Sometimes it takes an outsider to show you what ought to be obvious. My wife is American, and since falling in love with Matthew Hoggard in 2005 she has become an extremely knowledgable observer of the game. You might say this is like a cat who plays tennis: It doesn't do it very well, but you're amazed it can play at all. In this case, however, her clarity of vision puts many an Englishman to shame.
She made a very sharp point about England's wicket-keeping conundrum. First, though, a few background facts. The way the English media tells it, the rest of the world have a different class of batsman-wicketkeeper. Newsflash: They don't.
We must stop beating and breaking our wicketkeepers with massively distorted and unrealistic expectations. Rather like the desperate wannabe model who starves herself in the mistaken belief that the photos on her wall actually represent real people, English cricket is damaging itself by trying to live up to an ideal that everybody else ignores. Gilchrist was a one off. Stewart was exceptional. Sangakkara is arguably a better batsman than either, but he has recently given up the gloves. His replacement, HAPW Jayawardene, after 21 tests, averages a mere 27. And by current global standards, that's pretty good.
Let's take a look at the current keepers of the main test-playing nations. India's Parthiv Patel is one of the better batsmen. He averages 30 from 20 games. Pakistan's Kamran Akmal is a shaky stumper but makes 32 each time he comes to the wicket. West Indies' Denesh Ramdin has the lowest average, a mere 22 from 27 games. Of the antipodeans, Brendan McCullum, considering his fearsome reputation, has a surprisingly modest record: He averages a mere 31 from his 35 games. Brad Haddin, the man with the most illustrious predecessor in the history of anything, averages a respectable 30 from his 3 tests. Time will tell whether he can keep it up. From the candidate with the least experience to the one with the most. From Mark Boucher's 118 tests he averages just 31.
By now it should be clear that if England's keeper averages 25 it's far from being a national disaster. It would actually be par for the course. Ambrose's head is on the chopping block despite averaging only 6 runs fewer than Boucher. Rough justice. Matt Prior averages an outstanding 40, though by one calculation he has dropped more runs than he's scored in an England shirt. And Chris Read, England's forgotten man, is still one of the stronger candidates. In his brief run of seven tests in 2006-7 he averaged a thoroughly respectable 27, a considerable improvement on his first eight tests. Which brings me back to my wife.
She put it more simply than anybody I've heard in England's cricket commentariat. The 'offence' sets the total. The 'defence' defends it. Of course, all the bowlers are also part of the offense, and all the batsman play a part in the defence, but this black and white scheme captures an essential truth about the game. And the wicketkeeper, she points out, is obviously part of the defence. He's a key part of the wicket-taking unit. That's his primary job. So my wife's advice? Pick the best keeper. If he can average between 25 and 30 with the bat, then he may not be a new Gilchrist, but he'll be as good as all the real wicketkeepers in the real world today. And that comes from my wife.
Bang on, Alfred. The only reason why you wouldn't pick your best 'keeper is that you don't trust your specialist batsman to get enough runs.And who suffers when catches are dropped? The poor bowler!As they say, it's a batsman's game...
Posted by: Rob at August 12, 2008 1:53 PM
It wouldn't be a huge suprise to me if we were picking a keeper to bat at number 8 for the ashes next year with both Flintoff and Broad to bat above. Which would make the argument simple, Chris Read it is.
Posted by: will at August 12, 2008 6:48 PM
the job our keepers are asked to do is bat in the lower middle order, score runs and take their catches. there are only 2 on the county circuit who do this regularly, Chris Read and James Foster. all the others bat in the upper order and drop more catches than would be acceptable at international level and to refer to the article the primary job is to take catches and from what i have seen this summer James Foster is ahead of Chris Read.
Posted by: Krishna at September 10, 2008 12:02 AM
You seem to have forgotten about somebody by the name of Mahendra Singh Dhoni !
Posted by: Auchi, Sri Lanka at February 4, 2009 10:11 AM
Sanga is the BEST! Don't forget Phil Mustard... he seems decent.
Posted by: Maurmorr at April 15, 2009 3:21 PM
It took an American woman to point this out? I was a 'keeper myself. The best 'keeper should always be chosen. If he makes runs, that's icing on the cake. Not since the days of Knott and Taylor have England chosen their best 'keeper, and have suffered because of it. Knotts, Gilchrists, Sangakkaras and Dhonis don't come around in bunches. A good 'keeper who holds just about everything that comes his way is far better than a batsman with gloves who scores at a decent average and drops the routine chance which can put his bowlers at a serious disadvanage.
Posted by: sunil mukhopadhyay at October 15, 2009 5:14 PM
Being an American and a cricket fan and an exp. player I must agree with your summary, select the best wicket keeper. As our experience tells us if you drop an important catch or miss a stumping chance, it matters a lot, which cannot be made up with some 30-50 runs.
Posted by: Ravi at November 3, 2009 9:25 PM
excuse me....why isnt anybody talking about M.S.Dhoni here. Exceptional Captain, excellent batsman and a very good keeper. Except Gilli nobody else can be compared to him in cricket with those qualities. Way to go Dhoni...
Post your comment
About this blog
'Inbox' will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from
ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you
hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and
you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from
our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing.
Welcome. (Editor, Cricinfo)