Jarrod Kimber stated the most relevant at the end of this chat, when he used the phrase "proactive wicketkeeping". The importance and value in the modern game is both understated and in many respects under valued. Examples of this would be Darren Berry stumping David Boon down the leg side in a state game off Paul Reiffel or Jack Russell stumping Dean Jones off Gladstone Small and Russell catching Geoff Marsh down the legside off Ian Botham while standing up. All batsmen were well and truly set. A good keeper up on the stumps often means the batsman does not get to the pitch of the ball. So not only do these incredible dismissals take place out of seemingly no where, many batsmen are caught in the covers and midwicket areas as they fail getting to the pitch of the ball, because they are wary about leaving the crease. Many batsmen are also not balanced for the same reason. On the other hand, with a plethora of brilliant batsmen/ordinary keepers or even backstops, there batting is too often taken on face value. A recent example of choosing Bairstow over Foakes in the 2023 Ashes. Theoretically this lost them the series. At that stage Foakes was probably the best keeper in the world and Bairstow the worst. Coming from McCullum, it is understandable as he was a brilliant aggressive batsman and a good aggressive gloveman who made dismissals out of nothing. Example, taking a full leg glance of Daniel Vittori. England could have won the first two Tests. The first Australian innings in the First test at Birmingham is all you need see as an example. Although Bairstow made around a hundred in his two innings, because of missed chances, unable to take half chances, do even going for chances and certainly not making chances, which Foakes did all of, Australia probably made 250 more runs than they should have. When the penny drops in T20 that an aggressive keeper will actually make dismissals, because the batsman is not getting to the pitch of the ball, or is out stumped or run out because the keeper has been proactive, is the time a keeper will not only be relevant, but vital. You just need that keeper in T20 skilled enough to change the template of what exactly is a keepers role in T20.
A keeper that moves better to pace bowlers is so important. The further his "range" of catching is, the further the slips can spread out. A good keeper can effect so many things and create opportunities for wickets that a bad keeper doesnt even see or think of
Andy tasted success more as test bastman than a limited game..although he was always the best batsman of his team for the entire length he played the game.
A specialist wicket keeper will always have a place, especially when your part time guy starts making mistakes! The extra few runs a batsman WK will get you probably won’t be worth more than the wickets he will cost you imo, at least in test cricket anyway
@@CricketEngland But I suspect they could have done better.......28 match wins with Alec as the glove man from his 130 overall tests. Keep trotting out your putz keepers, it won't always cost you an ashes series.....it'll be fine. 😄
its interesting that Jarrod brought up Dhoni. Because of Dhoni's reluctance to dive, the Indian slips were generally bunched together much tighter than normal slip cordon, hence you'd have a lot of balls go through what would've been a straighter gully and wide 3rd slip even when you had 3 slips in place. You'd also see a lot of catches go between Keeper & 1st slip!
We all know it's Adam Gilchrist effect , he changed what wicket-keeper/batsman at their very best could be forgetting conveniently that he was a once in a generation player.
He was an outlier. The guy can’t even really explain his success. It just came to him. And everyone since he came along has tried to find the next him and we haven’t got anyone truly close. He was the closest to being a mix of the old school, very high quality keepers like Healy and the very high quality batsman like a Ponting. But I think 99% of it was natural gift, not acquired skills.
An excellent wicket keeper is like gold! I would always pick the best person with the gloves - worth so much and chances can be few and far between and you could be in the field for 200 overs in an innings. Picking someone for theor batting and making them work hard to be a better keeper generally diminshes their batting (e.g. Geraint Jones, Stewart, Prior, Bairstow). I agree that since Gilchrist changed cricket England has been algorithmic in their ideas - the wicket keeper in ODI had to be an opener (Kieswetter, Prior, Mustard) or has to be a top order batter (choosing Prior, Jones, Stewart, Bairstow, Buttler) instead of the better keeper (Read, Foster, Russell, Foakes). I still maintain that if England actually gave it some original thought, Foakes should have batted 5 in India with either Stokes of Bairstow at 7 - Foakes could then potentially contribute to 3 proper partnerships before the tail came in. Instead we got Bairstow scoring 20 of 20 and not supporting the other batsmen! As a team I think they would have scored more with Foakes ar 5, three decent partnerships and then one of Bairstow or Stokes more likely to be scoring quickly alongside the tail (or Foakes who might be on 50-75 by then if he'd gone in at 5!)
