only 20% of matches as a keeper.
ABD played at total of 114 Tests.
ABD as WK : 24 Tests. 2067 runs @ 57.

I honestly see only Andy Flower and Adam Gilchrist as better batsmen than Rishabh Pant for now.

Yeah, but if De Villiers and Walcott and to an extent Sangakkara keep keeping in their prime I don't think their batting would be impacted, De Villiers wasn't, the only one who admitted he could be impacted was Sangakkara who didn't want to bat 3 and keep at once

 

[DrWolverine]

I don't think he'll surpass Gilchrist

Should we not consider the fact that Pant plays in a bowling era whereas Gilly played in the easiest era of batting since WW 2?

*assuming Pant bats like this for few more years

 

[Johan]

Should we not consider the fact that Pant plays in a bowling era whereas Gilly played in the easiest era of batting since WW 2?

*assuming Pant bats like this for few more years

I think we should, but it's also true that Gilchrist was averaging 50+ for the majority of his career, he definitely was a better bat than Pant at peak.

 

[DrWolverine]

Yeah, but if De Villiers and Walcott and to an extent Sangakkara keep keeping in their prime I don't think their batting would be impacted, De Villiers wasn't, the only one who admitted he could be impacted was Sangakkara who didn't want to bat 3 and keep at once

I disqualify Walcott because he has less than 1000 runs.

If we are talking about WK batsmen, there are only 2-3 who are better than him with the bat.

In my initial post I said there are 2-3 batsmen who were ahead of Pant - Flower & Gilly for sure and maybe ABD but not sure if we can consider him

 

[Johan]

I disqualify Walcott because he has less than 1000 runs.

ok

 

[sayon basak]

Is this conversation solely based on batting?

 

[DrWolverine]

Is this conversation solely based on batting?

Yes.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Pant is averaging 59.73 at no 5 which is a remarkable stat.

 

[Coronis]

Should we not consider the fact that Pant plays in a bowling era whereas Gilly played in the easiest era of batting since WW 2?

*assuming Pant bats like this for few more years

Well yes. We should also consider Gilchrist played for more than twice the amount of tests, and was kept out of the test side until 28 due to Healy. Imagine if Pant had only just started playing because of Saha or whoever.

And just looking at where Gilly was at current Pant’s stage… we could either go with 44 tests..

2940 @ 58.80 8 tons 16 fifties

or 77 innings…

3370 @ 53.49 10 tons 17 fifties

 

[sayon basak]

Yes.

Then why does the OP say "wicket keeper batters"? It should be "Where does Pant stand as a batter among players who kept wickets too?"

Anyway, by batting alone, close to Gilly. Surpassing him by the time he's done won't be impossible either.

 

[DrWolverine]

Well yes. We should also consider Gilchrist played for more than twice the amount of tests, and was kept out of the test side until 28 due to Healy. Imagine if Pant had only just started playing because of Saha or whoever.

And just looking at where Gilly was at current Pant’s stage… we could either go with 44 tests..

2940 @ 58.80 8 tons 16 fifties

or 77 innings…

3370 @ 53.49 10 tons 17 fifties

True. That’s why I said Gilly is ahead for now

While it’s true that Gilchrist had to wait until he was 28 to make his Test debut, that also meant he entered the scene with years of domestic experience and maturity.

On the other hand Rishabh Pant was thrown into Test cricket at 20. No cushion. No time. He had to learn the hardest format of the game on the job, often in foreign conditions under pressure with India in trouble. He didn’t debut into a settled team. He didn’t come in as a finished product. And yet, he already has match-defining innings in Australia, England, and South Africa. The fact he is just 27 years old and earning comparisons to the legendary Adam Gilchrist says everything.

 

[DrWolverine]

.

You changed your profile pic.
I did not realise it was you until now.

 

[sayon basak]

You changed your profile pic.
I did not realise it was you until now.

Is that a good thing?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Jack Russel, the artist

 

[DrWolverine]

Is that a good thing?

Kurt Angle, the complete wrestler.

 

[DrWolverine]

Pant imo is an average keeper purely gloves wise or atleast has regressed to one lately.

Pant has always been average.
I think he was worse few years before.

 

[Arachnödouche2.0]

He's going to comfortably outscore Gilchrist. Already is more than halfway to his tally. Pant also bats higher in the order and has regularly shored up a way more suspect lineup than Gilchrist ever had to. I think I'd be more comfortable knowing Gilchrist's in next because as explosive as he was, he was still a more known quantity than the headcase that Pant is.

No comparison between their keeping.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Pant has always been average.
I think he was worse few years before.

Back in the 2018s/19s he wasn't fit to keep in a Test. But he improved significantly before the accident