LOLmofo123 said:1- gilli
2- akmal
3- rest
on just keeping skills akmal is better then the rest.
I never said he was a "great" 'keeper per se, just the best currently going around. It says more about the standard overall than his 'keeping, really.Thats a huge call... he is a decent wicket keeper..nothing outstanding. I have seen him drop catches but also take some rippers.
Top_Cat said:I never said he was a "great" 'keeper per se, just the best currently going around. It says more about the standard overall than his 'keeping, really.
mofo123 said:and if u think my last post was stupid...he has more dismissals then mccullum in less matches...more then sangakara...only boucher has more dismissals at the same stage...but ill put that down to the fact he played with pollock...:P and errr donald...akmal played with sami and co who dont seem to b as good as getting nicks
In my view both are batsmen/keepers rather than the other way around. They're both solid glovemen who are well and truly Test standard but i put Gilly right at the top of glovemen today. Basically, I find it difficult to separate Sangakkara/McCallum/Boucher and the like because I think they're roughly of the same standard with small variations between all of them (some are slightly better at keeping to pacers, others to spinners, etc.). So yeah, they're mostly similar but for mine, Gilchrist is a level above all of them. Keeping to spinners, he seems a notch below Sangakkara but to pacers, other than an atrocious 2003/04, Gilchrist is above the other 'keepers in the world.Why don't you rate McCullum or Sangakarra?
Fair enough. I was admitting immaturity on my part though.Top_Cat said:I never made accusations of immaturity nor did I infer maturity on my part; just that you're wrong.
Hmmm.... Didn't I already say I was wrong to state bias?Top_Cat said:Good on you, viva le free speech! Part and parcel of that is that there are people who are allowed to disagree with you, however. I say Gilly is the best going around and you think otherwise. Good for you. Saying I'm biased by virtue of the fact that both Gilchrist and I reside in the same country, particularly when bias has never been part of my general MO around here (open to being told otherwise; everyone?), is just childish and petulant. That's just my opinion but I would wager that you'd have more people agreeing with that than agreeing with you saying I'm biased.
You said 'maybe you jumped the gun' (paraphrasing). It's a little bit different and I think I can allow you the benefit of the doubt on this occasion.Hmmm.... Didn't I already say I was wrong to state bias?
In which direction?I wouldnt rate boucher that high...simply because he is a terrible keeper against spin.Gilly-Sangy is pretty much indisputable....
C_C said:I wouldnt rate boucher that high...simply because he is a terrible keeper against spin.Gilly-Sangy is pretty much indisputable....
Are you talking about batting or wicket keeping or both?FaaipDeOiad said:Gilchrist
Sangakkara
Boucher
McCullum
Taibu
Akmal
Karthik
Browne
Mashud
Jones
For me, the top two are a cut above the rest, followed by the next three and then the last five all more or less even.
In terms of pure keeping, Gilchrist and Taibu are the best in my view, but as Taibu has never had to keep against quality spin it is hard to call him the best glovesman in the world. Boucher is quality, and Sangakkara is an excellent partner for Murali and I've been really impressed with what I've seen from him recently. Akmal is the best of the rest and certainly looks the good for the future. McCullum is a solid wicket keeper, as is Karthik. From what little I've seen of Mashud he's a very good keeper indeed, but not a particularly good batsman. Browne is a decent keeper and a below average batsman, and Jones is a terrible keeper and a good batsman.
In terms of batting, Gilchrist is a mile ahead, Sangakkara second. These two are batsmen in a true sense. After those two, there's McCullum, Taibu, Jones and Boucher about equal next, who are all very good batsmen who nevertheless with Taibu's exception because of the weakness of his side could not play as batsmen alond. Then there is Akmal and Karthick who have a good innings or two each so far and talent, but aren't proven as batsmen, and then Mashud and Browne a fair way back who are a touch better than your average tail ender.
The list was both, then I elaborated on each.zinzan12 said:Are you talking about batting or wicket keeping or both?
If your referring to keeping I totally disagree that Sangakkara is clearly 2nd best keeper. Definately 2nd best batsman but after watching the 2 tests again NZ, I thought sangakkara was a big disappointment behind the stumps. Before that series I would have agreed he was 2nd best. But now I think both Mccullum and Boucher are technically better keepers (batting aside)