I think the Ashes last year showcased how important a wicketkeeper is. Bairstow was a liability, dropped catches, missed stumpings etc. It cost them the ashes. The extra 10 runs on so in the batting averages from a specialist bstmans doesnt make up for missed opportunities.
I distinctly remember when England were playing India at home, and at lunchtime Sky were analysing how much wider England's slip cordon was because of Prior for them and Dhoni for India
Very interesting discussion. Its worrying that the focus is on the minimum capabilities of wicketkeeper and not on how to expand the horizons. It's time to understand and develop wicketkeeping as a separate skill by itself. Like Jarrod mentioned, look at how to cover more area behind the wickets, how to stop those third man leaks, get more inputs about bowling etc. For a wicketkeeper, batting should be a secondary skill to keeping. Atleast to ensure that cricket remains distinguishable from baseball.
Strange last sentence. Baseball catchers (equivalent to wk) are one of the only positions there where defensive ability is much more important than batting. Catchers also have been doing the "proactive keeping" thing for decades by getting runouts, influencing calls, making plays.
I am a big advocate for the keeping role as a specialist position. I think England would have been better served if Alec Stewart only opened the batting and Jack Russell was picked solely as the keeper. The morale of the bowlers would have improved and they would have been a much better fielding team.
Decent chance picking Foakes would have won the Ashes - every single fan I know wanted Foakes to play I also like how he bats - like the only adult in the room at times Sometimes, they over think things I reckon, it's not that complicated
The reason why such questions are coming from England is because they constantly play on flat decks alone, no doubt why they are not successful outside England
A good wicketkeeper batsmen is must for any top team, he has best eyes for entire game, from pitch to angles, how could his role be limited, most important in modern day cricket!
Once Gloucestershire won all 4 OD trophies in England and did it with jack russel standing up to everyone and creating intense pressure, I don't know why a T20 hasn't tried this, play best keeper even if he bats 10
MS Dhoni is a phenom when it comes to wicketkeeping. A player who is the DRS general, orchestrator of the field, elite with the gloves and also makes wickets with his decisions. Shocked how little he was brought up in this video
Another good discussion. Baseball statisticians have developed methods for analyzing fielding ("Sabermatricians"). I've made a start on applying some of their insights and I've no doubt that poor keeping costs more runs than poor batting (by the keeper). Adam Gilchrist has had a lasting effect but he was a very good keeper. We're not likely to see many like him.
Agree. You can measure how many runs a dropped catch has cost you and the amount of lost opportunity balls for taking the next wicket also (and i guess weight those by favourable conditions and ball age), but you can't measure loss of momentum and what potential calapses that wicket could have resulted in. Dropped catches are definitely worth more than a few extra runs. It's not even a question in tests.
It depends on the format. In T20 there is not a noticeable benefit at having someone skilled at wicketkeeping. Naturally you still need someone competent in the position, but a talented fielder should be able to skill themselves up to the level pretty quickly. At Test level a top level wicketkeeper is worth 30 runs an innings or more over a part-timer, and even more over someone incompetent. In order to justify a substandard keeper you would need to have the keeper to have a very high batting average. Bairstow is, IMO, costing the England team 20 runs an innings with his keeping, and his batting is not matching. The requirements for the 50 over game lie somewhere between, and the position could best be described as an all-rounder. So in summary for T20 a batsman who can keep wickets, for Tests a specialist keeper is ideal, for ODIs someone with batting and keeping skills.
