August 16, 2007
England's Wicketkeeping Woes
The English cricket selectors appear to have rocks in their collective heads when it comes to selecting a wicketkeeper.
I happened to see a bit of the recent Test Match at the Oval, via the conduit of pay television. Matt Prior's lead-footed blundering behind the stumps left me bewildered. Is it any wonder that he drops crucial catches when his footwork is so inadequate? I wholeheartedly agree with Ian Chappell's assessment. The wicketkeeper is a vital position in the most important aspect of the game of cricket, fielding. In recent times there has been a trend towards only considering selecting keepers who are good batsmen. This is flawed thinking. Just because Australia have been fortunate enough to have Adam Gilchrist, arguably the greatest keeper-batsman of all time, in their Test team for the last eight years doesn't mean that selectors of other Test teams should choose a player who is capable of scoring hundreds as well as keeping wickets. Australian selectors have at times fallen into the same type of trap when trying to find an all-rounder who could emulate Andrew Flintoff.
When it boils down to it, a Test keeper must be of Test standard. Any runs he or she scores are a bonus.
Update (20th August): It would appear that former English keeper Bob Taylor agrees with me.
Posted to Cricket by Keith PittyHi Keith;
Interesting - I was watching the aptly named Sidebottom (more than his fair share of bacon) bowl around the wicket as David Gower et al were discussing this very point only to see him pitch the ball on leg stump and have it pass the batsman at waist height and scoot away for four byes. Prior had to dive about 45m to catch the damn ball, yet he was being lambasted. Perhaps the bowlers could bowl in a corridor outside off stump like McGrath and others have done for longer than we can remember, it helps the keeper look good!
Cheers...