Nowadays most teams now play with 5 specialist bowlers therefore the keeper has to be more than just an efficient batter. Also with WTC points at stake the pitches are very result oriented so the keeper needs to be as good as the other 5 batters in the team.
I think in terms of balance between keeping and batting, Rizwan is the guy to have in One day and Test cricket. And he is more or less a vice captain in the Pakistan team, but he has had some shockers with the DRS.
Rizwan is good as wicket keeer. But his appeals and DRS calls, specially under pressure are horrible. Plus, I dont know how much he assist captain with proactive field placements or providing bowlers knowledge on a batter’s jitteriness to certain kind of deliveries.
@@dashmeetsingh9679 I do not like how pakistan have operated tactically, but having watched some games in the stadium. My judgement is that Rizwan and Shadab feed Babar with the tactics, Babar has a director level role.
Need to have stats similar to baseball on this. They have defensive statistics like range, runs saved, and similar statistics for getting outs like runouts and stumpings (i'm thinking caught stealing percentage for runouts and "pop-time" for stumpings)
I think the fact that England has used 50% more players in Test cricket than their greatest rivals speaks volumes about the historical differences between the two. And the difference in the number of wicket keepers is 100%. Just in the last 10 years England have selected 6 different keepers. I’m a Foakes fan like many others and I’d be picking him every time until someone of equal keeping ability comes along with superior batting credentials.
A wicket keeper has the best view of the ground..can help captains in setting the field...can determine the form and movement of batsmen and accordingly can guide the bowler to alter lengths and create opportunity for picking up wicket..
A good Wicket Keeper - Batsman can never be redundant. Of course his primary role still has to be Keeping Wickets & then be a good Batsman too. I remember Dhoni once said that Wicket Keepers should also be considered All Rounders & I couldn't agree more.
@@GIBBO4182 It's a false dichotomy. The examples of Pant, Dhoni, and KL Rahul (and counter example of someone like Foakes) show that developing into a decent keeper is much easier than developing into a decent batter. It is better to invest into the better batsman and train them to be a good keeper, than the other way round.
More like wicket keeping has evolved as well with DRS. A proactive wicket kepper can help captain to stem the flow of runs. Assist bowlers on line and length. These all apart from usual wicket keeper duties. And currently there is no way to tell, which skills of WK is most essential. Top batters wont give many chances, dropping their catch would cost a match.
Everyone says a wicket keeper isn't needed until there is a simple drop or a half chance completely missed. It's those moments that change games. Yes runs are important, but Gilchrist and hadden made the world think you need a keeper who can get a hundred every innings. Both were capable of it, but neither played in teams where the expectation was that. Each came in after a batting line up where expectations one or two would make a hundred. They were there mostly for cherry on top, or the occasional rescue. But if they were making errors then neither would have lasted. Paine was a brilliant captain, but he was also an excellent keeper. At a time when half chances were huge, he was so important.
Every batsman is expected to be at their best while fielding. Is it any different if a wicket keeper is expected to bat. Next step, what is the difference between a great keeper and a great fielder? On a tricky pitch, specialist skills make a difference. But on reasonable wicket,a good fielder can replace a keeper.
Role of wicket keeper in Test cricket is more important than 50/T20 cricket. In T 20 the wicket keeper role might fade away for pure wicket keepers who cannot bat aggressively.
Michael Bates isn't out of a job, he works pretty extensively as a fielding and wicketkeeper coach, his LinkedIn says he's the wicketkeeping coach for Hampshire and Sussex 😁
That's the thing how do you quantify a wicketkeeper? There was a saying a good wicketkeeper is when you do NOT notice him behind the stumps. Meaning he takes all catches in his way and does not fumble or give byes. How do you measure that? I think some of the logic that Kimber is saying makes sense and the tech is probably few years away. But as they say a goalkeeper in any sport soccer or hockey and a wicketkeeper in cricket have the same mindset. Unsung but very important at the same time.
I think Johny is past his prime and most bowlers around the world have also worked him out. Post the knee injury, I think he didn't have consistent good innings.
Ppl seem to forget Gilchrist was a great keeper as well, all the batter keepers since then are below average keepers that end up costing them games with the gloves. Cant be coincidence Australia always picks a good wicket keeper over batsman even post Gilly
After Alec Steward, Gilchrist, Dhoni & Boucher in the yesteryear's..... Every team wants a wicket keeper who can bat well, or should I say really well.
Australia are the best team in the world because they are able to calculate these, if their best wicket keeper is a good number 8, they are playing him, and play an extra allrounder, they gave world gilchrist but they donot necessarily rely on keepers to bat. Not all wicket keepers should be allrounder, if they are one great but if they'rent a good team should be able to afford best guy for the role
What is it with the England selectors they have the best wicketkeeper in the world in Ben Folkes but they cant wait to drop him for some sub standard keeper who they think will make a few runs that never happens
This kind of thinking explains how a top team like Man United end up with a clown like Onana in goal - a decision which has set them back years If your wicket keeper also happens to be a great batter then that's great, but wicket keeping is the most important part of the equation The crazy thing is that Foakes is actually a great batter and, perhaps more importantly, a great batting partner for guys like Root Too many guys analyzing 'data' these days to see the woods from the trees
Easier to make a keeper into a better batter (tons of bowlers become batters) than a batter into a keeper (not everyone can or should do keeping). So get a world class keeper and coach him into a better bat. Put in the long term efforr instead of short term bandaids.
He rarely dives. Though he was good with stumping, proactively moving his glove, towards stump, just second before ball actually in his glove. Then directing ball onto stumps, basically turning bad throw into good one. Used to come up to bowlers who were at 135 kmph. He missed few catches coz he didnt dive.
You learn every time with Jarod Kimber. Love the pod
Jarod fascinating on this subject.
This guy Kimber is a talented analyst. subscribed for him
Jarrod Kimber stated the most relevant at the end of this chat, when he used the phrase "proactive wicketkeeping". The importance and value in the modern game is both understated and in many respects under valued. Examples of this would be Darren Berry stumping David Boon down the leg side in a state game off Paul Reiffel or Jack Russell stumping Dean Jones off Gladstone Small and Russell catching Geoff Marsh down the legside off Ian Botham while standing up. All batsmen were well and truly set. A good keeper up on the stumps often means the batsman does not get to the pitch of the ball. So not only do these incredible dismissals take place out of seemingly no where, many batsmen are caught in the covers and midwicket areas as they fail getting to the pitch of the ball, because they are wary about leaving the crease. Many batsmen are also not balanced for the same reason. On the other hand, with a plethora of brilliant batsmen/ordinary keepers or even backstops, there batting is too often taken on face value. A recent example of choosing Bairstow over Foakes in the 2023 Ashes. Theoretically this lost them the series. At that stage Foakes was probably the best keeper in the world and Bairstow the worst. Coming from McCullum, it is understandable as he was a brilliant aggressive batsman and a good aggressive gloveman who made dismissals out of nothing. Example, taking a full leg glance of Daniel Vittori. England could have won the first two Tests. The first Australian innings in the First test at Birmingham is all you need see as an example. Although Bairstow made around a hundred in his two innings, because of missed chances, unable to take half chances, do even going for chances and certainly not making chances, which Foakes did all of, Australia probably made 250 more runs than they should have. When the penny drops in T20 that an aggressive keeper will actually make dismissals, because the batsman is not getting to the pitch of the ball, or is out stumped or run out because the keeper has been proactive, is the time a keeper will not only be relevant, but vital. You just need that keeper in T20 skilled enough to change the template of what exactly is a keepers role in T20.
A keeper that moves better to pace bowlers is so important. The further his "range" of catching is, the further the slips can spread out. A good keeper can effect so many things and create opportunities for wickets that a bad keeper doesnt even see or think of
It also creates pressure on the batter if the keeper never misses.
People remember Dhoni, Gilly and Sanga but have completely forgotten Andy Flower!
Andy tasted success more as test bastman than a limited game..although he was always the best batsman of his team for the entire length he played the game.
A specialist wicket keeper will always have a place, especially when your part time guy starts making mistakes! The extra few runs a batsman WK will get you probably won’t be worth more than the wickets he will cost you imo, at least in test cricket anyway
Alex Stewart did ok though
@@CricketEngland But I suspect they could have done better.......28 match wins with Alec as the glove man from his 130 overall tests. Keep trotting out your putz keepers, it won't always cost you an ashes series.....it'll be fine. 😄
An absolutely fascinating discussion without any of the cliches that other pundits use.
its interesting that Jarrod brought up Dhoni. Because of Dhoni's reluctance to dive, the Indian slips were generally bunched together much tighter than normal slip cordon, hence you'd have a lot of balls go through what would've been a straighter gully and wide 3rd slip even when you had 3 slips in place. You'd also see a lot of catches go between Keeper & 1st slip!
We all know it's Adam Gilchrist effect , he changed what wicket-keeper/batsman at their very best could be forgetting conveniently that he was a once in a generation player.
He was an outlier. The guy can’t even really explain his success. It just came to him. And everyone since he came along has tried to find the next him and we haven’t got anyone truly close. He was the closest to being a mix of the old school, very high quality keepers like Healy and the very high quality batsman like a Ponting. But I think 99% of it was natural gift, not acquired skills.
An excellent wicket keeper is like gold! I would always pick the best person with the gloves - worth so much and chances can be few and far between and you could be in the field for 200 overs in an innings. Picking someone for theor batting and making them work hard to be a better keeper generally diminshes their batting (e.g. Geraint Jones, Stewart, Prior, Bairstow). I agree that since Gilchrist changed cricket England has been algorithmic in their ideas - the wicket keeper in ODI had to be an opener (Kieswetter, Prior, Mustard) or has to be a top order batter (choosing Prior, Jones, Stewart, Bairstow, Buttler) instead of the better keeper (Read, Foster, Russell, Foakes). I still maintain that if England actually gave it some original thought, Foakes should have batted 5 in India with either Stokes of Bairstow at 7 - Foakes could then potentially contribute to 3 proper partnerships before the tail came in. Instead we got Bairstow scoring 20 of 20 and not supporting the other batsmen! As a team I think they would have scored more with Foakes ar 5, three decent partnerships and then one of Bairstow or Stokes more likely to be scoring quickly alongside the tail (or Foakes who might be on 50-75 by then if he'd gone in at 5!)
Wicket keepers are redundant in limited overs cricket and in general. The Gilchrist model is basically what everyone strives for.
Gilchrist was still a very good wk. Especially off Warne
Gilchrist was far better than Dohni not that any Indian would agree
@@CricketEngland some Indian must have shagged your mum.
@@CricketEnglandtmkc😅
@@CricketEngland👍
I think the Ashes last year showcased how important a wicketkeeper is. Bairstow was a liability, dropped catches, missed stumpings etc. It cost them the ashes. The extra 10 runs on so in the batting averages from a specialist bstmans doesnt make up for missed opportunities.
Very good analysis overall.
How u guys picked up on KS Bharat being a ‘yes man’, was too accurate and funny 😂
can we get jarrod on sky sports this summer please!
I distinctly remember when England were playing India at home, and at lunchtime Sky were analysing how much wider England's slip cordon was because of Prior for them and Dhoni for India
Very interesting discussion. Its worrying that the focus is on the minimum capabilities of wicketkeeper and not on how to expand the horizons. It's time to understand and develop wicketkeeping as a separate skill by itself. Like Jarrod mentioned, look at how to cover more area behind the wickets, how to stop those third man leaks, get more inputs about bowling etc. For a wicketkeeper, batting should be a secondary skill to keeping. Atleast to ensure that cricket remains distinguishable from baseball.
Strange last sentence. Baseball catchers (equivalent to wk) are one of the only positions there where defensive ability is much more important than batting. Catchers also have been doing the "proactive keeping" thing for decades by getting runouts, influencing calls, making plays.
I am a big advocate for the keeping role as a specialist position. I think England would have been better served if Alec Stewart only opened the batting and Jack Russell was picked solely as the keeper. The morale of the bowlers would have improved and they would have been a much better fielding team.
This is another example of how the game is focused more on batting than bowling & fielding (and I fuckn hate it)
Batting on flat decks is an important clause to be added
Make this guy 'jarrod' mainstream.
He has his own channel: Jarrod Kimber
@@Crudmonkey211 i know. By mainstream i mean give him space on air like nasser and athers are on sky etc.
@@tricksbyumerSky only go for a big name ex-player
Decent chance picking Foakes would have won the Ashes - every single fan I know wanted Foakes to play
I also like how he bats - like the only adult in the room at times
Sometimes, they over think things I reckon, it's not that complicated
This Australian wanted him playing then and now. I can’t stand seeing any role in a Test side being filled by an amateur.
Any team that lacks proper spinning structure will also not need a traditional wicketkeeper, quite simple. It depends how you set-up the team
The reason why such questions are coming from England is because they constantly play on flat decks alone, no doubt why they are not successful outside England
A good wicketkeeper batsmen is must for any top team, he has best eyes for entire game, from pitch to angles, how could his role be limited, most important in modern day cricket!
Once Gloucestershire won all 4 OD trophies in England and did it with jack russel standing up to everyone and creating intense pressure, I don't know why a T20 hasn't tried this, play best keeper even if he bats 10
MS Dhoni is a phenom when it comes to wicketkeeping. A player who is the DRS general, orchestrator of the field, elite with the gloves and also makes wickets with his decisions. Shocked how little he was brought up in this video
Another good discussion. Baseball statisticians have developed methods for analyzing fielding ("Sabermatricians"). I've made a start on applying some of their insights and I've no doubt that poor keeping costs more runs than poor batting (by the keeper). Adam Gilchrist has had a lasting effect but he was a very good keeper. We're not likely to see many like him.
Agree. You can measure how many runs a dropped catch has cost you and the amount of lost opportunity balls for taking the next wicket also (and i guess weight those by favourable conditions and ball age), but you can't measure loss of momentum and what potential calapses that wicket could have resulted in. Dropped catches are definitely worth more than a few extra runs. It's not even a question in tests.
It depends on the format. In T20 there is not a noticeable benefit at having someone skilled at wicketkeeping. Naturally you still need someone competent in the position, but a talented fielder should be able to skill themselves up to the level pretty quickly. At Test level a top level wicketkeeper is worth 30 runs an innings or more over a part-timer, and even more over someone incompetent. In order to justify a substandard keeper you would need to have the keeper to have a very high batting average. Bairstow is, IMO, costing the England team 20 runs an innings with his keeping, and his batting is not matching. The requirements for the 50 over game lie somewhere between, and the position could best be described as an all-rounder.
So in summary for T20 a batsman who can keep wickets, for Tests a specialist keeper is ideal, for ODIs someone with batting and keeping skills.
Nowadays most teams now play with 5 specialist bowlers therefore the keeper has to be more than just an efficient batter. Also with WTC points at stake the pitches are very result oriented so the keeper needs to be as good as the other 5 batters in the team.
I think in terms of balance between keeping and batting, Rizwan is the guy to have in One day and Test cricket. And he is more or less a vice captain in the Pakistan team, but he has had some shockers with the DRS.
Rizwan is good as wicket keeer.
But his appeals and DRS calls, specially under pressure are horrible.
Plus, I dont know how much he assist captain with proactive field placements or providing bowlers knowledge on a batter’s jitteriness to certain kind of deliveries.
@@dashmeetsingh9679 I do not like how pakistan have operated tactically, but having watched some games in the stadium. My judgement is that Rizwan and Shadab feed Babar with the tactics, Babar has a director level role.
Need to have stats similar to baseball on this. They have defensive statistics like range, runs saved, and similar statistics for getting outs like runouts and stumpings (i'm thinking caught stealing percentage for runouts and "pop-time" for stumpings)
I think the fact that England has used 50% more players in Test cricket than their greatest rivals speaks volumes about the historical differences between the two. And the difference in the number of wicket keepers is 100%. Just in the last 10 years England have selected 6 different keepers. I’m a Foakes fan like many others and I’d be picking him every time until someone of equal keeping ability comes along with superior batting credentials.
A wicket keeper has the best view of the ground..can help captains in setting the field...can determine the form and movement of batsmen and accordingly can guide the bowler to alter lengths and create opportunity for picking up wicket..
If Smith drops a dolly in the first test, cue all and sundry calling for a specialist keeper in Foakes.
A good Wicket Keeper - Batsman can never be redundant. Of course his primary role still has to be Keeping Wickets & then be a good Batsman too. I remember Dhoni once said that Wicket Keepers should also be considered All Rounders & I couldn't agree more.
Jarrod was great as always, but I was annoyed by how they both kept interrupting Harmy. Let the man complete his point geez
Man can't complete his own sentences
Great question!
This will bite back when they will drop catches
Exactly what I think. The extra runs won’t be worth the missed chances
@@GIBBO4182 It's a false dichotomy. The examples of Pant, Dhoni, and KL Rahul (and counter example of someone like Foakes) show that developing into a decent keeper is much easier than developing into a decent batter. It is better to invest into the better batsman and train them to be a good keeper, than the other way round.
More like wicket keeping has evolved as well with DRS.
A proactive wicket kepper can help captain to stem the flow of runs. Assist bowlers on line and length.
These all apart from usual wicket keeper duties.
And currently there is no way to tell, which skills of WK is most essential.
Top batters wont give many chances, dropping their catch would cost a match.
Ben foakes is way more valuable than yjb @@dashmeetsingh9679
You guys seem to have forgotten that spinners play cricket as well. Without wicket keeper it would be a disaster
Everyone says a wicket keeper isn't needed until there is a simple drop or a half chance completely missed. It's those moments that change games. Yes runs are important, but Gilchrist and hadden made the world think you need a keeper who can get a hundred every innings. Both were capable of it, but neither played in teams where the expectation was that. Each came in after a batting line up where expectations one or two would make a hundred. They were there mostly for cherry on top, or the occasional rescue. But if they were making errors then neither would have lasted. Paine was a brilliant captain, but he was also an excellent keeper. At a time when half chances were huge, he was so important.
Every batsman is expected to be at their best while fielding. Is it any different if a wicket keeper is expected to bat. Next step, what is the difference between a great keeper and a great fielder? On a tricky pitch, specialist skills make a difference. But on reasonable wicket,a good fielder can replace a keeper.
Exactly. The fact it’s taken cricket so long to have every person in the team have multiple ‘all-round’ capabilities is stunning.
Well, you saw how England suffered from having a poor keeper during the first two Ashes matches
Role of wicket keeper in Test cricket is more important than 50/T20 cricket.
In T 20 the wicket keeper role might fade away for pure wicket keepers who cannot bat aggressively.
Michael Bates isn't out of a job, he works pretty extensively as a fielding and wicketkeeper coach, his LinkedIn says he's the wicketkeeping coach for Hampshire and Sussex 😁
That's the thing how do you quantify a wicketkeeper? There was a saying a good wicketkeeper is when you do NOT notice him behind the stumps. Meaning he takes all catches in his way and does not fumble or give byes. How do you measure that? I think some of the logic that Kimber is saying makes sense and the tech is probably few years away. But as they say a goalkeeper in any sport soccer or hockey and a wicketkeeper in cricket have the same mindset. Unsung but very important at the same time.
I think Johny is past his prime and most bowlers around the world have also worked him out. Post the knee injury, I think he didn't have consistent good innings.
Ppl seem to forget Gilchrist was a great keeper as well, all the batter keepers since then are below average keepers that end up costing them games with the gloves. Cant be coincidence Australia always picks a good wicket keeper over batsman even post Gilly
Love Harmy ♥
I think Ollie Robinson from Durham should be in for a shout out
For test cricket yes other formats no
After Alec Steward, Gilchrist, Dhoni & Boucher in the yesteryear's..... Every team wants a wicket keeper who can bat well, or should I say really well.
Australia are the best team in the world because they are able to calculate these, if their best wicket keeper is a good number 8, they are playing him, and play an extra allrounder, they gave world gilchrist but they donot necessarily rely on keepers to bat. Not all wicket keepers should be allrounder, if they are one great but if they'rent a good team should be able to afford best guy for the role
You most definitely need a wicket keeper. One drop catch could be difference between winning and losing. Catches win matches.
What is it with the England selectors they have the best wicketkeeper in the world in Ben Folkes but they cant wait to drop him for some sub standard keeper who they think will make a few runs that never happens
This kind of thinking explains how a top team like Man United end up with a clown like Onana in goal - a decision which has set them back years
If your wicket keeper also happens to be a great batter then that's great, but wicket keeping is the most important part of the equation
The crazy thing is that Foakes is actually a great batter and, perhaps more importantly, a great batting partner for guys like Root
Too many guys analyzing 'data' these days to see the woods from the trees
They say this like Jamie Smith couldn't be a better keeper than Jonny Bairstow.
anyone else think Jon is mark Waugh's Doppelganger?🤔🤔🤔
You might need one in India for test cricket
There are no decent glove men anymore,Bairstow was probably the worst I've seen last summer in the Ashes
it'll become "extinct" until teams start conceding multiple byes
So who isn’t algorithmic (apart from Harmy)?
Will Jacks
Alan Knott still the best keeper
This type of questions arise only when a team is constantly playing on flat decks😅, this is why England is not successful outside of England
Easier to make a keeper into a better batter (tons of bowlers become batters) than a batter into a keeper (not everyone can or should do keeping).
So get a world class keeper and coach him into a better bat. Put in the long term efforr instead of short term bandaids.
Host needs to stop interrupting jarrod
Remove a keeper and find out 😊
literally lost the ashes cause of this thinking
You will catch ball with Your Ass behind the wicket....what a should question 😂😂
Not investing in Foakes is pure idiocy. Help him recover like how Archer is being handled.
Harmy. A weak link in any comms or comment. There is much better out there.
Are wicket keepers the new drummers?
They don't have to be the best in the world, nor maybe the best in the team either.
Obsession of having the best in everything
Dhoni didn't dive? This is news to me! Is it true?
Of course he would now and then, but he certainly wasn’t as willing to throw himself around as much as other keepers.
He rarely dives. Though he was good with stumping, proactively moving his glove, towards stump, just second before ball actually in his glove.
Then directing ball onto stumps, basically turning bad throw into good one.
Used to come up to bowlers who were at 135 kmph.
He missed few catches coz he didnt dive.
Jarrod talks so much… didn’t even realize Harmisson was there.
Yeah but when he speaks it’s worth listening to
Matt Prior is not known for a strong ticker so to make excuses…
Gillchrist an dhoni an indeed stewart b4 them, alot of teams are moving away from specialist keepers
Gilchrist was good enough to be a specialist keeper, he just happened to be a great batsman as well.
England needs player's from England, not borrowed from other countries.
Just a suggestion, Britain had all ready converted into Islamic country😊
They could leave out the hindu players as well